2394: The Witcher Adventure Game

0394_001

Gave The Witcher Adventure Game board game a try today with the assistance of Andie; she wasn’t a huge fan, but it’s not really her kind of game. She stuck it out to the end, though, so I was able to get a good sense of how the whole game works. And I liked the game quite a bit.

The Witcher Adventure Game eschews the “easy” route the game could have taken by not being a reskin of Descent; rather than being a dungeon crawler, it’s presented at a more “macro” level as Geralt the eponymous witcher, Triss the sorceress, Dandelion the bard and Yarpen the, um, dwarf explore the Continent from Novigrad to Rivia, taking on quests, battling monsters and dealing with Foul Fates that infest the regions.

At its core, The Witcher Adventure Game is about resource management. Most quests require that you have a certain combination of “proof” tokens to complete them, and these are acquired by collecting “lead” tokens of the same colour in varying quantities according to which character you are playing. Geralt, for example, being a combat-inclined character, has a much easier job acquiring combat proof tokens, needing only 3 leads to trade in for one, whereas Triss, conversely, is better at acquiring magic, Dandelion at diplomacy, and so forth.

The basic flow of the game, then, goes: get quest, acquire lead tokens, exchange lead tokens for proof tokens, go to quest location, complete quest. Repeat twice more to end the game, at which point whoever has the most victory points wins.

It is, naturally, a bit more complicated than that thanks to the various obstacles that get in your way. Many quests — particularly if you’re playing Geralt — involve combat, though you can still complete the quest even if you don’t “win” the combat. And each main quest card also carries a number of sidequests that are optional, but worth a number of extra points each. There’s also a “support” quest where you can recruit the assistance of one of your opponents; if they accept, they get 6 points in exchange for some of their resources, while you also get 3.

Progression through the game is largely driven by each character’s Development deck of cards. As one of the two actions you can take in a turn, you can draw two of these cards and keep one as an ability that you can then use from that point on when appropriate. In Geralt’s case, his Development cards include potions and Signs, the witchers’ take on magic spells. The early game, it seems, is about acquiring a good spread of these in order to be able to deal with difficult situations you might encounter later on.

The cards are nicely thematic. Not only do many of them have enjoyable flavour text on them, but they work how you might expect if you’ve played the video games. Geralt’s card for the Quen sign, for example — which, in the video games, envelops him in a magical shield for a short period — allows him to exchange dice rolls with the Sign symbol for defensive capabilities. Also, much like the first Witcher video game in particular, Geralt must brew his potions in advance to be able to use them, and must quaff them before starting combat rather than chugging away mid-battle. This makes for some interesting decisions to make, particularly if you know you’re going to be dealing with multiple threats.

The overall way the game mechanics work seems to fit nicely with the themes and feel of The Witcher as a whole, too. As a bard, Dandelion is able to enjoy a steady income of gold coins, for example, while Geralt often wanders around penniless, having to rely on other resources to get by. The Investigation cards you can draw as one of your actions often incorporate characters and groups from the video games and source novels, too; expect to be harassed by Nilfgaardians and manipulated by Dijkstra before the game is over.

After one game, it’s hard to judge the overall difficulty of the game, but the mechanics were certainly pretty straightforward to pick up and apply. The challenge of the game, I feel — particularly with more than two players — will be to determine how best to use your limited actions to maximise the amount of points you’re able to attain, and how to balance powering up your character with actually making progress towards the end of the game and that all-important final score.

I’m keen to give it a go with the full complement of four people; the varying abilities of the four characters look set to make things very interesting indeed, and if nothing else the game creates an enjoyable and engaging emergent narrative as you play through a combination of the choices you make and the flavour text on the cards.

There’s no bonking though, to my knowledge.

2195: Quest Complete

0195_001

We played through the whole Warhammer Quest: The Adventure Card Game campaign today with the full complement of four players, and despite failing the first four quests, we were ultimately victorious, saving our local town-in-peril from a full-on orc invasion.

It’s an interesting game. The first four quests felt very difficult indeed, with our party quickly getting overwhelmed before we were able to complete our objective. On one occasion we got frustratingly close to victory — like, one extra action would have let us win, probably — while on others it very quickly became apparent that we weren’t going to make it out of this particular dungeon in one piece.

What’s interesting is that if you know this is going to happen, you’re not necessarily resigned to playing out the last few turns of your inevitable bloody demises; instead, you can do what you can to minimise the damage you’ll suffer in the subsequent quest. Each quest has both “reward” and “penalty” affects according to whether you succeeded or failed, you see, and these range from adding a “Nemesis” monster into the monster deck for the subsequent quest (a penalty, obviously) to adding one of the four “Legendary Fortune” cards into the Gear deck, allowing the lucky drawer to take and equip one of their three Legendary items.

Where the interesting stuff comes is once a couple of these rewards or penalties have resolved themselves. Since we failed the first few quests, the Nemesis from the previous mission would end up in the next quest’s monster deck, in addition to any Nemeses the quest threw at us. This was obviously a bad position to be in, but there’s a ray of hope for a party in this situation: if you kill a Nemesis added to the monster deck in this way, they are perma-killed and won’t come back again. As such, when it became clear that we weren’t going to successfully complete a quest, we’d simply turn our attention to the Nemeses who were harassing us and take them down so we wouldn’t have to deal with them again in the campaign, and this ultimately worked out pretty well. Facing three or four extra Nemeses in the final quest rather than the one we did successfully deal with would have made a big difference to the eventual outcome of the campaign.

