Runebound 2nd Edition or World of Warcraft the Board Game?

MadMaxim · Aug 2, 2008

Hi everybody! I'm looking for some advice on what board games to go for. As the title suggests I've a hard time choosing between the two titles mentioned because I'm a huge fan of the Warcraft universe (played the RTS games but never World of Warcraft), but the Runebound game looks more generic and perhaps better suited for those not familiar with the Warcraft universe. What are you experiences with each if you care to share them? Thanks in advance

By the way, is the Starcraft Board Game any good? A little bit of Blizzard fanboy

egarvue · Aug 2, 2008

Runebound is great, we've played it a lot with my family. It is worth it to get the packs of expansion cards, though, as you'll quickly become familiar with the original quest.

One thing about Runebound is that it is better with only a few players. Because there's not a lot of interaction between players (each is pretty much on their own questing and whatnot), if there's too many people at the table, there will be a lot of downtime. We've found that its a perfect game for three players.

Can't speak for the WoW Adventure game. The Starcraft boardgame looked ok, it didn't really blow me away though. A better space strategy game from Fantasy Flight games is Twilight Imperium; very very fun game, that is.

MerricB · Aug 2, 2008

MadMaxim said:
Hi everybody! I'm looking for some advice on what board games to go for. As the title suggests I've a hard time choosing between the two titles mentioned because I'm a huge fan of the Warcraft universe (played the RTS games but never World of Warcraft), but the Runebound game looks more generic and perhaps better suited for those not familiar with the Warcraft universe. What are you experiences with each if you care to share them? Thanks in advance By the way, is the Starcraft Board Game any good? A little bit of Blizzard fanboy

Runebound has severe problems; a lot of people like it, but there's very little player interaction and you should never, ever play it with more than three people. At 1 hour per person, it _drags_ horribly. I enjoy it as a solo game, but I hate it with other people. 1-3 players only.

World of Warcraft: the Board Game is good, but I don't recommend it due to it's length: 4+ hours is standard. It also requires people to become fairly familiar with its system; it isn't really for casual players. I enjoy it, though. This game is for 2, 4 or 6 players. Odd numbers don't work at all.

World of Warcraft: the Adventure Game is the option you should consider; it takes a much lighter approach to the game and should finish in about 2 hours for 4 players. 2-4 players are supported with the basic game. I've played a couple of games so far, and I really enjoy it. It's pretty cheap as these things go (on par with RB). Characters go on quests (kill monsters, deliver messages, etc.) and there's lots of player interaction. Turns are also fast - about a minute per player.

Starcraft: the Boardgame is a game I really enjoy. 2-6 players, takes about 30-45 minutes per player. It's not exactly starcraft as you're battling over many planets simultaneously (and it doesn't use the micromanagement of SC), but it uses the themes of the universe very nicely.

I play the WoW games without having played actual WoW at all, so that's not a problem.

Cheers!

MadMaxim · Aug 2, 2008

MerricB said:
Runebound has severe problems; a lot of people like it, but there's very little player interaction and you should never, ever play it with more than three people. At 1 hour per person, it _drags_ horribly. I enjoy it as a solo game, but I hate it with other people. 1-3 players only.

Why is it so bad with more people, if you would please elaborate? Does each player's turn take too long due to a lot of options or something else? I can see that the poor player interaction can ruin it. Oh, and an extra question: How are the expansions for both the games?

Asmor · Aug 3, 2008

MadMaxim said:
Why is it so bad with more people, if you would please elaborate? Does each player's turn take too long due to a lot of options or something else? I can see that the poor player interaction can ruin it. Oh, and an extra question: How are the expansions for both the games?

The problem with Runebound is that it's basically multiplayer solitaire. There are, technically, rules for player interaction, but they come up very rarely and there's no reason to actually do it. So basically, you get the same experience whether playing with multiple people or by yourself, but if you're playing with multiple people you just do a whole lot less.

