data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3546b/3546b3e575852eb354fb090919860595baa9070c" alt="Image"
Behold! The new Dominion:Dark Ages replacements for Estate.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/24574/24574b9888c27912c06c5c64c5f4a7047bfbdb3d" alt="Image"
I love Rats!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f6a36/f6a36cfb7d70cc8c2d22683abdf7ba7cc5d49089" alt="wub :wub:"
Moderators: The Preacher, $iljanus, Zaxxon
Dude, we lost the first game against the horde. We did run away with the second game though.Chaosraven wrote:Spent the evening at a friends birthday party gaming.
There was a table of Munchkin going, as we tried out my mtg Horde (managed 2 wins in a row, suppose it needs to be MORE EVIL), then a 6 Player COSMIC ENCOUNTER (co-win by Remus and myself).
Yep. It blew up all our stuff it's first turn and we never recovered from that. Shark needed one or two more lands, I think you needed one more, the goblins I was playing just couldn't block much and he overran us with dragons.Chaosraven wrote:Wait, we did?
So a pile of cards is easier to manage than pages of cards in a binder? I've been doing it wrong for years!Chaz wrote:I'm intrigued by the spell book deal, but if it's really just a nice way to display your cards, it'll be a pain to set up, give you more options than you (or especially a new player) can practically parse, and could just as easily be done by holding your cards in a big pile.
More like it'd be easier to change "decks" by just grabbing a new pile versus swapping cards in a binder thing. Isn't the way you change from one mage type to another by swapping to a different set of cards in the spellbook? I thought I remembered reading on BGG previews that the game ships with four different mage types/decks, but only two spell books.SpaceLord wrote:So a pile of cards is easier to manage than pages of cards in a binder? I've been doing it wrong for years!Chaz wrote:I'm intrigued by the spell book deal, but if it's really just a nice way to display your cards, it'll be a pain to set up, give you more options than you (or especially a new player) can practically parse, and could just as easily be done by holding your cards in a big pile.
That is correct. Even the core spells expansion that's coming out about the same time has only cards and no spellbooks. It's essentially a two player game but there's a planned expansion coming out later that will allow for 4 player...although I'm guessing it will be team play and not head to head.Chaz wrote:I thought I remembered reading on BGG previews that the game ships with four different mage types/decks, but only two spell books.
Watched as my son played a demo game of this at gencon. They had nicely placed stickers on the pages to say whether a spell was a block or attack. But there still was lots of time spent looking at the spellbook as both were new players. My son really liked it. I dont think it brought anything new to gaming but it looked fun. I am sure people who knew what they were doing would get down much faster. There are 4 casters, each with recommended spell lists But you can build your own decks with spells from outside your domain costing 3x (or maybe 4x) to add to your book/deck. In game they cost regular cost to play. The physical spell books you get with the game (might be limited to pre-order, dont know for sure) are easier than having them as a deck. My son had the priestess and his opponent had the wizard(?). They both had same hit point and mana regen for the demo but i dont if they actually have different values for each caster or not. But really the caster are more targets than anything. You can think of the game as more like MtG as a boardgame i suppose.hepcat wrote:That is correct. Even the core spells expansion that's coming out about the same time has only cards and no spellbooks. It's essentially a two player game but there's a planned expansion coming out later that will allow for 4 player...although I'm guessing it will be team play and not head to head.Chaz wrote:I thought I remembered reading on BGG previews that the game ships with four different mage types/decks, but only two spell books.
Only three more months until BGG Con.coopasonic wrote:I got to play Go Fish over the weekend. I had to look up the rules on the net. I also played a couple games of Connect 4.
Yup. As a matter of fact, Jeremy saw me playing Rune Age Saturday and sat down for a bit to talk as I was already out of the game due to an early death. He said that Game Salute told him they'd brought twice what they thought they needed, but were almost sold out of that. Needless to say, he was very pleased with that.SpaceLord wrote: And I've now played Shadowrift 10 times or so, and remained really enthused. Did anyone that went to GenCon see it at the GameSalute booth?
Boudreaux wrote:Had a huge gaming weekend, partly due to an impromptu "Can't Go To GenCon Game-A-Thon" with a few friends. Started off by teaching my 7-year-old Rune Age, which he took to fairly quickly. He has a bit to learn about deck building, as he tended to buy everything he could without regard for what it did to his deck, but we had some close games. I'm itching to get him into Summoner Wars next.
wrong thread?Isgrimnur wrote:They're very close to hitting the halfling mark. I think the only reason this ever ends is the timer expires.
isgrimnurIsgrimnur wrote:Just a bit. I had my hockey forum up in another window.
I love Tobago, but I always advise people it took us a few games for us to appreciate how to play the game... not in the sense of rules or mechanics, but what you're supposed to do to try and win the game.MythicalMino wrote:My kids and I may play Tabago this afternoon.
Shadows gets better with familiarity, but I still don't think it's quite as good as it wants to be. The quests that allow group participation like Grail or Excalibur should be done by several players all together, or not at all. It's virtually impossible to complete the Grail quest by yourself, for example. You need to deside which quests you can collectively (or individually) complete quickly, and which you can afford to let go. Ideally, there should be as little moving around as possible, and sometimes that means staying in Camelot to grab cards for a couple of turns while evil has its way. Also, as the traitor I think there is almost zero reason to reveal yourself unless it wins you the game.The Rocketman wrote:9) Shadows over Camelot:
This is a relatively new game for our group, but we're not enjoying it as much as we thought we would. We lost, again, but what's worse is that we all felt it was boring. The fact that the rules punish you for moving around, makes for a very stale game. For example, 1 player tried the Grail quest for pretty much the entire game, only to give up after hours because he was getting nowhere. Also, the traitor revealed himself, and he found out that you simply don't have any meaningful decisions anymore then.
Isn't the grail a solo quest? If it isn't, well, that explains a lot thenBoudreaux wrote:Shadows gets better with familiarity, but I still don't think it's quite as good as it wants to be. The quests that allow group participation like Grail or Excalibur should be done by several players all together, or not at all. It's virtually impossible to complete the Grail quest by yourself, for example. You need to deside which quests you can collectively (or individually) complete quickly, and which you can afford to let go. Ideally, there should be as little moving around as possible, and sometimes that means staying in Camelot to grab cards for a couple of turns while evil has its way. Also, as the traitor I think there is almost zero reason to reveal yourself unless it wins you the game.The Rocketman wrote:9) Shadows over Camelot:
This is a relatively new game for our group, but we're not enjoying it as much as we thought we would. We lost, again, but what's worse is that we all felt it was boring. The fact that the rules punish you for moving around, makes for a very stale game. For example, 1 player tried the Grail quest for pretty much the entire game, only to give up after hours because he was getting nowhere. Also, the traitor revealed himself, and he found out that you simply don't have any meaningful decisions anymore then.