At the moment, we’re not quite sure whether our failures in the first quests were due to our own incompetence (largely due to lack of knowledge of the game) or due to bad luck — or a combination of both. I suspect a bit of both, though it’s not at all unusual for a cooperative game such as this to be tuned to a very high level of difficulty to encourage replayability. I’d be interested to try the campaign again and see if we perform any better — or if the few random, non-fixed elements and dice rolls we had to deal with throughout really were the deciding factor in our success or failure.

Interestingly, Warhammer Quest: The Adventure Card Game also comes with a non-campaign “Delve” quest that is much longer than an individual campaign quest, and provides a condensed form of the campaign’s progression automatically at set intervals through your progress. It sounds like this will be a stiff challenge as well as significantly more randomised than the campaign quests, so it will be fun to give that a go sometime.

All in all, it seems like a great game, and I’d be happy to play it again sometime. A day well-spent, I feel!

2184: Warhammer Quest Cards: A First Attempt

0184_001

Tried out Warhammer Quest: The Adventure Card Game with three of my regular board gaming buddies for the first time this evening. We challenged the first quest, which challenges the party to make it through three random locations and a quest location before getting splattered across the nearest wall, and came pretty close to completing it, but were ultimately unsuccessful. Fortunately, the penalties for losing this first quest are relatively minor, though we do miss out on the potential to grab a Legendary item in the next quest as a result.

So how does the game play? Very well, as it happens; each of the four characters gradually start to show how distinctive they are as the game progresses, with each having a clear specialism which can be further developed through the campaign progression system after each quest. The Bright Wizard is particularly good at dealing area-of-effect damage, for example, though many of her abilities require her to take damage in order to have increased effects. The Waywatcher, meanwhile, is very good at exploring, while the Dwarf Ironbreaker is good at tanking enemies and attacking two (or, later, three) at once. The Warrior Priest, meanwhile, is the aid-bot of the group, with his Aid and Rest actions both being particularly strong and benefiting both him and the party: Aid, aside from its usual effect of potentially granting a party member bonus “free” successes on a subsequent action, also heals both the Warrior Priest and the target of his Aid, while his Rest action allows him to endow a party member with the Empowered condition, which is very useful indeed — it prevents an action from being exhausted on use, as well as providing a bonus automatic success and defence on top of any results rolled.

The quest starts relatively straightforward, but gradually escalates as you progress. We cleared the last random location in a somewhat bloodied fashion, which meant we weren’t in a particularly good position to deal with the Nemesis Odious Grump in the final location, particularly as the Peril track had advanced to its final stage, granting him two bonus activations per turn on top of his usual attack. Somehow we reached a position where in the last couple of turns, two party members were dead, leaving the Waywatcher (my friend Tom) and the Warrior Priest (me) to soak up the incoming damage from a good seven or eight enemies, which, of course, wasn’t going to happen at all.

I get the impression the different quests each reward a somewhat different approach. This first quest rewards a quick, efficient exploration process, for example; the quicker you can get through the locations, the fewer enfeebling effects you’ll suffer and the less you’ll have to deal with Odious Grump being a nuisance. It’s all very well knowing that, mind, but it’s not always easy to put into practice: the game’s elegant mechanics of exhausting your actions as you use them but allowing you to refresh them through the use of your character’s otherwise weakest ability makes for some interesting strategies, particularly when you contemplate how the different party members can interact with one another by, say, Aiding one another to refresh actions ahead of time, or using other actions to exhaust enemies or cause them to retreat, taking some of the pressure off comrades.

It’s a really interesting game. The basic mechanics are very simple to understand, but the execution of a quest gives the game a surprising amount of depth that might not be immediately apparent. I’m very keen to see how the game progresses over the course of the complete five-quest campaign, and everyone in our group seemed to enjoy the experience, too. So I call that a win — particularly as it was eminently possible to get through a whole quest on a weeknight evening, which is more than can be said for more conventional board-based dungeon crawlers such as Descent: Journeys in the Dark or indeed the original Warhammer Quest.

2179: Warhammer Quest: The Adventure Card Game Blind Tutorial Playthrough

0179_001

Longtime readers will know that I’m a fan of Games Workshop’s wonderful but out-of-print dungeon crawler games, including Hero Quest, Advanced Heroquest and Warhammer Quest. Unfortunately, these don’t hit the table nearly as often as I’d like, since they’re quite time-consuming to play and fiddly to set up due to their sheer number of components and pen-and-paper RPG-style necessity to prepare adventures beforehand.

I was, as you might expect, quite excited to hear that Fantasy Flight Games, who have been leveraging a whole bunch of Games Workshop properties recently, had released an official card game adaptation of Warhammer Quest which promised to play in 30-60 minutes, and which many claimed offered a fun dungeon-crawling experience without the need for festooning your table in thousands of miniatures and cardboard tiles.

The game is extremely well-regarded on legendary boardgaming community site Boardgamegeek, so I was keen to give it a go. One of the most common complaints, however, was that neither the Learn to Play manual nor the Rules Reference guide were particularly well laid out, meaning it took a little while to get your head around how to actually play. This is nothing unusual for Fantasy Flight Games, however, who, although they produce absolutely beautiful components and cards, aren’t particularly well-regarded when it comes to writing instruction manuals. (Hey. If anyone from FFG is reading, I am very much available for freelance manual and tutorial writing. Please get in touch.)

With that in mind, I decided to try the game’s tutorial scenario and record my experiences for the benefit of anyone else considering this game. So let’s jump right in.

This is all the stuff you get in the box. Two rulebooks — a “learn to play” guide and a reference manual — plus a selection of quest sheets, a deck of large cards, a deck of small cards, six dice and a selection of tokens. Numbered tokens are double-sided so can be used to denote a value of either 1 or 3.