I'm a big fan of the WoW board game, if you can manage the time commitments. It's also worth noting that the game requires a prodigious amount of space; clear off the entire dining room table for it. But the combat system is very cool and it emulates WoW very well. Haven't played the adventure game.

Starcraft is an awesome game, but a very very different game from Runebound and WoW. Starcraft is a strategic war game, not an adventure RPG.

Gundark · Aug 9, 2008

MerricB said:
Runebound has severe problems; a lot of people like it, but there's very little player interaction and you should never, ever play it with more than three people. At 1 hour per person, it _drags_ horribly. I enjoy it as a solo game, but I hate it with other people. 1-3 players only.

World of Warcraft: the Board Game is good, but I don't recommend it due to it's length: 4+ hours is standard. It also requires people to become fairly familiar with its system; it isn't really for casual players. I enjoy it, though. This game is for 2, 4 or 6 players. Odd numbers don't work at all.

I can agree with Merrric about Runebound. I own and have played the 2nd ed. quite a few times. It is a flawed game. World of Warcraft the board game was very boring. For the same reasons that I find Runebound to be boring...both games are extremely boring when it's not your turn.

wow....how many times can I use the word boring in a post

Gundark · Aug 9, 2008

MadMaxim said:
Why is it so bad with more people, if you would please elaborate? Does each player's turn take too long due to a lot of options or something else? I can see that the poor player interaction can ruin it. Oh, and an extra question: How are the expansions for both the games?

I don't know about the expansions to the game, however I don't think they would do anything to fix the problems I have with the game, they just add different options.

Really really poor player interaction, the only time to interact is cursing out a another player for going after an adventure site that you wanted to go after. Multiplayer solitaire is a good analogy but picture playing your turn, then stare at the board for 2-4 times longer than your turn, and then have your turn again.

Also there is going to be one player that pulls ahead early in the game due to dumb luck, generally this has been the person who will win the game.

Shoping for items is really lame as it's random

Havn't played this game in ages

bobthehappyzombie · Aug 13, 2008

I'll second... third... add my voice to the growing choir that says Runbound is not a game we'd recomend, the only interaction is when someone does all the second level quests and screws anyone whom can't handle them yet... not worth the time invested, sorry to say.

Descent is a good game along similar character development lines, and is co-operative, though you do need someone to run it, Arkham would be my recomendation as to what to buy if you don't fancy shelling out the cash to buy descent... and don't bother looking on ebay I have been stalking it for weeks now, very difficult to get a bargin.

Holy Bovine · Aug 22, 2008

I'm going to have to come in on the side to support Runebound 2E. This is one of my all time favourite boardgames and while it does have some problems it is still fun and much faster than Descent or World of Warcraft (although I like both of those too). I like the premise of the players competing with each other for quests - that is the interaction between players! Some characters are unbalanced however (the one who can buy advancements for one less XP comes to mind) and this can make for a dull game. 4 Players is ideal IME any more than that and it can get slow especially if some people are new to the game. Us experienced players usually get through our turn in about 5 minutes tops. There isn't all that much to do during your turn - getting through it shouldn't be a big ordeal.

Holy Bovine · Aug 22, 2008

Gundark said:
Really really poor player interaction, the only time to interact is cursing out a another player for going after an adventure site that you wanted to go after. Multiplayer solitaire is a good analogy but picture playing your turn, then stare at the board for 2-4 times longer than your turn, and then have your turn again.

Also there is going to be one player that pulls ahead early in the game due to dumb luck, generally this has been the person who will win the game.

By this criteria Ticket to Ride is a terrible game too. I just can't accept that.

Runebound 2nd Edition or World of Warcraft the Board Game?

MadMaxim

First Post

egarvue

First Post

MerricB

Eternal Optimist

MadMaxim

First Post

Asmor

First Post

Gundark

Explorer

Gundark

Explorer

bobthehappyzombie

First Post

Holy Bovine

First Post

Holy Bovine

First Post

Similar Threads