|
3 years ago ::
Nov 08, 2010 - 4:14PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2008
|
After playing this game a few times and coming accross some encounters cards there are to many questions as to what to do.
Example: all players had 4 health and encounter card picked up said to pick the player with the lowest health and that player losses 1 health. Nothing there to say what to do if everyone has teh same health.
Also when you move a monster 1 tile closer where on that tile do you place them, the bone pile or where ever you want?
There was some others but I don't recall them all right now. Although the rulebook seems way to condensed.
This game doesn't seem like it was even play tested at all or if it was all they hear was "oh wow this is so cool" and not anything else.
Come one Wizards, you should be doing better then this.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 09, 2010 - 7:18AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Dec 16, 2002
|
In your first example, I would roll of a d4 to decide which player gets the damage.
Second, when you move a monster to a new tile, that monster may move to any square on the new tile.
I agree that the rules could have been better defined, but it's not too difficult to adjudicate.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 09, 2010 - 10:14AM
#3
|
|
|
I'll agree with you - the rulebook was sparse at times. However, a lot of problems can be solved once you realize you're thinking about them too hard. For instance, when there's a tie - whether it's closest hero to a monster, or who's at the lowest health - it's up to the players to decide who gets the penalty. It's a resource management thing - who can afford to pay for the HP loss? Another big question that has arisen, with no real answer in sight: do coffins and other dungeon dressing - such as the altar in the chapel - block movement? I feel confident that these questions will be answered when the next game comes out.
Zappa answered your second question. Monster movement is tile-to-tile. You can place the monster anywhere on the tile you like, and that means you can set them up where it's most advantageous for you to do so.
Finally, I take issue with your statement that you don't believe it was "play tested at all." The game system works smoothly. If you go back and listen to the podcasts, they found ways to make it more and more of a cooperative system.
Were some mistakes made? Probably. Is it still a fun game? Absolutely. Do I think Wrath of Ashardalon will be awesome? Hells yeah.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 09, 2010 - 3:06PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Mar 20, 2009
|
What Misroi said. Any time there is ambiguity, the players decide the outcome. In this way you can make tactical decisions that give you the greatest advantage. Unfortunately, you are correct that this point is never explicitly stated in the rules.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 09, 2010 - 4:29PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2008
|
We have been making our decisions on what to do for most of these things but if you get place a skeleton or ghoul on any square you want, then you can really make this to your advantage so they don't get there charging or reach strike's. If you do that then the monster will never ever get its ability. There should have been something said about where to place the monster in the rules. I am sure this must ahve come up durring play testing.
- Move
- Explore
- Draw monster card
- Place monster
- Move monster 1 tile *can't afford ink for this rule Must leave out
As was said that you can roll a d4 and see who losses the life, we just chose not to as no one had the lowest life score as we were all tied. Even this should have come up durring play testing and a condition put on the card or in rule book. If this was an RPG game then sure I can see making allot of things up to determine what to do, but its a board game and these situations should be defined in rulebook or on card. Don't get me wrong I like the game and we have fun playing it every week. I just don't appreciate a $60 (US) game where you already find a fault durring the first 10 minutes of play (placing monster on new tile durring its move). Like I say I like this game but its almost completed, not a finished product due to lack of rules.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 4:18AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 26, 2010
|
You can always rule that if there is a tie, the active player takes the damage (insted of rollig a die). The game is pretty cool...and yes a bit more rules or a faq would do the rest.
lordofmasks
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 2:45PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2008
|
Granted I know we can make our own rulings, but why should the rulebook not have even that info, if there is a condition that this card doesn't cover then make your own decision.
I find the rule book a little to condensed and laking for a board game. There wasn't enough play testing done ro cover situations I am sure came up or questions the play testers had.
WoTC is better then this.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 11, 2010 - 8:35AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2007
|
We have been making our decisions on what to do for most of these things but if you get place a skeleton or ghoul on any square you want, then you can really make this to your advantage so they don't get there charging or reach strike's.
If you do that then the monster will never ever get its ability. There should have been something said about where to place the monster in the rules. I am sure this must ahve come up durring play testing.
Half of the strategy of the game is moving the monsters in legal ways that advantage the party. For instance if a hero just explored and is standing on the edge of a tile, and a monster must move adjacent to the hero and attack, then the player can decide where adjacent to him this will be. In this example the monster could stand adjacent to the hero in the hero's tile or the tile the hero is standing next to you. Depending on the situation this can give the players an edge.
I think the game was very well playtested and the balance and straight foward mechanics are clear evidence of this. However I do agree that the game needs an official FAQ to clear up some of the minor rules issues that come up from time to time. I am also a little disaponted that WOTC has not moved on this yet or has not relased some new online scenaros.
Not liking the new forums.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 11, 2010 - 11:47AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2008
|
There was one addon adventure they did release, its wasn't easy to find but here is the link if your interested. www.wizards.com/dnd/files/RavenloftAdv.p...
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 11, 2010 - 2:27PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2007
|
Yeah, those two scenarios I have seen, but I want more.
I have played the zombie escape one, but have not got up to the sunsword one yet.
Not liking the new forums.
|
|
|
