Runebound & Descent. Any good?

[Felon]

I have no idea where posts about board games go. Mods, move it as you deem fit.

I was wondering if anyone here finds either Runebound or Descent to be games with a lot of replay value. I don't want to lay out $80 for a game that gets played once, maybe twice, and then goes on a shelf. I got burned by Return of the Heroes that way.

Seems that the issue with games like Return of the Heroes and similar pseudo-fantasy-RPG games in the spirit of Talisman is that the gameplay isn't very deep. The entertainment value is based less on strategy and more on luck of the draw. The problem there is, once you've played the latter type of game a few times, you learn all the cards and nothing comes as much of a surprise. Do Descent and Runebound fall into that same trap?

 

[jdrakeh]

I hear nothing but good about Descent. One of the local game shops runs demo sessions on a fairly regular basis and, on eBay, used copies seem to go for little less than retail which speaks to the fact that there is a market for the game (and, if there's a market, people must be playing and enjoying it). I also hear that the expansions are wicked fun. I've been considering picking up a copy, myself.

 

[thedungeondelver]

I have no idea where posts about board games go. Mods, move it as you deem fit.

I was wondering if anyone here finds either Runebound or Descent to be games with a lot of replay value. I don't want to lay out $80 for a game that gets played once, maybe twice, and then goes on a shelf. I got burned by Return of the Heroes that way.

Seems that the issue with games like Return of the Heroes and similar pseudo-fantasy-RPG games in the spirit of Talisman is that the gameplay isn't very deep. The entertainment value is based less on strategy and more on luck of the draw. The problem there is, once you've played the latter type of game a few times, you learn all the cards and nothing comes as much of a surprise. Do Descent and Runebound fall into that same trap?

DESCENT: JOURNEYS IN THE DARK has a problem in that the players can pause and "power up" and benefit from experience, while the monsters never get any more powerful. It is incumbent on the "GM" of the game to either kill the players in the first outing or be resigned to the players cake-walking the rest of the game.

You can download the rules from the mfg. website and see for yourself.

 

[GuardianLurker]

I regard Runebound as a *very* worthy successor to Talisman. Using the Doomcounters option is pretty much required if you want to avoid the super-powered/cakewalking heroes endgame, which is the most serious failing for Talisman as well.

Descent is essentially a 3.x Dungeoncrawl, with an adversarial killer GM. Like a lot of FFG's games, it has one or two mechanics that are *very* sensitively balanced - a hair too much or too little, and the game becomes overwhelmingly hard, or increadibly easy. In Descent's case, it's Threat Tokens. Personally, I can't agree with DD; while on paper that would seem to be the case, in practice the GM's threat tokens increase much faster than the players' ability to deal with them. And the second "adventure" in the game is a KILLER, even without that problem.

Between the two, I'd rather play Runebound.

One other problem with both games is that the rulebooks are poorly organized for look-up during play, so it can be very hard to find the answer to some very basic questions.

 

[Emryys]

One other problem with both games is that the rulebooks are poorly organized for look-up during play, so it can be very hard to find the answer to some very basic questions.

Sounds like they could use a "reference" sheet... Hmmm I'll have to look around

Runebound is fun

 

[Beckett]

DESCENT: JOURNEYS IN THE DARK has a problem in that the players can pause and "power up" and benefit from experience, while the monsters never get any more powerful. It is incumbent on the "GM" of the game to either kill the players in the first outing or be resigned to the players cake-walking the rest of the game.

Actually, the Overlord has several Power cards he can play which enhance the powers of all monsters. As the heroes find the silver and gold treasures, they become very tough, but, aside from the first few quests (which are designed to favor the players), in my experience the heroes have been in danger right up to the end.

I've never tried Runebound, but I'm a big fan of Descent. My reviews of the game and expansions can be found here:

Descent
Well of Darkness
Altar of Despair

 

[jdrakeh]

Actually, the Overlord has several Power cards he can play which enhance the powers of all monsters. As the heroes find the silver and gold treasures, they become very tough, but, aside from the first few quests (which are designed to favor the players), in my experience the heroes have been in danger right up to the end.

From everything that I've heard locally, Descent is ultra-lethal (especially true in case of the expansions apparently). From the demo session that I've seen, this seemed to be true. A lot of the players who went into certain scenarios without planning were slaughtered mercilessly. This is also one of the big 'selling points' that a buddy at the FLGS frequently mentions, specifically "I love Descent because it's like D&D with consequences!"

 

[Asmor]

My friends love Descent, personally I hate it because it takes so long. I'm also not a big fan of the fact that it's one person (the overlord) against the rest.

I love Runebound. Also takes a long time, but it's a really fun game. It's also a good bit cheaper than Descent.

You might also consider the World of Warcraft board game, which also takes a really long ass time (3+ hours), but personally I love it. It's a very complex game, with lots of strategy and chances to customize your character, and I absolutely love the unique combat system.

 

[Felon]

So, World of Warcraft board game is worth checking out?

Regarding Descent, do any of the expansions let you go beyond the five player limit?

 

[Marcon]

Well, let's see... Have you played Milton Bradley's Hero Quest back in the days? Descent is basically Hero Quest on steroids. The main difference is that in HQ, time wasn't a factor and there weren't "surprises" to speak of 99% of the time so the good guys would basically wait until they could line up neatly behind a door and open it. The DM would fill the room with furnitures, 2 or 3 crits and then Player 1, 2, 3 and 4 would play in that order and when the DM turn would come, there would be no crits left on the board.

Threat tokens is a wonderful way around that problem, though it is really bringing things at the complete other end of the spectrum. In Descent, as soon as you step into the Dungeon, the Overlord gets Threat tokens every turn and can use them to spring all kind of nasty tricks at you, including wandering monsters.

I agree with what others posted above, e.g. the game is insanely tough on players, you better have a group that works together as a team as every single square of movement can be critical. This is probably what tends to bring the game length to as much as 4 or even 5 hours, almost as long as your typical RPG session.

There is no easy way to run all the quests as a campaign, as the heroes becomes really powerful after opening a treasure chest (Again, this is a contrast to Hero Quest). Not sure if I recommend it, head to a site such as boardgamegeek.com to get some insightful reviews.

-Marco