Live Dungeon Sagas Interview Tonight

FyD posterFrom 6.30pm UK time (7.30pm CET) tonight I’ll be doing another one of those Google hangouts thingamajigs live on Youtube. If you’re in a different timezone then there’s a handy countdown timer on there so you can see how long you have to wait.

If you can make it during the interview then I’ll be happy to answer questions. Just post them in the comments under the video or here. I expect that if you can’t make it during the live broadcast it will be etherically immortalised so you can listen to us natter at your leisure.

The interview will be with the crazy Spanish gamers at Forja y Desván who seem to spend their lives interviewing some gamer or other. You can check out their Facebook page or YouTube channel for more.

See you then 🙂

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Dungeon Sagas, Kickstarter. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Live Dungeon Sagas Interview Tonight

  1. crimsonsun says:

    In reference to my comment during the interview it was not questioning the Stats or the play process you all ready have in place already, it was in reference to aspects of games play the stats simply do not cover this was my post on the Mantic forums about my initial thoughts which is where it references to..

    Been though the rules properly now so I thought I would share my initial thoughts,

    I like the core mechanic, its very simple but offers enough variation for this kind of game, keeping the combats fairly dynamic. A lot of people seemed concerned about the amount of time it took the beasts of war guys to get though that initial room but they spent at least half that time chatting and a lot of there dice rolls were ugly, so I am less concerned by this. I love the idea of the Bone Piles mechanic and while I expect/hope that this and the Necromancers decks will be expanded in both the core game and the advanced one, I think it is a great way of introducing spawn points in a natural manner*1.

    The only aspect of the main mechanic I don’t like and its purely because its a very gamey mechanic is that hits against heroes only cause 1 wound regardless of the number. I can instantly see why its in place, I just don’t like it as a player that plays more RPG’s than Board games. I Think the monster damage system is fine (though I hope monster heroes are treated as heroes in terms of damage) but it will need a few more bells and whistles though as the monster types keep expanding.

    I was surprised players can not swap there action for a move or there move for an action (though the former surprised me more than the latter) and depending on dungeon size this may be a useful addition. Otherwise Range, Fighting and the initial spells were fine. I am concerned that the system could do with the inclusion of an additional statistic or three (for heroes and bosses at least, names are just for examples), hit points*2 , Will*3 and dungeon*4 as this will create so many more options for what can be done in the basic game and then expanded further in the advanced game. I Realise you clearly stated this version was the very basic stuff but as I see it the basic Statistics are at the very core of the game.

    I realise you don’t want to get caught up in the bells and whistles but I some of these are pretty important as without them the game will be boring as hell and how they are incorporated in the basic core game is of equal importance to me as how the characters fight. I will agree with what was mentioned on the kickstarter comments that I dont think potions or items of any kind should be passed on to characters that are not adjacent to one another, I might even go so far as to say that while drinking a potion does not cost an action I it could generate attacks (though this may be overly harsh).

    Not a huge amount more I can say at this stage, the Doors process is fine as it keeps set up’s in bursts but keeps aspects of the Dungeon a surprise while still allowing the Heroes to plan for there immediate surroundings. I think another aspect that should be considered in terms of Dungeon design is the Dungeon itself in terms of Hazards and features, now while most of this kind of thing is advanced rules stuff there is a ton that could be a enjoyable part of the basic game.

    My Final comment is to say I feel this game will be hugely benefited by various 3D Furnishings such as Bone Piles, Furniture and Doors for without them the board may well be a nightmare for moving models without knocking two dozen counters out of place…

    *1.I wonder though when we move away from the the Undead what these will be replaced with, Summoning Circles could work for lower demons but otherwise I am interested to see what you come up with…
    *2. Having variable values here provides far more potential variance in heroes, for common monsters they could instead have hits but the effect is the same ( I am hoping bosses have health like heroes as mentioned above) and is something that makes sense to be on there profiles.
    *3. It is a Fight Characteristic for mental tests, the options for its use are multiple. Uses: spells, to fear, gases, cursed items or curses. Its inclusion in the alpha rules may seem unnecessary but having a core stat such as this now may save you all kinds of special rules later.
    *4. Dungeon was my catch all for all those non combat dungeon actions, possibly not needed in the basic game but I could still imagine it would be very useful and in the advanced game it becomes invaluable. Uses: Climbing, jumping, searching for treasure, searching for secret doors, picking locks and dodging traps/dungeon events. Once again I feel its critical to put these stats in early rather than having two dozen special rules for covering the same thing later.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Hi Crimson!

      Lots of questions 🙂

      To answer specific points:

      There is no need to replace piles of bones with a literal equivalent in different clothing. Other factions can work in different ways. In fact, should work in different ways. I’m not saying I definitely won’t revisit it for something at some stage, but I wouldn’t start with an assumption that I needed it each time.

      The 1-wound-at-a-time mechanic could be called gamey, and it could also be called Heroic. How many action films have you seen where the Hero is killed in a single blow? And how many have you seen where they suffer a minor injury or three and fight on (heroically) regardless? This models the latter. Think Die Hard, or Conan…

      Also, it leaves the option of things like Mighty weapons which could inflict up to 2 (or 3 or whatever) at a strike. Think Troll-sized two handed hammers…

      Swapping the order of move and action is something I would do in the Advanced rules. For the Core game and Core audience, I think a fixed order is better. I suspect that the people who will think of the difference as important will be mainly the Advanced audience.