Let’s get set up! I’ll be trying out the Tutorial solo. The Tutorial isn’t a full quest, rather just an opportunity to try out all the main mechanics before jumping in to a full session. I’m going into this pretty much blind, so I may get things wrong along the way. As such, do not take this post as a definitive How to Play guide for now!

First thing to do is pick two heroes to play. There must be at least two heroes in the party, even if you’re playing solo. There are variations on each hero card according to how many party members you have. Generally speaking, the fewer party members you have, the more life each individual character has. If playing with two heroes, each hero gets two turns. If playing with three heroes, one hero per round gets an extra turn.

I’m going to go with the Ironbreaker dwarf and the Bright Wizard for this playthrough, because a tank/wizard combo sounds sensible, and also they’re the two characters I’ve played most in Warhammer End Times: Vermintide on PC.

Each hero starts with four basic action cards that allow them to Attack, Aid, Explore or Rest. During a Campaign or Delve quest, these can be upgraded to Advanced versions later. Here are the Bright Wizard’s basic actions:

And here are the Ironbreaker’s:

The Bright Wizard begins the Tutorial engaged in combat with a Night Goblin Archer, while the Ironbreaker has been set upon by a Rat Swarm. There are also two face-down enemies in the middle of the table, considered to be “in the shadows” for now.

The Tutorial also specifies that we’ll be exploring the Throng of Webs location for now, so this card goes in the middle of the table along with the shuffled Dungeon deck.

We’re now ready to start. We begin with the Hero Activation phase, during which each hero activates in turn, beginning with the current Party Leader, and performs an action. The relevant card is exhausted once it is used, unless it has a Prepare symbol in the corner, in which case all action cards can be readied for the next round.

The Bright Wizard is first to play. Let’s play her in an appropriately hot-tempered manner by immediately flinging a fireball at that pesky Night Goblin Archer in front of her.

Fireball is the Bright Wizard’s Attack action, and it allows her two white dice with which to attempt to deal damage. It’s also a ranged attack, so she can fling fireballs at enemies in the shadows or engaged with other heroes and even target more than one enemy in exchange for taking a point of damage, but for now let’s concentrate on the immediate threat.

The Bright Wizard gets two white dice for her attack, and rolls against one black die because she’s engaged with one enemy. She rolls two success symbols (the crossed axes) plus a defence shield, while the goblin rolls an attack for one point of damage. Since the Bright Wizard rolled a shield, she successfully defends against this damage, and since the goblin only has two hit points in the first place, she defeats it with an appropriately explosive flourish.

Now it’s the Ironbreaker’s turn. He, too, is going to attack. His attack allows him to engage up to two enemies. He’s already engaged with one, but he’s feeling cocky, so he also chooses to engage one of the enemies in the shadows. This flips the card face-up and places it in his engagement area in front of him.

It’s a second Rat Swarm. They don’t do much damage, but they do have 3HP each so it’s unlikely either of them are going down this turn. Regardless, the intrepid Ironbreaker pushes on, rolling two white dice against two black dice.

He rolls one point of damage, which he applies to the enemy of his choice, and successfully defends against one incoming point of damage thanks to the two shields he rolled.

Now it’s the Bright Wizard’s turn again. Since her Fireball is exhausted, she can’t use it again against the enemies engaged with the Ironbreaker or the one remaining in the shadows. She instead takes the opportunity to explore the location by rolling one white die against no black dice, since there are no enemies engaged with her right now.

She rolls a success, which puts the party 1/7 of the way to completing this location. She finds some Cool Waters, which allows her to recover 2HP or ready an action, but since she has taken no damage and her Explore action allows her to ready all her actions anyway, it’s not much use right now. Since she’s flush with life right now, she then chooses to take two points of damage to claim two success tokens and put them in her play area. These can be used next turn for two automatic successes on the Explore action if she uses it.

That’s the end of the Bright Wizard’s actions this round.

The Ironbreaker, meanwhile, is still engaged with the two Rat Swarms. He chooses to use his Stubborn Resolve ability to exhaust one enemy in front of him and automatically defend against up to two points of damage. He then gets to rest, which allows him to recover HP by rolling white dice against black dice, but since he hasn’t taken any damage and there’s no way for the single remaining readied Rat Swarm to do enough damage to get through that monstrous 2 defence, there’s no need to roll any dice.

That’s the end of all the Hero turns this round, which brings us to the enemies.

The Bright Wizard is first to activate an enemy. Since she is not engaged with any enemies right now, she must activate one of the enemies in the shadows, and since there is only one face-down enemy left in the shadows, she flips it face-up to reveal a Giant Wolf.

The Giant Wolf then resolves its three actions in turn. First is Lacerate, which causes whoever it is engaged with to be afflicted with the Bleeding status. Since it is not yet engaged with anyone, however, it does nothing.

Next, its Prey ability causes it to engage the Hero with the most HP, which is the Ironbreaker. It moves into his engagement area. Since the Ironbreaker is now engaged with the maximum three enemies, any additional engagements will simply cause him to take automatic damage, but since there are no other enemies on the table right now, that probably won’t be an issue.

Finally, the Giant Wolf’s Inflict ability deals two damage to the Ironbreaker. This can’t be defended against. The Giant Wolf is then exhausted.

That leaves just the injured Rat Swarm for the Ironbreaker to activate. First it would Advance to engage the Hero activating it if it was in the shadows, but since it’s already engaged with the Ironbreaker, nothing happens. It then deals another point of damage to the Ironbreaker.

At the end of the enemy phase, the Bright Wizard is on 20/22HP, while the Ironbreaker is on 23/26HP. Of the enemies, one of the Rat Swarms and the Giant Wolf are on 3/3HP, while the other Rat Swarm is on 2/3HP. All the enemies are now re-readied for the next round.

