Game: Fury of Dracula, The

Image

zombiegod — 2008-07-12T15:08:03+00:00

Artwork from Lord Godalming playsheet

Image

zombiegod — 2008-07-12T15:07:36+00:00

Artwork from Prof. Van Helsing playsheet

Image

zombiegod — 2008-07-12T15:06:52+00:00

Artwork from Doctor Seward playsheet

Image

zombiegod — 2008-07-09T17:48:37+00:00

Image

zombiegod — 2008-07-07T20:08:55+00:00

Card Deck

Thread: Re: GW should quit 40k and go back to making awesome games like this?

mttbstrd666 — 2008-06-10T03:05:34+00:00

Thanks for your review on the new version. I don't think I'll be buying it now.

Thread: Re: GW should quit 40k and go back to making awesome games like this?

Sphere — 2008-06-10T02:36:06+00:00

I have a friend who I've played the original with for the last 20 years. When the new version came out, he bought a copy and we dove in with high hopes. We played 4 complete games during 3 gaming sessions, and had planned another, but when the time came we agreed that neither one of us felt the new one was as good as the old, which we happily played instead. The new one went back in the closet, and hasn't been seen since.

Dracula's movement in the new one is no longer tracked on a hidden map. Instead, he marks his location by playing cards - each location has one card. This leads to a lot of special rules (and FAQ entries) to handle cases where he wants to remain in place or double back. These problems never arose with the original.

Another major change is the Day/Night sequence. In the original, each time the Hunters encountered Dracula it was determined at that point whether this occurred during daylight or night time. In the new game, it remains 'Day' for several turns, and then 'Night' for several turns.

Advocates say this adds control. For us, it took away some of the suspense that previously accompanied the start of combat. It also felt oddly disruptive to travel across Europe and have encounters in multiple cities during a single day.

Another area that I recall being significantly different was combat. Combat takes longer in the new version, but neither my buddy nor I felt there was anything gained in the more cumbersome procedure. The old version's combat had just as much tactical depth, and was finished quicker.

Plus, a kill result is no longer a kill in the new version - Dracula has to be killed multiple times. Like the odd Day/Night thing, this was another disruptive detail that seemed to pull us out of the narrative rather than immerse us in it.

The new game has many fans, but for us the original wins hands down.

Thread: Re: GW should quit 40k and go back to making awesome games like this?

DaveD — 2008-06-09T21:29:31+00:00

Yes, It's Great, See Fury of Dracula, Yes I did

Thread: GW should quit 40k and go back to making awesome games like this?

mttbstrd666 — 2008-06-09T21:16:14+00:00

And has anyone gotten the new version? How is it? What did they change? Is it worth buying again?

Image

zombiegod — 2008-03-17T20:10:27+00:00

Box Cover - High Quality

Thread: Re: How many event cards should there actually be? (And where can I get the ones I might miss?)

zombiegod — 2008-03-16T20:22:40+00:00

Glad I could help. Sorry I split the cards up long before I got hold of a scanner, but how on earth could anyone resist playing such a great game.

Image

zombiegod — 2008-03-16T14:11:31+00:00

Shrink wrap is no problem with these nails!

Image

zombiegod — 2008-02-25T11:54:59+00:00

Ink washed white metal mini's.

Image

freni126 — 2008-02-18T18:58:39+00:00

Hunter Event Card Front 3

Image

freni126 — 2008-02-18T18:55:37+00:00

Hunter Event Card Front 2

Thread: Re: How many event cards should there actually be? (And where can I get the ones I might miss?)

freni126 — 2008-02-18T17:16:29+00:00

I contacted "Zombiegod" who had an image in the gallery with unpunched event cards hoping he could scan them for me. He had however split them up long time ago, but still made the effort to place them all one by one in the scanner just to help me out and I got the scan just hours after I first asked!

With those scans and some photoshopping I managed to produce a complete set of all the event cards in decent resolution.
So if you, like I did, miss any event cards, I have published the images in the gallery for you to download. =)

Thread: Re: How many event cards should there actually be? (And where can I get the ones I might miss?)

