Sword Coast Legends To Introduce RAGE OF DEMONS and Tile Based Editor

Dan Tudge of n-Space, makers of Sword Coast Legends, has just posted a major "State of the Game" announcement which recognizes that opinion on the game has been polarizing and that it does not meet the expectations of many, and how the company plans to address those issues. To that end, there's a whole bunch of upcoming update packs, which include more areas, control enhancements, a "cleared" outdoor area ready for placeables, new races, and the two seemingly biggest enhancements: a tile-based editor and the Rage of Demons storyline.

​

As Dan Tudge says, the game has had its fair share of complaints (it's currently trending at only 20.5% here at EN World). The biggest complaints about SCL - at least as far as I can make out - have been the lack of free DM area creation, and the way the game does not really use D&D 5E rules. The latter issue isn't addressed, but the December update includes:

• Official introduction of mod support, including
• Tile based level editor
• Branching dialog editor
• Adjustable game systems, ex: round timer, loot tables, etc.
• Community facing development of these features to begin immediately
• Option to disable monster level scaling in DM campaigns

I don't know if this will mean Neverwinter Nights levels of customization, but it certainly seems to be a major step forward.

The Rage of Demons storyline was expected, and includes tile sets, objects, a tiefling race, creatures, etc., as well as an adventure.

The full list of five major update packs can be found here.

 

[R_Chance]

I'm 57. I have played video games since the late 70s (Radio Shack TRS 80, Atari 2600, Commodore 64, Apple IIe and so on) and PnP D&D since 1974. I don't play current gen consoles however. Card carrying member of the PC master race I pre-ordered SCL and I'm happy with it. As Smiteworks mentioned above I recall people being unhappy with NWN (and pretty much every other D&D computer / video game before and since). I loved the Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, NWN (I and II) games. I don't assume that any computer game will replicate the PnP experience. They are adding to SCL and I'm happy with that -- specifically the tile based editor.

 

[RedSiegfried]

Tile based editor and other improvements are welcome, but was there any word on being able to play with more than four people at a time? Also, can anyone tell me how the toolset works, if at all, on a game console?

And yeah, it's not D&D, but let's face it, it's never going to be - not even close - other than in spirit. But I could still see enjoying this game in the same way I enjoyed the toolset and MP in Vampire the Masquerade: Redemption. In other words, it's not D&D, but it was a decent substitute in which you had a lot of in-game resources to create a lot of different adventures.

But still, if it's in the spirit of D&D, but doesn't come close to emulating 5e, why not play a game that's also in the spirit of D&D, but closely emulates 3e?

 

[Reinhart]

So here's the bad/good news for N-Space and fans of SCL:

Total customers for the game reached its lowest since release on the same day that this "State of the Game" announcement was released. However, over the Halloween weekend they finally made up for all those lost players and seem to be slowly growing again. So regardless of our feelings about this game, it seems this announcement had a positive effect. The game is still not doing well, but they finally stemmed the hemorrhaging of players demanding refunds.

Likely that's because of a couple of reasons. The negative reviews have made it clear what this game really is, and isn't, so that there are far fewer people now shocked to find out what they spent $40 on. There are probably also those still hopeful the game will eventually deliver on more of its promises.

 

[amerigoV]

Well, do any of you 45-50-year-olds have an Xbox One or PlayStation4 at home? SCL will be launching on that soon, so that's a big market they want to tap.

I am hanging just outside the target market. 46, but I have not moved to Xbone/PS4 yet (unless they give me that free one with Fallout4 from the contest I entered yesterday). I still have too much Xbox360 to play (and the games I missed over the years get cheaper all the time).

Part of the premise of SCL is really one of the reasons I have not upgraded - so many games are focused on on-line play. The Fallout4's of the world are less and less, and the Titanfalls (couple hours of campaign, the rest online) are rising. With the upgrade in tech now all the MMOs can go to the console (ESO). SCL sounds like its better than that (more single player campaign and such), but its in the same bucket.