      Of course, exactly where you draw the line between Core and Advanced games is something that has already been much debated. I’m sure the debate will continue.

      The point about stats is a classic design question: what to include and what to leave out? In every game there are a mass of abstractions and omissions. You could always add more detail to every process (move, fight, morale, dungeon layout, command & control, shooting, magic, etc, etc). When you’ve added that detail you could always do it again, layering more and more. The world is a complex and subtle place and games are never going to cover everything. What you have to do is weigh the value of each addition in terms of whether the benefit in additional fun is worth the pain in being slower or more complex (which every additional rule will be, to some extent). When you do this, you have to do so from the viewpoint of the intended type of end-user. So, the strictures I would apply for the Core game differs to that I use for the Advanced.

      Also, I think people are thinking too narrowly about stats. There are many ways to include variation without adding more stats. For example, armour could add fixed benefits as well as it’s value (e.g. always stops the first hit), cause re-rolls on successful attacks, allow re-rolls in failed defences, grant immunity to a specific type of attack, and so on. It’s not just a case of +1 or -1 being all you can do. The same goes for all the other values. Then you can add special rules, items, spells, feats, etc on top, and I seriously question whether you are going to add something really useful with an extra stat. If you do add a stat then you start cluttering up every model’s card with a value which, for most of them, won’t do anything, or will be so unremarkable that it has no real impact on the game. If you assume (as I do) that each audience essentially has a budget of how much complexity they can cope with, is this the best use of your limited allowance?

      3D terrain is something people like and I would expect to get added as a stretch at some stage. In game terms, I personally see it as hindering as much as it helps so I’d not really fussed either way. It’s good at some stuff and bad at others. The option would be nice though.

      • crimsonsun says:

        Thanks for the reply mate :D,

        The main reason for my post was in the answer to my question in the interview I got the impression you felt I was saying the core mechanic does not pose enough variation or development options, so I posed the above so you could see that was not the case at all, instead I was looking at stats that I believe would be useful in for alternative action types.

        Your response is of course fine as at the end of the day you could add the things I suggested with various special rules and abilities, which is of course purely a matter of opinion to which is better, I am on the camp of preferring an additional stat or two rather than a series of special rules but neither camp is wrong.

        I had not considered the utilisation of an alternative spawn mechanic so I am very interested to what you come up with in that sense.

        While I consider the 1 wound mechanic gamey which means I dislike it on principle, as a rule in a board game I actually have no issues with it and understand why such mechanics exist, I was purely mentioning it to give a full appraisal.

        I had read your previous discussion about changing the turn sequence so that once again was familiar ground, it was only included in the above as that was a copy and pasted post I wrote on the day of the alpha release 😀

        Thanks again for the reply, as I said my post was more a case of me clarifying my question during the interview rather anything else, also I had a question asked in your previous interview that was stretch goal related which was actually intended more for Ronnie to answer since I realise that while you have input into what’s going to be produced especially in terms of rules you have stated many times you have no knowledge to the order of things.. 😀

        • Quirkworthy says:

          All cool, Crimson. I used your comment as something of a springboard to answer similar queries raised elsewhere too, so I may have drifted off topic slightly ;P

      • souterrien says:

        The comparison to action movies is overdue. Heroes in those movies are not supposed to die. And when they are hurt, they are hurt in such way they wont die. In other words, their enemy misses.
        Over my dozen of test runs, a hero hit twice is a rare event. Any time it happens, reducing to one wound takes from the necromancer player.

  2. Matt Price says:

    Couldn’t catch the whole interview – but was anything revealed on who the big Goblin boss (i.e., the greenskin “Mortibris”) will be? Or any news on his (or her?) boss monsters will be?

    Also, I do hope you’ll make the expansion as a separate story and not carry on with “legendary” heroes (or really high level ones, in the advanced game). Though I get some players will want continuity, this is lots more balancing work, plus you’ve got new heroes included, and this sounds like more of a headache than it’s worth. I like the idea of when heroes become X powerful, or get to level X, they can decide to go up against Mortibris or a Goblin equivalent who’s also at level X. Including rules for just jumping in for your first advanced game with experienced heroes and an experienced bad guy.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Nope. Not talked about the greenskin bosses yet. he may not actually be present on the board, like Mortibris in DKH 1.

      I can see benefits from linking and not linking the stories, and it’s not been decided yet anyway. We’ll have to see. The latest update poses the question though, so if you have a strong view you should comment there so they can tally them all up.

      • mastertugunegb says:

        Leo and the Iron Goblin from Kings of War: Kings and Legends for a Boss in Warlord of Galahir. Now that’d be cool, cos then you’d have a model for both games, one who is big and stompy. Great for smooshin’ Elves.

  3. Danny says:

    Thanks for taking the time to participate in this interview, Jake. It was very interesting to watch and hear you elaborate on your ideas and thought processes. It’s also good to hear new snippets of info 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s