Before the round ends, the location’s effects are resolved. In this case, the party leader (currently the Bright Wizard) must exhaust one of her four actions, though it can’t be her Explore action, which has the Prepare icon on it — if this was exhausted, she would eventually be completely unable to act! She instead chooses to exhaust her Rest action Smouldering Wrath, since she’s fairly hale and hearty right now.

Now the round ends, and the party leader token passes to the Ironbreaker.

The Ironbreaker is in a slightly sticky situation, since he’s engaged with three enemies and two of his actions are exhausted. He chooses to offer his Aid to the Bright Wizard, since he has the HP to spare right now. He throws up a Shield Wall, rolling one white die against three black dice.

He rolls two successes, which the Bright Wizard chooses to “bank” on her Fireball action. He also rolls two attacks, causing him to take three points of damage — two from the Giant Wolf and one from one of the Rat Swarms, since higher attack value enemies are always prioritised in situations where not all enemies are attacking. He’s now down to 20/26HP, but those two banked successes for the Bright Wizard will be useful.

Shield Wall also allows the Ironbreaker to re-ready all his actions, so he does so.

The Bright Wizard is up. She chooses to cast Fireball and engage the uninjured Rat Swarm, pulling it off the Ironbreaker. She then voluntarily takes a point of damage to target a second enemy. She then rolls two white dice against one black die.

She rolls one success and two defence, the latter of which allows her to shrug off the Rat Swarm’s counterattack of a single point of damage. With the two banked successes from the Ironbreaker’s Aid action, she has a total of three successes to assign between up to two enemies as she pleases, and since her Fireball is ranged she doesn’t even have to attack the enemy she’s engaged with. She chooses to assign all three points of damage to the Giant Wolf in front of the Ironbreaker, killing it instantly and levelling the playing field somewhat.

Next it’s the Ironbreaker’s turn again. Since he readied all his actions last turn, he is free to use his Attack skill Inexorable Advance. Since this allows him to engage two enemies, he pulls the Rat Swarm back off the Bright Wizard with a mind to cleaving both remaining enemies with a lucky roll. He rolls two white dice against two black dice.

He rolls a normal success, a critical success and an attack. The critical success counts as a normal success but also allows an additional roll of that white die.

Impressively, he rolls another critical success, which means another reroll. That’s a total of three successes so far.

His final roll is a shield, allowing him to shrug off the single point of incoming damage. He assigns two of the successes to the injured Rat Swarm, killing it, while the remainder goes on the last enemy. This round is now over for the Ironbreaker.

That leaves one action for the Bright Wizard. She chooses to use her Burning Sight ability to explore, using her two banked success tokens from the previous turn — these must be declared and used before rolling dice — and rolling a critical success.

She then rolls another two successes, bringing her to a total of five, including the banked tokens she used. This brings the overall progress on the location to 6/7. She then draws a Dungeon card.

The Shrine she discovers gives her the option of exhausting an action to recover 1HP and claim a success token. Since the Explore action allows her to re-ready all her actions anyway, there’s no reason for her not to do this. She heals 1HP, exhausts her Aid ability Fan the Flames and banks a success token on it.

The Bright Wizard cannot finish the exploration this turn by burning HP, but she can bank one token for next turn. She takes the 1HP damage she just healed and claims a success token. She then re-readies all her actions, and that’s the end of the Hero phase.

The only remaining enemy on the table is engaged with the Ironbreaker, who takes one point of damage.

The location effect then causes the party leader (currently the Ironbreaker) to exhaust one action dealing with sticky webbing. He chooses to exhaust his Explore action. Leadership of the party then passes to the Bright Wizard for what will probably be the final round.

To clear the Tutorial, the party must fully explore the Throng of Webs location (which requires just one more Explore success to do so) and defeat all the enemies. With that in mind, the Bright Wizard uses her first action to Aid the Ironbreaker for two dice plus the success token she banked earlier.

She rolls a success and a critical success…

…followed by a defence, which isn’t much good right now, but three success tokens is still plenty. In fact, you can only bank up to two success tokens per card, so the Ironbreaker banks two on his Inexorable Advance card and a third on his Shield Wall card. He also readies his Into the Dark action to explore if necessary, since the Bright Wizard’s Aid action allows him to ready one action.

The Ironbreaker uses Inexorable Advance and rolls two defence, which is more than enough to shrug off the incoming damage from the Rat Swarm. He uses his two banked success tokens from the Bright Wizard’s Aid to defeat the Rat Swarm without the need for rolling further successes. Now the area is clear of enemies, which just leaves the exploration.

The Bright Wizard has a banked success token, so rolling the die is just a formality at this point, but she rolls a critical success anyway. That brings the location to 7/7 progress, completing it and clearing the Tutorial. Full quests would require the exploration of other locations and perhaps the completion of other objectives, but for now… victory!

1942: Thoughts on XCOM After a Four-Player (Tutorial) Game

It’s my combined birthday/stag weekend this, uh, weekend, and so we kicked off the celebrations with a shot at XCOM: The Board Game. Since my three companions for the weekend have not played the game before, we had a go at the tutorial scenario, which I had already familiarised myself with beforehand. The tutorial essentially gives you a predictable setup, then walks you through two complete “rounds” of the game before continuing as the “Easy” difficulty until it concludes either with your victory or crushing defeat at the hands of the aliens.

My immediate reaction to the game after having tried it with a full complement of four people is that this is clearly how the game is intended to play. I enjoyed the couple of solo attempts I had, but it is a lot of things to keep track of at any one time, since you’re effectively doing the work of four people. When you’re against the clock, as you are in each round’s timed phase, this is very difficult to do effectively — though not, I might add, completely impossible.