I must be in the grumpy old man bucket - I play video games to get away from people.

But on the other hand, I have tracked the game. I am a lapsed D&Der (Savage Worlds all the way!) but if I did win that Xbone I might pick this up at a reasonable price. The fact that its not a slave to 5e rules is irrelevant to me. Heck, I still kick along with the BG2 EE and that is 2e rules - not that it matters (although I would love if spells were on a cooldown system instead of having to rest every few rooms). So I may eventually tie into the broad D&D platform WoTC is going after.

 

[Corpsetaker]

So here's the bad/good news for N-Space and fans of SCL:

Total customers for the game reached its lowest since release on the same day that this "State of the Game" announcement was released. However, over the Halloween weekend they finally made up for all those lost players and seem to be slowly growing again. So regardless of our feelings about this game, it seems this announcement had a positive effect. The game is still not doing well, but they finally stemmed the hemorrhaging of players demanding refunds.

Likely that's because of a couple of reasons. The negative reviews have made it clear what this game really is, and isn't, so that there are far fewer people now shocked to find out what they spent $40 on. There are probably also those still hopeful the game will eventually deliver on more of its promises.

Some people still tend to be a bit gullible when it comes to things like this. They think everything is okay now that the devs have "said" they are going to do XYZ.

 

[Zaruthustran]

As others have stated, this is an adaptation of the 5E ruleset, not a direct port.

That's the problem. They marketed it as a direct port. See below:

View attachment 71580

"stayed true to the actual D&D ruleset" turned out, well, not to be true.

There has never, in the history of D&D computer games, been a direct port of a D&D ruleset.

I give you an "F" in history, professor:

Pool of Radiance: character creation, combat, spellcasting, resting mechanic, and leveling all direct ports of the D&D ruleset.
Curse of the Azure Bonds: character creation, combat, spellcasting, resting mechanic, and leveling all direct ports of the D&D ruleset.
Secret of the Silver Blades: character creation, combat, spellcasting, resting mechanic, and leveling all direct ports of the D&D ruleset.
Pools of Darkness: character creation, combat, spellcasting, resting mechanic, and leveling all direct ports of the D&D ruleset.

Dark Sun, Spelljammer, and Planescape: Torment all diverged in minor ways but were very, very close to direct ports of the D&D ruleset.

The big diversions from D&D rules began with Hillsfar and later, the Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter games. But they were still much closer to D&D than SCL.

More recently, The Temple of Elemental Evil brought back turn-based combat and accurately implemented D&D's character creation and spells.

Of course, you may not care for how N-Space adapted the 5E rules, but that does not mean that the game is *not* D&D. To me, this is the same crap language edition warriors throw around about whatever version of D&D is not to their liking, as in "4E is a great game, but it's not D&D." BS to that kind of talk.

It's reasonable for people to be disappointed when they are told they will get A, and instead receive B. The issue isn't whether SCL is a good or bad game. The issue is that SCL was positioned as a game that, quote, "stayed true to the actual D&D ruleset."

It doesn't.

 

[Dire Bare]

It's reasonable for people to be disappointed when they are told they will get A, and instead receive B. The issue isn't whether SCL is a good or bad game. The issue is that SCL was positioned as a game that, quote, "stayed true to the actual D&D ruleset."

It doesn't.

In your opinion. With which I strongly disagree. You can keep your "F" also, my colleague.

None of the games you listed directly port the rules of D&D (any version) to the computer. Many try to get as close as possible, particularly the Gold Box series, but they do not reach 100%.

What we are arguing is the degree of fidelity to the rules, which is subjective on its own, and also subjective in its importance.

N-Space certainly has advertised fidelity to the 5E rules, but if you misinterpreted that to mean that SCL would be a direct port of the 5E rules, well, I can't help you there. SCL is most definitely an adaptation of the 5E ruleset to a video game format. The degree of fidelity is closer than some previous D&D games, and further away than some others. Apparently, it isn't close enough for you, which is fair.

