The Big Board-Gaming Catch-All

carrotpanic wrote:
Atras wrote:
MonoCheli wrote:

Re Eminent Domain. Have others realized I didn't teach it right?

If you dissent on another players turn you get to draw a card. I didn't teach it that way.

I saw that in the rules. It really adds a lot to the strategy of the game.

You get to draw any card?

A card from your deck. Think of it as a bump to your hand size for not getting on the band wagon.

Ooh. I feel confident I would have won all of the games at PenCon had we been playing correctly, then.

Hmmm... not sure if we did that at the session where Demyx and I played this, that might explain why Eminent Domain didn't "click" with me. I still prefer Core Worlds and Race primarily for their better use of the theme.

My issue with Core Worlds is that unless you have the one (or so?) card that can trash cards from your deck, the cycling is SO slow. You might as well not even buy cards (for the purpose of playing them) past the 7th turn. At least that's how our game went at Pencon. I did like it, though. It seemed like there were a few slightly different viable strategies to both Eminent and Core.

That was my feeling on Core Worlds as well carrot. It seems like each phase you should be able to shuffle your deck or something. I really liked the theming of the game, but that issue plus the play time really left me wanting more.

MonoCheli wrote:

Re Eminent Domain. Have others realized I didn't teach it right?

If you dissent on another players turn you get to draw a card. I didn't teach it that way.

Ack! And now I've been teaching it wrong! LOOK AT THE MONSTER YOU HATH WROUGHT!

(Sorry Atras & cyrax)

Yeah, the dissent and follow actions on other peoples' turns made me like it a lot more. I felt like I was constantly making small choices which culminated in how I would take my actual turn most efficiently. It's just the same idea of whoever can do the best the fastest for VP, but the constant interaction helped.

Stilgar Black wrote:

Ack! And now I've been teaching it wrong! LOOK AT THE MONSTER YOU HATH WROUGHT!

Well I like to keep everyone on their toes. It was a test to see if you were reading the rules! Yeah a test. Everyone failed!

carrotpanic wrote:

Ooh. I feel confident I would have won all of the games at PenCon had we been playing correctly, then. :)

Yes, yes you would have.

Dissenting makes Eminent Domain quite a different game from RTFG. My recent strategy article on the topic

http://www.gamehead.com/article/1956...

Nice article. I agree that Produce/Trade is by far the hardest strategy to pursue!

Daughter and I tried the first coop mission in Wrath of Ashardalon again, remembering to grab treasures this time, and it made a huge difference! We had a couple of iffy situations, but mostly we were able to keep things under control. She played the paladin again, and this time I was the cleric - which, except for my AC boost on her character, I mainly ended up healing myself more than her. What helped us a lot was her ability to get extra bonus to hit for each adjacent monster and a pair of gauntlets we found that gave her a +1 to damage. It was a lot of fun for both of us, and the first time we've succeeded in a D&D game ( we only tried Ravenloft twice ).

According to BGG News, a Waterderp expansion popped up on Amazon. Details:

Lords of Waterdeep: Scoundrels of Skullport adds two new expansions to the Lords of Waterdeep board game – Undermountain and Skullport – inspired by the vast dungeon and criminal haven under Waterdeep. The Skullport expansion adds a new resource to the game, Corruption, while the Undermountain expansion features bigger quests and more ways to get adventures. Players can choose to add one or both expansions to the base game.

Lords of Waterdeep: Scoundrels of Skullport also includes new Lords, new Buildings, and materials for a sixth player.

shoptroll wrote:

According to BGG News, a Waterderp expansion popped up on Amazon. Details:

Lords of Waterdeep: Scoundrels of Skullport adds two new expansions to the Lords of Waterdeep board game – Undermountain and Skullport – inspired by the vast dungeon and criminal haven under Waterdeep. The Skullport expansion adds a new resource to the game, Corruption, while the Undermountain expansion features bigger quests and more ways to get adventures. Players can choose to add one or both expansions to the base game.

Lords of Waterdeep: Scoundrels of Skullport also includes new Lords, new Buildings, and materials for a sixth player.

Sweet! I love that game, and having a sixth person should be interesting.

Hey guys-

Maybe everyone already knows this, but awhile back Dominion the card game was removed from Bretspielwelt and I had heard a rumor that it was because the developer was preparing to release his own online version. I think I found it here and this time it looks like more cards are included:

http://dominion.isotropic.org/

I really hope its the original developer and not some rip off. The UI is primitive but the fun is there intact after you get used to it.