Sphere — 2008-02-16T23:21:12+00:00

freni126 wrote:
Everybody knows that smurfs are the best vampire hunters anyway. =)

Von Helsing looks like he could have a bit of Smurf in the DNA.

Along with the file showing cards, you might want to take a look at the one I posted which contains the official errata. Some of it is card related.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/info/8760

Thread: Re: How many event cards should there actually be? (And where can I get the ones I might miss?)

freni126 — 2008-02-16T16:29:21+00:00

Many thanks!
I will ( even with my limited Photoshop skills) be able to scan in one of the cards I have and then alter the text. I have access to a pretty good printer at school so this will probably be almost as original.. I hope. =)

Thanks!

I also miss one of the metal figures, but I think that one will be harder to replace so the Smurf I currently use will have to do. Everybody knows that smurfs are the best vampire hunters anyway. =)

Thread: Re: How many event cards should there actually be? (And where can I get the ones I might miss?)

DaveD — 2008-02-16T13:01:26+00:00

There is a file listing the event cards and their effects by Rick Holzgrafe here.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/info/7820

Note that there are actually only 23 Dracula (bat) cards, so you must be missing some of both types.

Thread: How many event cards should there actually be? (And where can I get the ones I might miss?)

freni126 — 2008-02-16T11:26:51+00:00

I got this game when I bought a lot of several games not really knowing what it was. I ended up playing this more than the other games in the lot, even though they were the reason for me buying all of them.. =)

I have played it a few times now without problem, but I also know that it says it should contain 60 event cards and mine only has 42. I have 30 event cards with a cross on them but only 16 with a bat, so I guess I miss 14 bat cards... :/

As I said the game is playable without these cards, but I'd really like to have a complte set.

So, if someone has a complete set and are able to scan for me I'd be really greatful. I can't trade any parts for this game, but I have several spares for Talisman and its expansions.

Thread: Re: Great Hunt, Awful combat

Sphere — 2008-01-27T18:22:20+00:00

The cleaner combat system is one of the major reasons I prefer the original. The re-design's combat system goes on too long, and is too convoluted, without adding anything substantive.

Thread: Re: Great Hunt, Awful combat

barfoo — 2008-01-27T14:28:10+00:00

I agree that the combat system is too tedious and distracts from the focus of the game (which is hunting down Dracula's location).
Has someone made houserules that replaces the combat system with something simpler?
My gaming group had the same problem with Junta; very good game but too involved Coup rules bogging down the play (but at least all players participate in Junta coups).

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-07T20:26:03+00:00

SouthernMan wrote:
Your intent was to rubbish anything about the FFG game like a good ol' dinosaur.

My intent was to join the discussion about the two versions of the game.

SouthernMan wrote:

I have only said that I thought a couple of aspects of the FFG version were quite good and you have gone out of your way to point out corresponding features in the GW version that gave the same result (even though they weren't what I was after).

Your comments are "I only said" and mine are "gone out of your way". Why is that?

SouthernMan wrote:

The biggest laugh over your little teenage tirade is that I only own the original and preferred playing it over the FFG version and will play it again next time out of choice.

It doesn't matter in the least to me which copy you own, or which you prefer. I only mentioned that I had played both in response to your first personal attack, which implied I had no rational basis for my comments.

Tastes differ, and it comes as no surprise to me that others might have a different viewpoint than mine. I'm secure enough that I can have a civil discussion with somebody who disagrees with me without making derogatory personal comments.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

SouthernMan — 2008-01-07T19:49:39+00:00

Your intent was to rubbish anything about the FFG game like a good ol' dinosaur.

I have only said that I thought a couple of aspects of the FFG version were quite good and you have gone out of your way to point out corresponding features in the GW version that gave the same result (even though they weren't what I was after).

The biggest laugh over your little teenage tirade is that I only own the original and preferred playing it over the FFG version and will play it again next time out of choice.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-07T18:15:20+00:00

My apologies to the rest of the board. My intent was to talk about the game. I would have done better to have simply ignored SouthernMan's b.s.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-07T17:54:01+00:00

SouthernMan wrote:
Sphere wrote:
Lovely debating style.

