A Question and a Comment

[freeport_pirate]

So hey, board gaming friends, I've got a question for you. When you play Descent, does your Overlord act like a GM in a roleplaying game or does he/she really try to beat the players? Last time we played to took a turn in the Overlord chair and I found my natural instinct was to act like a GM. For example, when I realized how tough the opening

Comments

[jediwiker]

Funny you should ask. I've posted recently about my Descent experiences, with Andrew as Overlord--and he plays to win. Keri pointed out that she never won a game of MageKnight against Andrew because he's naturally inclined toward good tactics, and I've really seen that at play in Descent.

Now, when *I* ran Descent for Keri, I ran it like a GM--mainly because I was frustrated with the fact that we had never even completed the first scenario in four tries.

It probably has something to do with the fact that I've spent the last 28 years since being introduced to D&D getting accustomed to the idea that it's not a "me vs. the players" situation--and it's hard to break that old habit.

JD

[codrus]

re: Cavalry -- wow, that sounds really weaksauce. Were they just trying to 'balance' it as a game?

I've only been the Overlord that one time, but I was 'mostly' trying to win the scenario. Trying to focus-fire on specific folks, for example. That intro scenario is pretty hard for the Overlord to win though. Or so it seemed to me -- half my monsters were dead without ever firing a shot, and the other half were stuck in terrain thanks to the scenario design.

[ptevis]

Hmm. I've always pictured the Rohirrim as light/medium cavalry rather than shock troopers. But still, skilled dudes on horses in hand-to-hand with unsupported skirmishers ought to clean up.

As for Descent, I've sadly not played it. Thus, this comment is not helpful. Sorry.

[freeport_pirate]

You haven't played Descent? Who are you and what have you done with Paul Tevis?

[ptevis]

Ha! It occurs to me that I probably would have the opportunity to try it at one the conventions I'm going to in July. Perhaps I should see about that...

[freeport_pirate]

I would throw down with you, but I won't be at Origins this year. It's Ropecon and GenCon for me.

[blizack]

I owned Descent briefly, and reading it, it seemed a lot like an RPG in that the Overlord had a lot to take care of, and it would probably take a long time to get through a scenario. So much so that I realized that if I had enough time and players to run Descent, I could be playing an RPG, so I sold it.

Seemed like a pretty cool game, though.

[freeport_pirate]

See that's funny because I've been looking at 4E and saying to myself, "Why would I play this when I could just play Descent?"

[blizack]

I haven't gotten to read 4th edition yet, but I think I see what you did there. They do seem to be converging on almost the same concept, in a way, though I don't think the idea of highly tactical play is necessarily a bad thing. I am looking forward to giving it a test run this weekend and seeing how it goes.

By the way, I just read the bits about SIFRP on the Green Ronin site and am finding myself excitedly looking forward to some low-magic grittiness. Sounds like it's going to be good!

[wordwill]

I'm super-curious to see answers to this Descent question. My experience is that the Overlord is The Opponent, but I'm not sure I agree with that as The Best Idea. That the game survives in the hands of both sorts of Overlords is a strength and, I brazenly suppose, evidence of intent.