Dax wrote:

Hey guys-

Maybe everyone already knows this, but awhile back Dominion the card game was removed from Bretspielwelt and I had heard a rumor that it was because the developer was preparing to release his own online version. I think I found it here and this time it looks like more cards are included:

http://dominion.isotropic.org/

I really hope its the original developer and not some rip off. The UI is primitive but the fun is there intact after you get used to it.

That's not it, and that should've (in theory) shut down when the HTML 5 app from Rio Grande went online. Not sure if Isotropic is still up due to unhappiness with the official application. Weird.

Ah, thanks for clarifying that shoptroll. I've found some articles about that disaster which apparently occurred back in August. At that time the launch went so badly that the Rio Grande app was shut-down entirely. Anyone know what's become of the product since then? I'd love to support the developer directly, if the pricing is reasonable.

According to this article, they're back in open beta.

Looks like its live in some fashion. Here's the link, haven't tried it yet: http://play.goko.com/Dominion/gameClient.html

That Waterderp expansion sounds sweet! I was wondering if they were going to add a new resource. I'm guessing the Skullport thing adds onto the board with extra spots for your workers?

I've always felt Waterdeep was one good expansion away from greatness. Don't get me wrong, the game is quite good, but after 7 plays are so I felt like there was more that could be done. I assumed (or hoped?) that the expansion would have more secret role/lord cards, so that points at the end weren't so similar, but there's no mention of that in the blurb. Corruption as some type of anti-currency that would inhibit you in some ways would be fascinating. No doubt, I'll pick up the expansion, even if it's just for the 6th player.

The bottom of the blurb mentions new lords. Which is good because I feel like there needs a bit more diversity in them.

The only thing I'm worried about with new lords is balancing with the rest of the game.

I mean, I'm assuming with the new resource, there will be at least one new quest type (since there are currently five quest types loosely associated with the corresponding resource), so if that's the case there will certainly be lords that give bonuses for quests of the new type. But what is there other than that? The original game has the lord with bonuses for building which really puts you at a huge disadvantage compared to everyone else IMO.

Demyx wrote:

The original game has the lord with bonuses for building which really puts you at a huge disadvantage compared to everyone else IMO.

I'm hoping for more off beat lords like that. Not sure what they could do but that's a lot more interesting that a 2 point bonus for each completed quest of a given type.

So this is a lords management game?

shoptroll wrote:
Demyx wrote:

The original game has the lord with bonuses for building which really puts you at a huge disadvantage compared to everyone else IMO.

I'm hoping for more off beat lords like that. Not sure what they could do but that's a lot more interesting that a 2 point bonus for each completed quest of a given type.

Same here. I was hoping to have more lords not so rigidly tied in to quest types. There's really a lot you could do if you got the balance right:
--points for building no buildings
--points for having the most of one resource at the end of the game
--but none of another resource
--points for the least (or most) number of quests completed
--points for having the most corruption (if it is an anticurrency)

and so forth.

Gravey wrote:

So this is a lords management game?

It's a worker management game, but each player gets a randomly dealt Lord card that gives them a point bonus for particular actions (usually completing quests of a certain type).

Stilgar, those are great ideas in theory, but the Lord who gets points for building buildings isn't balanced well enough -- she's really at a huge disadvantage to Lords who give points for doing quests. If they do make more alternate lords, I hope they balance it better.

Demyx wrote:
Gravey wrote:

So this is a lords management game?

It's a worker management game, but each player gets a randomly dealt Lord card that gives them a point bonus for particular actions (usually completing quests of a certain type).

Sorry, Idle Thumbs reference.

I agree Demyx, that balance is the key. We house rule that you draw two lords and keep one, just so no one gets stuck with the building person.

Stilgar Black wrote:

I agree Demyx, that balance is the key. We house rule that you draw two lords and keep one, just so no one gets stuck with the building person.

...or... just remove that card from the game..?

SommerMatt wrote:
Stilgar Black wrote:

I agree Demyx, that balance is the key. We house rule that you draw two lords and keep one, just so no one gets stuck with the building person.

...or... just remove that card from the game..?

:)

Somehow every time we've had someone get that card, they won handily.

thejustinbot wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:
Stilgar Black wrote:

I agree Demyx, that balance is the key. We house rule that you draw two lords and keep one, just so no one gets stuck with the building person.

...or... just remove that card from the game..?

:)

Somehow every time we've had someone get that card, they won handily.

Yeah... I've played it a few times, and it didn't seem to be a blow-out either way.