Oh dear - another passive/aggressive ... , should have recognised the signs - my stoopid fault. Grow a freakin spine mate.

Passive aggressive my arse.

'Stoopid' act 1:
Assume that nobody could have a rational basis for disagreeing with you.

'Stoopid' act 2:
Create a straw man argument to make your point.

'Stoopid' act 3:
Act above it all and pretend you're a tough guy.

I'm not your mate, mate, and I'm anatomically correct.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

SouthernMan — 2008-01-07T10:33:19+00:00

Sphere wrote:
Lovely debating style.

Oh dear - another passive/aggressive ... , should have recognised the signs - my stoopid fault. Grow a freakin spine mate.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-07T00:11:37+00:00

SouthernMan wrote:

Your inability to accept that there could possibly be good (or better) ideas in the remake seems weird to me.

Lovely debating style.

I certainly felt it was possible that the remake could be better, and played it several times in hopes that it would be. My preference for the original is based on that experience.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

SouthernMan — 2008-01-06T23:29:13+00:00

Sphere wrote:
SouthernMan wrote:

When I played the original last month I'm positive we had to throw a dice (50/50) to determine day or night for Dracula's combat - his only two combats came up day and he was killed on the 2nd one by a lucky stake (thank God as we were getting no where catching him). Just checked rules and that does appear to be the rule.

Dawn Raid and Hour of Darkness cards override the die roll.

If you have the cards at the time of course.

Sphere wrote:
SouthernMan wrote:

My strategy comment was referring to the Day/Night status and being able to plan battles to occur durng the time of day you wanted - not the game itself.

The strategy added is to wait for a day turn to attack Dracula? The fact that Dracula can visit several cities during the 'night' while you wait to time your attack seems weird to me.

The option is available to Dracula as well to wait until night to attack - in fact it probably benefits him more which is what I was trying to say.

Your inability to accept that there could possibly be good (or better) ideas in the remake seems weird to me.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-06T23:07:01+00:00

SouthernMan wrote:

When I played the original last month I'm positive we had to throw a dice (50/50) to determine day or night for Dracula's combat - his only two combats came up day and he was killed on the 2nd one by a lucky stake (thank God as we were getting no where catching him). Just checked rules and that does appear to be the rule.

Dawn Raid and Hour of Darkness cards override the die roll.

SouthernMan wrote:

My strategy comment was referring to the Day/Night status and being able to plan battles to occur durng the time of day you wanted - not the game itself.

The strategy added is to wait for a day turn to attack Dracula? The fact that Dracula can visit several cities during the 'night' while you wait to time your attack seems weird to me.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

SouthernMan — 2008-01-06T22:48:01+00:00

Sphere wrote:
The original had cards that dictated day or night, and a shipping agents card that forced Dracula to declare when he went to sea. I think the original had at least as much strategy as the new one.

When I played the original last month I'm positive we had to throw a dice (50/50) to determine day or night for Dracula's combat - his only two combats came up day and he was killed on the 2nd one by a lucky stake (thank God as we were getting no where catching him). Just checked rules and that does appear to be the rule.

And unfortunately the (only) Shipping Agent card had not come up early or mid game - but yes, this would have done the same once it was out.

My strategy comment was referring to the Day/Night status and being able to plan battles to occur durng the time of day you wanted - not the game itself.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-06T21:54:17+00:00

The original had cards that dictated day or night, and a shipping agents card that forced Dracula to declare when he went to sea. I think the original had at least as much strategy as the new one.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

SouthernMan — 2008-01-06T21:16:15+00:00

After playing both versions I quite like the Day/Night chart which adds a bit of strategy when Dracula fights, and Dracula having to declare when at sea saves a lot of frustrating time in the original version when the Hunters know he has probably embarked and have to wait for a newspaper report event before they can start playing the game again.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Bustee — 2008-01-06T14:10:42+00:00

Thanks, I didn't realize that there was actually more than one page of files...

I just wanted to see if it's possible to adapt some of the old rules to the new game. Especially since I read in another thread that the old rules emphasize more on a search than on the hunt, which I might prefer.