With four people, meanwhile, everyone can specialise and concentrate on their own area, hopefully contributing to the overall war effort against the invading aliens. The Central Officer can concentrate on reading the game app and distributing information as well as allocating his “satellite” resources either to orbital defense against UFOs or special abilities and technologies. The Commander has overall control of the budget, and if there is a dedicated person controlling nothing but that role, it’s a lot easier to keep track of how much you’re spending during a turn, which is important because overspending carries some pretty harsh penalties!

The Chief Scientist, meanwhile, has overall control over technology research. Up to three technologies can be put into the research queue each turn, and technologies, once completed, effectively become extra special actions for one of the four players. Many of them have some sort of “automatic success” ability, allowing you to make combat or completing mission tasks easier or more resource-efficient, while others have other special effects that manipulate the game flow in some way, perhaps allowing you to “rescue” units that would otherwise be destroyed or gain resources that you wouldn’t be able to collect normally.

Finally, the Squad Leader takes control of the ground forces, and is responsible for completing missions — which bring the team closer to unlocking the final mission and, consequently, the victory condition for the game — and defending the XCOM base, which is one of the two main means through which you can lose the game. (You lose either if your base is destroyed, or two regions on the board reach the “danger zone” on the panic tracker.)

Once everyone had the rules sorted — and, unlike many Fantasy Flight games, they are pretty simple, elegant and easy to learn quickly — the game flowed nicely, and managed to become extremely exciting and tense. One of our number commented that he doesn’t usually find dice-centric games particularly exciting as they’re rather chance-based and it’s difficult to become invested in something you don’t have complete control over, but the overall setup of XCOM means that it develops a very clear sense of “narrative” as you progress through the game, and consequently those dice rolls become much more meaningful. By the end of the game, we were making up names for our Interceptor pilots; praising “Simon’s” brilliant defense of Europe and chastising “Pancho Gonzalez” for failing to defend South America adequately and ultimately costing us the game just before we could complete the final mission objective.

It’s a great game. I’m looking forward to trying it without the training wheels tomorrow, and probably failing to repel the alien invasion in spectacular manner. Unlike many co-op games, it all but eliminates the “alpha player” problem, where one player dominates the table talk and effectively runs the game by themselves by telling everyone else what to do. Because of the “timed phase” mechanic, there simply isn’t time for any one person to dominate the discussion; everyone has to take responsibility for their own area’s actions, and everyone else has to trust them to make the right calls. It’s a really interesting means of handling co-op, and it works really, really well.

Bed now, though. It is late.

1938: XCOM: The Board Game: Some First Impressions

My brother bought me a copy of XCOM: The Board Game for my birthday, so I spent a bit of time learning it today since you can play it solo, and I’m planning on playing it with some friends this weekend.

I must confess that I’m not actually massively familiar with XCOM as a whole, though I did play UFO: Enemy Unknown back when it first came out, and I do at least own a copy of the more recent reboot, even if I have never actually booted it up as yet. I know the principle, though, and I also know that knowledge of the video game series isn’t particularly important for enjoying the board game, as the board game has a somewhat different focus than the video game.

Basically, aliens are invading and everyone is fucked unless you save them. You do this by responding to UFO sightings around the world, completing missions, researching technology and, hopefully, eventually thwarting the alien menace. While you’re doing this, the various regions of the world are gradually getting more and more panicked by the Bad Things that are happening everywhere, so you need to try and take care of them as much as you can lest your funding gets pulled from that region.

XCOM: The Board Game is a cooperative affair for one to four players. However many players are playing, four “roles” are used, with multiple players taking on more than one role if you’re playing with less than a full complement. The Commander is in charge of the overall budget. The Science Officer is in charge of research. The Squad Leader is in charge of leading the troops on the ground. And the one I’ve forgotten the name of is in charge of other important stuff like communications and whatnot.

Yes, communications; XCOM: The Board Game has an interesting twist on the usual “players against the game” formula of cooperative tabletop games: there’s a companion app for smartphones/tablets, and it is required to play, not optional. The reason for this is the “real-time” phase of each round, which requires someone to be in charge of the app and bark out orders to the other players as the app issues them; the players, in turn, then have strict time limits in which to complete their actions, and the exact “phases” through which a turn proceeds are part randomly generated, part determined by the information you pass the app about the current situation of the game.

It’s an elegant solution to the sometimes clunky nature of cooperative games that rely on “event cards” or equivalent to help build the narrative of a play session. Those who like to know all the possible things that might happen in a turn may balk at the idea of not having a deck of cards to flick through before or after the game, but the element of mystery is very much a part of the XCOM experience, as is responding to unexpected threats at a moment’s notice.

The real-time phase is pretty hectic — and, I can imagine, prone to some horrible disasters. It’s followed by a resolution phase in which the app walks you through each step in turn and tells you how to resolve each action. Unlike the real-time phase, the order of actions in which is part-randomised (though you always get new technologies and budget first in a turn), the resolution phase follows a fixed order, so learning this will allow you to formulate effective strategies.

The basic mechanic of the resolution phase is press-your-luck dice rolls. Generally speaking, for every (insert appropriate unit here) you have on a particular task, you get a blue die, which is marked with some blank sides and some “success” sides. Each task requires at least one success to complete; enemies generally require multiple successes to defeat. If you fail to get the successes you need on one roll, you can press your luck and try again — the risk factor comes in the fact that the “threat level” increases for this task each time you do it, making it more likely that you’ll take losses even if you’re ultimately successful in completing the task. Losses are determined by a special red eight-sided die; this is marked with numbers, and rolling equal to or under the current threat level (it begins at 1 and goes up to 5, so there’ll never be a guaranteed loss) counts as a loss, which usually means military units are killed and “reusable” units such as scientists and satellites are exhausted, meaning they’ll be out of action for a whole round.