To say that SCL doesn't capture the feel of 5E to you personally is a fair statement. To say that N-Space has been deceptive, and has promised something that they did not deliver, is hyperbolic edition-warrior crap-talk . . . all IMHO, of course.

 

[Sacrosanct]

In your opinion. With which I strongly disagree. You can keep your "F" also, my colleague.

Um...no. That isn't a matter of opinion because we can look directly at the mechanics. SCL's mechanics are not even close to 5e's mechanics. You don't even need to look behind the scenes at the core math. The very foundation is different. SCL is not turned based and has skill trees for powers that don't match what the corresponding class in 5e has. SCL also has scaleable monsters. That's not opinion. That's fact.

None of the games you listed directly port the rules of D&D (any version) to the computer. Many try to get as close as possible, particularly the Gold Box series, but they do not reach 100%.

Name the significant differences. Because as he mentioned, the video games were direct ports of the mechanics for everything he listed.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well, do any of you 45-50-year-olds have an Xbox One or PlayStation4 at home? SCL will be launching on that soon, so that's a big market they want to tap.

I'm in my early 40s and I have a PS4. I used to be a PC elitist. But my recent purchase of SCL reminded me of why I have made the move to console (other than laying my old bones in a comfy couch instead of hovering in an office chair lol). The games on consoles largely don't crash. Not nearly at the rate of PCs games. If I wanted to go back to the days of tweaking the autoexec.bat and confing.sys files just to get a game to run, I'd do that. But I don't have that time anymore. When I play a game, I want it to work reliably. And my PC version of SCL crashed all the time.

 

[Jester David]

None of the games you listed directly port the rules of D&D (any version) to the computer. Many try to get as close as possible, particularly the Gold Box series, but they do not reach 100%.

What we are arguing is the degree of fidelity to the rules, which is subjective on its own, and also subjective in its importance.

That's really getting nit-picky.
The bar isn't 100% fidelity or nothing. Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale were certainly closer to adhering to the 2nd Edition ruleset that, well, many of the actual games of 2e I played with friends. And much, much closer than SCL.

N-Space certainly has advertised fidelity to the 5E rules, but if you misinterpreted that to mean that SCL would be a direct port of the 5E rules, well, I can't help you there.

They listed three games as examples: Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Neverwinter. Those three out of the dozens of D&D video games. (Almost 100 all told). They didn't go with Iron & Blood: Warriors of Ravenloft or Tower of Doom or Eye of the Beholder or even Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance. They went with three games that were really, really close ports of the D&D ruleset.
That gave a false impression. To say nothing of the "gameplay and sensibilities" or "stayed true to the D&D ruleset" lines.

SCL is most definitely an adaptation of the 5E ruleset to a video game format. The degree of fidelity is closer than some previous D&D games, and further away than some others. Apparently, it isn't close enough for you, which is fair.

It's pretty far away. There's a lot of cosmetic application of the rules, things with a similar name, but how much the actual ruleset is applied is small. It takes more than just using familiar terms to make things into a D&D game.
Like having classes actually mean something.

To say that SCL doesn't capture the feel of 5E to you personally is a fair statement. To say that N-Space has been deceptive, and has promised something that they did not deliver, is hyperbolic edition-warrior crap-talk . . . all IMHO, of course.

They've totally been deceptive. They promised something they didn't deliver. Whether they did so intentionally or just through ignorance is another matter, but the fact remains people were led to believe they were anticipating and buying a game that was a modern take on Baldur's Gate.
And, frankly, that likely hurt the game because they weren't marketing the game to people who might be interested and weren't focusing on that style of play. Had they been honest from the start they would have gotten less attention, but they wouldn't have upset as many people dragging down their rating.

So, you like the game. Okay, that's fair. No one is saying you're not allowed to find the game fun. But you don't need to defend the developers. Their degree of honesty has no bearing on your enjoyment of the game.