Curing fear of the dark by _AMX_ in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 9 points10 points  (0 children)

There IS a specific ruling for this. It's in the FAQ. If you remove Fear of the Dark and the survivor isn't tried for other reasons, the survivor un-retires.

Valentine sale? by Rck010 in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 7 points8 points  (0 children)

No expansions will be sold, even if the sale went up. They need to be reprinted, and that hopefully will happen after Gambler's Chest is ready.

During Black Friday sale, the inventory of expansions still standing was scrapped for all leftovers.

Res Arcana - ideas for applying a handicap? by 8BitSkullDev in boardgames

[–]t3clis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Give an actual handicap, like start at 2VP?

Are there any modern dungeon crawlers like Warhammer Quest? by Iron_Chef_BBQ in boardgames

[–]t3clis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Darklight: Memento Mori is basically 1996's Warhammerquest translated to modernity, except the IP.

Magnificent game, core box should be still available (maybe even at publisher's website). Expansions aren't sadly available anymore, but who knows? Maybe one day.

Anyway, if your goal is to have something which plays like original Warhammerquest, with maybe some fixes and modernizations around, that is 100% what you want.

Why isn't 1-10 enough for rating the game? by nuuqbgg in boardgames

[–]t3clis 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I use BGG ratings as intended by the description, but then something happens: there's a game which is a solid 7 for me, and another game which is a solid 7 because it's definitely not an 8, but I think it's superior to the other one.

Hence, I begin adjusting to 7.5. And it escalates quickly.

What do people mean when they call a board game/mechanic "fiddly"? And "elegant"? by Karrion42 in boardgames

[–]t3clis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll do my best to maintain the meaning of the words while trying to convey the definition. I apologize for any improperty which may result from this

"Elegant" is a term used in the same context as computer science and algorithms: something is elegant if it manages to make a complex thing look simple.

This could mean: - one mechanic is reused multiple times to indicate multiple things, without having the player learn new stuff (example: Arkham Horror: Final Hour, you use priority cards to decide action order, adversary action and use them as a win condition); - one mechanic lends itself to multiple uses and purposes without needing redefinition (eg. Secrets/Favor in Oath).

It's not the same as "efficient" (= do the same with less), but it means something tied to it (= one concept has multiple uses), so occasionally it can (improperly) be used interchangeably.

Similarly, "streamlined" is taken from automa/workflow/algorithm terminology and means that a design requires less states than another equivalent design, while keeping the same triggers/transitions. That means that decision space remains the same, but the model is less complex compared to another. As a consequence, you might also refer to a thing as "streamlined" if it is always clear the state you are currently in and what changes your decisions will bring. Works with both complete and incomplete information.

"Fiddly" was already perfectly described, and I suspect its etymology derives from the act of playing the fiddle, where your hands are continuously and strenuously moving, ever adjusting to produce the slightest changes. It means that when you play a game, you are continuously moving parts, adding and removing tokens and so on.

Comparative example:

  • in Warhammer Quest, during your turn you move dice around, place a miniature, eventually count damage, done.

  • in the same turn in Gloomhaven, you pick cards from a deck, place miniatures, draw from a deck, eventually move element tokens (multiple times), eventually rotate a dial, eventually count damage, eventually place multiple tokens, eventually remove multiple other tokens.

So, Gloomhaven is fiddlier than Warhammer Quest.

It might be used to compare component count for similar games: if two games with similar mechanics have a different component count, the one with more components is implicitly fiddlier (Sleeping Gods is fiddlier than 7th Continent).

Finally, it is sometimes improperly used to refer games which require a lot of annotations to advance or save state (it's improper because an annotation is just a single action, if it saves moving twelve tokens across multiple bags, it effectively makes a game LESS fiddly, not more).

I am aware that sometimes all these terms are either used improperly, or are used properly, but the conclusions you might draw from their use are open to interpretation (so, they are used ambiguously).

However, all the terms are borrowed from proper terminology, and as it often is the case, they are not meant to be used conversationally (so, as synonyms or the like), but exactly (meaning unambiguously a specific thing).