The mechanics are simple to understand and seem to combine a good amount of luck and strategy. You can, of course, manipulate the amount of “luck” you’ll be relying on by assigning more units to a particular task, but there are limits in place — not to mention something of a shortage of units to scatter around the world!

I lost both the solo games I tried earlier; once from two continents falling into full-on panic (which results in an immediate loss) and once from my base being destroyed by alien intruders. I had a great time, though, and I’m very interested to see how the play dynamic changes with multiple people around the table; it’s rather overwhelming to take responsibility for everything!

1500: Make a Run

[Aside: Gosh. 1,500 daily posts. Good job, me. I’d celebrate, but I already had something in mind to write about today, sooo…]

Spent a pleasant hour or two teaching and playing Netrunner this evening. This is the third time I’ve had the opportunity to give this interesting game a go now, and each time I play, I like it a little more.

I think the best thing about it is the psychology aspect of it. Like a good game of poker, success in Netrunner relies as least partly upon reading your opponent, figuring out how they’re likely to act and taking advantage of it. When playing as the Corporation, for example, choosing which of your Remote Servers you’re going to install Ice in front of is extremely important: do you think your opponent will assume your most valuable cards — the ones they’re trying to steal in order to win the game — are heavily protected behind Ice, or will he see through the common bluff of leaving valuable cards unprotected as if they’re no big deal?

There’s a wonderful sense of tension in the game, on both sides, and the game is seemingly balanced in such a way as to encourage this feeling as often as possible.

In the last game I played today, for example, I was playing as the Corporation, and a victory on points was looking likely. My last Agenda card — the cards I needed to spend credits on to “advance” in order to score — was heavily protected behind three pieces of Ice, and I had enough credits to rez all of them without any difficulty. Moreover, I could see that my opponent James didn’t have the Icebreakers he’d need to defeat my pieces of Ice, so I was feeling pretty confident. I advanced my last Agenda until it was one token away from final victory for me, and then it was the end of my turn.

Naturally, James used this opportunity to make a final Run on my Remote Server, obviously hoping to pick up my Agenda and bring himself closer to victory, while denying me the win. He began with the Tinkering card, which made one of my already-revealed pieces of Ice into a type that his Icebreakers could deal with. Uh-oh. He also had enough money to power up his Icebreaker enough to crack through it and deactivate its subroutines. Uh-oh. James broke through the first piece of Ice without any difficulty, so I rezzed the next one — an infuriating little card called a “portal” whose main effect was to send James back to confront the first piece of Ice again. This would fuck him over nicely, since he didn’t have enough credits left to confront it again, but unfortunately his Icebreaker was of the correct type to bypass the portal without any difficulty.

This left the final piece of Ice for him to confront. My confidence had evaporated by this point, but I rezzed it anyway. It was pretty weak, but its subroutine would end his Run immediately — and best of all, it transpired that it was of a type his Icebreaker couldn’t crack.

My heart leapt. I had done it. I had fended off an attack that had got a whole lot further than I thought it was going to — and now I was going to win for sure. And win I did — and great it felt, too.

I’m starting to get my head around this game now, and I’m really interested to play it some more. It’s a big challenge — one false move, or an unfortunate draw of the cards, can leave you in serious shit or even with an instant loss if you’re not careful. But knowing the things to watch out for allows you to prepare for most eventualities — and if you’re playing against an evenly-matched opponent, it can lead to some genuinely thrilling faceoffs.

I’m not quite brave enough to approach the clearly experienced Netrunner players in the Monday night board game group as yet, but I’m definitely keen to play more. Hopefully I’ll have the opportunity to do so soon.

1146: Doing It Wrong

We’ve had a day of board gaming today, including a game of Agricola, a game of Small World and finishing off with a quest and a half worth’s of Descent: Second Edition.

Partway through our Descent session, I looked up something on a whim, and it transpires that we’ve been playing a certain rule completely wrong for the duration of our campaign. It turns out the Stun condition, which we’d been playing as completely eliminating a figure’s go (i.e. the only action they could take that turn is getting rid of Stun status) actually only removes one of a figure’s two actions per turn. Given that one of the hero characters has an ability that automatically inflicts Stun on any monster figure that begins their turn adjacent to them — and, more to the point, has been making extensive use of that ability — this has likely had a significant knock-on effect on our campaign. I knew that ability as we had been playing it felt distinctly unbalanced, and now I know why — the way we were playing it, it was!

Fortunately, Descent 2 is fun enough that even with the hero players being armed to the teeth with a variety of ill-gotten gains through earlier quests that they might not necessarily have won had my Overlord’s forces not spent most of their time staggering around in a daze, it’s still enjoyable to play. I’m still losing pretty much every quest and it’s entirely likely that I will lose the entire campaign as a result of our earlier fuckup, but it doesn’t matter too much. We know now, at least, and from the sound of the conversation around our gaming table this evening it looks highly likely that we’re going to do another run through the campaign once we’re finished, with everyone in different roles.

This is the one tricky thing about board games versus video games. In video games, assuming they have been programmed correctly, there is no way to do that wrong. Had Descent 2 been made as a Fire Emblem-style video game (which would be fantastic, incidentally — I would pay good money for a video game version of it, particularly with multiplayer) then there would have been no ambiguity about the rules. We’d always be using the correct skills, we wouldn’t inadvertently be breaking the rules and there’d be no disputes over what the wording of certain cards meant.