So again. thank you very much for the quick replies.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

SouthernMan — 2008-01-02T13:24:26+00:00

On BGG.

Thread: Re: rules of the original version

Sphere — 2008-01-02T03:00:02+00:00

Having the old rules wouldn't make it possible to play the original game. The card decks have changed, the combat is different, even the map was altered. The lineage is clear, but they are two distinct games.

Thread: rules of the original version

Bustee — 2008-01-02T00:45:29+00:00

Hi,

I own a copy of the new FFGames edition and wanted to know whether someone could send me the old rules or tell me a place where I can dl it from.

Thank you

Thread: Re: som equestions from first game

whats your game? — 2007-10-21T10:22:52+00:00

Thanks, its just a strange layout cos youve got a bit saying wounds before that to keep your marker before your wounded. I enjoyed the game, felt the feeling of hunting down dracula came through quite well, I would like to play again soon, not to sure about my buddies, who were moaning that it was going on so long, whereas I like a true geek would have been willing to play another game at 1am when it finished.

Thread: Re: som equestions from first game

mrbeankc — 2007-10-21T09:36:27+00:00

whats your game? wrote:

questions i had: wounds when you get your first wound do you go to 0 or 1? We went for 1, but then why is the 0 there?

Yes you go to 1. The 0 is there simply for you to put the marker you use to keep track of your wounds when you have none.

Thread: some questions from first game

whats your game? — 2007-10-21T00:49:40+00:00

going to be brief cos its late and we jsut finished our first game, after 5 hours was just randomly won on a dice roll with the stake.

questions i had: wounds when you get your first wound do you go to 0 or 1? We went for 1, but then why is the 0 there?

2) When dracula is in his death phase he has to return to castle dracula, but we had sealed of his route with Holy hosts, so is he stuck away from the castle or does he just instantly go back the same as the rule for if he is in the UK?

3) Heavenly hosts, we had some saying it on the chit, and four chits with the same artwork but not saying heavenly hosts, are they the same thing or what? (I am now guessing they may be holy wafers?)

I think that is the three main things I ended the game not sure about.

Thanks.

Thread: Re: Event Card Counts

Sphere — 2007-06-04T00:08:12+00:00

The original game came with 60 total cards (37 hunter, 23 dracula), printed on four pages of 15 per page. This 60 card total is specified on page 4 of the rulebook and repeated on page 5.

I own two copies of the game, one with the metal figures and one with the plastic, and each of them has the correct number, so although some copies apparently got extras, this wasn't universal.

Thread: Re: Event Card Counts

Drew1365 — 2007-05-09T17:33:20+00:00

It appears I also have double the number of event cards. (Almost. My copy is maybe missing one Hunter card. Maybe.) Just as reported in the OP, I have 46 Dracula cards and 73 (one missing?) Hunter cards, instead of the given 23 and 37.

So he's not alone in this anomally. The reference to check on the front page of the FoD entry is probably a reference to the old-style BGG. So I'm not sure what to check now.

Anyone able to shed any light on this?

Thread: Re: 2 hours in ... and we gave up

grandslam — 2007-03-14T22:46:20+00:00

I am still a bit unclear.

If we get the reprint and play by the stated rules, how long should the first and fifth games take?

Do more players speed it up, slow it down, or not affect it?

Thanks.

Thread: Re: Dracula Has Finally Risen From The Grave

Sphere — 2007-03-03T08:08:43+00:00

Vickers wrote:
But i do feel however it is a title that will improve with each play, as we become more experienced in the nuiances of the game and strategies available, these possible pitfalls should be largely avoided.

You've hit the nail on the head. As you gain experience, the full beauty of the game is revealed and the problems disappear.

Thread: Dracula Has Finally Risen From The Grave

Vickers — 2007-03-03T01:40:46+00:00

I remember it was a Sunday morning December 1987 when I bought a copy of the 96th edition of White Dwarf. I was eleven years old. I was just starting to take my first tentative steps into the murky world of fantasy board games and role-playing. The actual content of the magazine I’d bought was more or less a mystery to me. I had absolutely no understanding of the complex looking charts, articles and scenarios inside, but because of that, it strangely made the contents all the more fascinating. It was something on the back cover however which really caught my attention. It was an advert for a game seemingly dripping in theme and atmosphere called The Fury of Dracula and I knew at that moment I must have it.