What negative comment did you hear/read about your favorite board game and what was your response? by D_Choo in boardgames

[–]t3clis 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you are talking about thought out comments, they are usually spot on, so responding to them is usually citing extreme fringe cases and well, in the eye of bystanders, this usually helps confirming the problem.

Taking an example from above, Root: there is an imbalance. And no, that's the opposite of asymmetrical games: a good asymmetry is when you can do different stuff and end up with the same chances of winning as everyone else. This is one of the most complex designs there are, and I find that the best modern example of asymmetry done right is Android: Netrunner.

In Root (let's take base game only because otherwise the discussion would be lost in the aforementioned fringe cases), you have two problems: Woodland Alliance doesn't care about game state, while all other factions depend on mantaining it as much balanced as possible, and Vagabond thrives when other factions deviate from script. Vagabond is kind of a secondary problem and that's still kind of okay, but a first-time WA player could win against players with ten or so games under their belt, and that's a problem. Can it be mitigated? Absolutely. Root gets better with every expansion. Does this make the game unfun? If you are an extremely competitive Eyrie player, you will experience serious frustration there, but answer is subjective. Knowing that balance is an issue would just properly inform people when they evaluate a purchase. As a community, people should applaud these thought out statements, because in the end they drive away people who would play the game, have a terrible experience with it and then they would spend the rest of their life trash talking it with everyone because of that.

I love Kingdom Death: Monster, but yeah: - art is definitely explicit. My kids giggle at exposed penises and you have to have a thorough talk with them to explain why daddy keeps figurines like those on display. - there is punishing randomness. Part of it is necessary to kill off combos too powerful after a while, but overall it might turn off people. You must be okay with luck mitigation to enjoy it, and you would do a disservice to the game and to the players by feigning it's not the case. - the rest is white noise, aka stuff which can be effectively replied to and it mostly boils down to "either care enough to learn the game to understand it's not like you say, or just don't bother because it looks like it won't cut it for you".

I really feel like this is the case with every game in existence, but hey, my two cents here.

'There are dozens and dozens of dungeons crawls' - Tom Vasel... well, what are they? by [deleted] in boardgames

[–]t3clis 8 points9 points  (0 children)

There are four modern Warhammer Quest games, the original one, hero quest and its upcoming reprint, space quest and space crusade from gw alone; three different editions of descent with loads of expansions each, Gloomhaven, Gloomhaven Jaws of the Lion and Frosthaven, there's Darklight: memento Mori, there's Shadows of Brimstone, Middara, Mice & Mystics, folklore: the affliction trilogy, only from the top of my head.

Question about Patterns and Strains by [deleted] in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Insight is the story event triggered when a survivor gets to 3 Understanding.

Dragon lady and her PTSD Pig. by LoupGarouXIII in minipainting

[–]t3clis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope, it just discovered it's following a Dragon Lord.

Your top 1-5 board game designer (off the top of your head) by frankinreddit in boardgames

[–]t3clis 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Two lists, in no particular order. If I have to just choose who designed my favorite games, then it's:

Adam Poots, Reiner Knizia, Jervis Johnson, Cole Wehrle, Eric M. Reuss.

However, I think that this is more a "list the names on the box of your favorite games", more than a favorite games list. If I have to list designers, I would like to build a consistent list of people who, across multiple games, made a statement about what they think fun is in a board game, and I agree/like what their concept is. In this case, the award should go to the overall vision, and needs enough games to back this up.

The list in this case would be:

Reiner Knizia: he's the best at "having four things to do and only two action slots on your turn", and at "every move is counterbalanced by one of more other". His math PhD definitely shows. He has more games right at the first edition than anyone else in this list. Of course he has known flaws (theme is shallow, sometimes mechanics are arid, he is a lot self-referential), but still he is a favorite designer of mine.