This is actually a common problem with the theme-heavy games that I’m such a fan of. Because theme-heavy games tend to have a lot of rules, many of which only apply to very specific situations (usually tied to happenings in the “narrative” of the play session), it’s very easy to misunderstand, forget or otherwise mutilate the rules in some way. If everyone agrees on a variation, it hurts no-one, but it can be frustrating to have played something for a hefty period of time and discover that you’ve been Doing It Wrong.

Oh well. As I say, I’m not too worried. I’ve had a blast playing through the Descent 2 campaign so far, and we’re coming up on the finale. Once that’s done and dusted, we’ll be able to start a new game — possibly with the recently-released expansion pack — and play it, you know, properly. We have a running joke in our gaming group that if we fuck something up rules-wise and it’s too late to do anything about it, the game in question is a “training game”. When it comes to a multi-session campaign like this, it’s a little harder to justify, but as I say, since we’re highly likely to be playing it again we can chalk our experiences this time around up to learning the ropes, and hopefully do a better job next time around.

If I haven’t made it clear by the several other posts I’ve written on this subject to date, Descent 2 is a really good game. It’s been a big hit with our gaming group due to the fact that it marries genuinely strategic gameplay with theme-heavy shenanigans and lovely-quality components — the miniatures in particular are beautifully-detailed, if rendered in rather bendy plastic — and thus appeals to both the people who enjoy games with “stories” and a lot of theme, and those who enjoy competitive, strategic play. I can highly recommend it for anyone looking for a good, relatively easy to understand (rules for the Stun condition aside) game with a lot of variety and huge replay value.

#oneaday Day 939: Deeper Into the Dark

Last night, I had the good fortune of being able to spend some more time with my friends playing Descent: Journeys in the Dark Second Edition (hereafter, once again, referred to as Descent 2). The game has been a big hit so far, which is pleasing, as there’s a hell of a lot to it and a significant amount of replay value even once your group plays through the 20+ hour campaign once.

This time we had a full complement of five players — me as the Overlord and four hero characters, two of whom we “boosted” up to an equivalent level to the two who played the first quests in our first session. We took on a new quest and played it through to completion. It took significantly longer with five people as this (1) meant that there were four people to argue about the best way through which to eviscerate my monster minions and (2) I had more monster minions with which to attempt to eviscerate my four opponents. Overall, I found it a much more satisfying experience with five players total, which perhaps explains why the game’s BoardGameGeek page rates it as “best with 5 players”.

The game has so far appeared to be weighted quite heavily in favour of the heroes in that they have won every quest so far. I’m not complaining about this, mind — it’s quite fun to struggle against these difficult odds, and I’m assuming (hoping, really) that the odds will even or perhaps tip in my favour as the campaign progresses to more difficult challenges. Or, of course, I could just be rubbish at being the Overlord. (I know for a fact on more than one occasion I screwed myself out of a potentially significant advantage by forgetting to play Overlord cards such as “pit trap” and “tripwire” that could have stopped players from moving and thus blocking me off from completing objectives — but this is entirely my fault, so I didn’t ask for a “do-over” as that wouldn’t really be in the spirit of things. I have learned my lesson.)

There are a ton of things to like about the game, though. Unlike many “dungeon crawlers” (which, as I’ve previously said, Descent 2 really isn’t) the rules are relatively lightweight, but pretty flexible, and the custom dice used for combat allow for a large amount of variety. For the unfamiliar, every attack roll uses a blue “attack” die, which has a 1 in 6 chance of missing and does varying degrees of damage on its other faces. Each weapon or special attack then uses one or more of the red and yellow dice — red ones offer the potential for more damage, while yellow ones offer more in the way of “surges” — little lightning-bolt symbols that can be spent to perform a weapon’s special actions — some might be able to “pierce” the enemy’s defensive dice, for example, while others might do additional damage, apply an effect or knock the unfortunate victim backwards. Combine the various weapon, skill and item cards with the pool of dice available and you have a wide variety of possibilities that keeps combat constantly interesting.

And that’s just within a single encounter. Pulling back to look at the bigger picture, the entire campaign can play out completely differently according to how the heroes and Overlord perform, and the quest choices that the hero players make. Rather smartly, the game only requires players to complete three out of five possible “Act I” quests before an “interlude”, followed by three out a possible ten “Act II” quests, each of which is presented as part of a pair according to whether the heroes or Overlord won the corresponding act I quest. I didn’t explain that very well. Basically, Act II’s available quests change according to who won various quests in Act I. There, that’s better.

On top of that, the Descent 2 Conversion Kit allows content from the original Descent: Journeys in the Dark to be used with Descent 2, opening up a whole swathe of possibilities. And then you can guarantee that Descent 2 will also have its own expansions ready to roll before long, meaning that this is a game with a potentially very long lifespan — which is why I’m so very pleased that my group has taken to it so well. Anything that puts off yet another humiliating, crushing (and bewildering) defeat in Agricola is just fine with me.

#oneaday Day 925: Journeys in the Dark

I remember catching a glimpse of the first Descent: Journeys in the Dark a good few years back now. It was when my friends and I were just starting to discover the joy of board gaming, and had been experimenting with everything from Risk to Space Crusade via Catan and several others. Descent was noteworthy for 1) coming in a massive box and 2) costing £60, which put it slightly out of “impulse purchase” territory. I mean, if it sucked, that was a lot of money and shelf space to have wasted.

I did some reading up on it, though, and found that it seemed to be a well-regarded game, and one of the favourite “dungeon crawlers” among the community. I kept an eye on it with interest, but never got around to picking up a copy.

A month or two back, I decided that I really actually quite did want to give it a try, so I paid a visit to a couple of online UK board game distributors that I knew of and tried to order a copy. It was, as Sod’s Law tends to have it, nowhere to be seen.

A little research, and I discovered that the reason it was no longer available was because publisher Fantasy Flight Games was beavering away on a brand new edition. Descent: Journeys in the Dark Second Edition to give it its full, and rather grandiose title, in fact — hereafter referred to as Descent 2 to save my sanity. (Not to be confused with the video game Descent 2, however, which is something entirely different.)

Descent 2, it seemed, was to be a complete reimagining of the original game. The core mechanics had been overhauled entirely, a variation on the “campaign” rules from the original game’s Road to Legend expansion were to be included as standard and a whole new series of quests was produced. And the whole thing somehow came in a box half the size of the original while still cramming in a ridiculous amount of cardboard and plastic.

I haven’t played the original Descent so I can’t comment with any authority on the differences between it and the follow-up. But I can comment on how Descent 2 plays, because we gave it a try last night.

I honestly wasn’t quite sure what to expect. From reading the rules, it was clear that Descent 2 would be a little different from the other “dungeon crawlers” I’ve played in the past. It didn’t appear to have the sheer brutality of DungeonQuest, the heavily random nature of Advanced Heroquest and Warhammer Quest, or the purely cooperative “GM-free” gameplay of Legend of Drizzt. And it was considerably more complex than Hero Quest, a game which brought many people to the genre in the first place — and one which they should really rerelease for the modern world.

In fact, I’d argue that calling Descent 2 a “dungeon crawler” is actually rather inaccurate. It’s a competitive scenario-based strategy game in which a team of players (the “heroes”) take on a single opponent (the “overlord”) over a series of quests, with both sides gradually growing in strength as the campaign proceeds. (It’s also possible to play the game’s quests as “one-shot” adventures, but one would argue some of the satisfaction of watching your characters grow and evolve over time would be lost.)

Each of Descent 2’s quests is actually made up of two separate encounters, with a couple of exceptions. Each encounter takes place on a prebuilt map, the entirety of which is visible to both sides from the start. Both sides are also fully aware of the victory conditions for the map, rather than the heroes having to explore and uncover the mysteries of the quest for themselves. And once play begins, it is full-on competition between the overlord and the heroes for supremacy.

That latter aspect right there is the key difference between Descent 2 and the previously-mentioned dungeon crawlers. In most cases, the “evil” player (the respective games’ overlord-equivalent) acted as a facilitator, pushing the story forward and occasionally bending the rules in the player’s favour if things looked like they might be getting out of control. (After all, where’s the fun in composing an epic five-act quest if the heroes just get killed by goblins in the first dungeon?) In Descent 2, meanwhile, the overlord is trying their best to accomplish their own victory conditions, rather than simply trying to stop the heroes from accomplishing theirs. Notably, knocking a hero’s health down to zero does not kill them off (unless the group is playing the final battle of the campaign) — it simply causes them to spend a turn knocked to the ground, hopefully allowing the overlord time to gain an advantage.

The campaign unfolds over the course of two three-quest Acts, with additional shorter introduction, interlude and finale quests at appropriate points. For each quest, the victor (be it overlord or heroes) is recorded, with the available quests in Act 2 being determined by who won corresponding quests in the first Act. It all comes down to the final battle in the end, though, because victory for the entire campaign can be secured by either side in both of the two finale quests, regardless of how well (or badly) they have done up until that point. A poor performance could put one side or the other at a disadvantage come this final battle, however, so it is in the interests of everyone to give each quest their all.

In terms of base mechanics during play, they are relatively simple but very flexible. Weapons and skills provide players with varying numbers of dice to roll in combat, with some dice having the potential to deal more damage, others specialising in “surges” (which can trigger special abilities) or ranged combat. There’s a heavy degree of tactical play during each scenario, particularly in those where the heroes are accompanied by civilian characters and are also able to use them to their advantage. Should they get a civilian to close the door, forcing the slobbering monster outside to waste one of its two actions opening it again? Should they run away? Should they hide behind a hero or get as far away from the action as possible? Should the heroes defeat the monsters, or focus on the objectives? Is there time to pick up the hidden treasures scattered around the map? A Descent 2 encounter is a series of decisions like this, culminating in a charge for the finish.

So far we’ve played the introduction quest (which is very short and simple) and one of the Act 1 quests. Both seemed to be slightly weighted in favour of the hero players (though I may just be saying that because Overlord Pete lost both quests) but I’ll be interested to see how the game evolves over time — both heroes and the overlord have the opportunity to spend experience points on new skills between quests, and the overlord’s forces get an appropriate jump in power between Act 1 and 2. The game is also pretty well balanced according to the number of hero players, and from next session onwards we’ll have an extra hero in play, so it will be interesting to see what effect that has, too.

The game was a big hit with the two other participants I played it with last night, and I’d only describe one of them as a particular enthusiast of the dungeon crawl genre. But there’s the point, really — despite Descent 2 featuring a variety of dungeons, and quests, and equipment, and monsters, and experience points — all things readily associated with “dungeon crawling” — it’s really more of a scenario-based battle game. And it’s all the better for it. It’s easy to understand, surprisingly quick to play, and very satisfying. Also, the dynamic nature of the campaign means that it has a lot of replay value, too. A single campaign playthrough is supposed to take about 20 hours in total — multiply that by all the possible combinations of quests that you can play throughout and there’s an impressive amount of content in that box. And, if Descent 2 is anything like its predecessor, it will enjoy a healthy amount of official expansions and fan-created content, making it all but certain to keep a regular place in gaming groups’ rotations for months and years to come.