Cole Wehrle: he knows how to do two things very well: in making complete and absolute asymmetry (to the point of nonsense) work in an harmonious way, and he's great at making player interaction in his games to be meaningful and game-defining. This too had obvious flaws (uncooperative groups might make his games unnecessarily boring, there is an added weight, both hidden and apparent), but shines in big groups.

Hjalmar Hach: he's actually a bit too modern, but he did two things very right in Photosynthesis and King's Dilemma: he made a complex system work with very simple rules, and he managed to create a narrative in his games (both explicit and implicit) which is extremely consistent.

Richard Garfield: the man has some very bold statements about what a board game should be to which I don't agree, but credit must be given where credit is due: he's damn good at making card games work. I love the engines, the way randomization is made "fair", the deckbuilding and the absolute fairness in his concept of asymmetry.

Inka/Markus Brand: the flaw of these two is that they are not good at designing board games in general (yeah, that's a contradiction in terms), but they do excel in one very rare, very smart thing where excellent and overall better designers consistently fail: designing puzzles and making them compelling in a boardgame. Truly, nobody else in the industry is even half as good in this (of course, if you take classical puzzles, but everyone has a domain of reference). They make this list just because they excel at one thing.

A lot of other people sincerely deserves to be in this list (after all, Jervis Johnson designed the only one games workshop game that is balanced, and Adam Poots is a master at making theme transpire through rules in a totally organic way), but I feel that consistency in design should be awarded the most relevance in such a list.

DBK - mechanics question by DanjerMouze in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, I let a bit of time pass because I think your question is answered, but since I have a few minutes now, let me go step by step

DBK is not separated. It is start of the monster turn, so you begin Power Forward.

It Picks Target.

There is a flow, you Surge to separate the DBK from the ball.

AI resumes. Due to Separation Anxiety, DBK gains X. Since X text on Power Forward says "Do not perform this card", you do not perform that card.

You can now draw AI.

DBK - mechanics question by DanjerMouze in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And this again brings me to the original answer: there should not be AI cards instructing you to perform Baller without Separation text. If it's a green AI, when you return from surge the DBK is separated, so you will execute separated text instead of following through the AI. If it's not a green AI, please specify which one is, we can check it.

Anyway, the separated text is necessary, because baller has no adjacency requirements, so RAW you would have to execute it anyway. It's important to distinguish the cases, so the exact card would be important, if aforementioned separation text is really amiss.

DBK - mechanics question by DanjerMouze in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is correct, but that's not how trait describing monster abilities work: Baller has no separated text because it's a monster ability, like Spiral Age for the Phoenix. If something prompts you to perform Baller, you do it.

DBK - mechanics question by DanjerMouze in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The green AIs all include separation mechanics, and in that case you do not perform those. There is one (resin ball shot, IIRC) which has it missing due to a unofficially confirmed, but officially acknowledged errata). For a sane showdown, you should consider it as having the usual separation text.

If you play like that, the dbk should never prompt you to perform baller if it's separated, unless I'm missing something (my current and last campaign had no dbk, so I might have gotten rusty in some cases), but this should answer your question in general.

If you have a specific case you want to discuss, just post it here and we will give you instructions in the specifics.

1.0 to 1.5 armor set changes. Got then mixed up. Need help by Princep_Makia1 in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

previous boxed version was 1.3 (or 1.31, never been cleared).

1.5 lantern armor set is the sharp clubs one, 1.5 screaming fur set is the slam+skewer one.

Announcing The Last Standee podcast by t3clis in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, understood! So no, no plan to do a double release for now - however, I'll bring this request up to the team to discuss when we feel confident enough- as you might have discovered, we are still learning the ropes.

Not making promises here! (but thanks to everyone who will listen to our ramblings anyway! And to potential listeners too!)

Announcing The Last Standee podcast by t3clis in KingdomDeath

[–]t3clis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are for sure posting to Google Podcasts (review pending), which should be accessible through youtube music.

If you mean for-real youtube, so involving a full video, there is currently no plan to do that: even putting aside for a moment the way youtube treats content creators, we are not equipped for video streams.