]]>
The original advert

Well that was the plan anyway. It was almost 20 years later that a revival in my interest in board games and a very high Ebay bid finally managed to secure me a copy. It was the limited edition version and it was in very good condition. The metal miniatures contained within had never been cleaned or painted and so were still covered in flash and rough seam lines. So a few evenings of scalpel and brush work were required to smarten then up (plus a gloss varnish base coat sprayed with Testors Dulcoat to leave a tough satin finish for those interested).

]]>
My painted miniatures

So our regular Wednesday evening gaming night arrived, and after a quick game of Dungeon Quest, (it was a bit of an old-school Games Workshop affair that night) The Fury of Dracula finally made it to the table. Having already read up on the rules (which are quite ‘wordy’ and not very streamlined) I'd actually gone as far as producing some player aids, including a reference sheet and a double sided quick combat chart to help things along. * SHAMELESS PLUG *

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/fileinfo.php?fileid=22517
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/fileinfo.php?fileid=22516

With Alex and Richard in control of the 3 bold vampire hunters and myself providing the role of Dracula, the stage was set....The search began in the ancient capitals of Spain, Romania and France with the hunter’s opening placements in Madrid, Bucharest and Paris respectively. This initial search pattern created a blind spot in central Europe, and as I was feeling quite bold, I took advantage of this by beginning the game in the German city of Munich. The following few turns had the Hunters scatter even further away to the edges of the continent, trying to find a clue to my possible location. The space this created allowed safe passage for my route down to the South of France, then Westward up to the Bay of Biscay and round to Paris, leaving a trail of minor encounters as I went.

After several further turns of fruitless searching it was Van Helsing, newly arrived from Eastern Europe, who found the first clue in Marseilles and was promptly struck by a lighting bolt for his troubles. Undeterred the Hunters quickly mobilized, following my Northerly trail, creating an ever tightening search pattern which they deduced had me trapped somewhere in North West France. With the help of 'Hired Scouts' and then the discovery of Local Rumours in Nantes, the final pieces of the puzzle fell into place; all 3 Hunters now converged on what they knew had to be Dracula’s current resting place. They had finally cornered me in Paris…

Delayed the previous turn by a troublesome 'Water Crossing', I knew this meant that I would have to survive a possible 6 attacks from the Hunters currently surrounding me in Nantes, Brussels and Le Havre. But a hunted predator is most dangerous when it’s cornered and this proved to be the case! The initial night time attack by Lord Godalming met with little success, while Dr Seward was left disarmed and badly injured. It up to Van Helsing, with his years of scholarly research into vampirism, who decided it might be better idea to attack Count Dracula during the hours of daylight! And indeed it was. With the exits covered in Garlic and my powers greatly diminished, it was only high initiative rolls which saved me from a particularly pointy wooden stake. Rattled by the near success of Van Helsing’s trap, I took the opportunity during Godalming’s second night attack to escape the scene in Bat form.

After touching down in Milan I decided to develop a more concrete plan of action. I would make my way towards Spain I thought, and I there I could begin producing the 6 vampires I needed for victory. The narrow entrance into the Iberian Peninsula is a natural choke point, and so any Hunter that came snooping round could be attacked before they could gain access to the Spanish mainland. However several turns later, after managing to place 4 Vampires, the Hunters were again closing in. A timely 'Newspaper Report' confirmed my location in Madrid, while 'Shipping Agents' were then employed to watch the coast. It was getting quite late in the evening now (early morning in fact) so rather than run I thought I’d make a stand and defend the 4 vampires I had, maybe adding a couple of Hunters to that tally in the process.

So on they came, dispatching the encounters I'd left in Toulouse, Barcelona and Saragossa before cornering me in Granada. Surrounded once again by Hunters, I lashed out at an still weakened and isolated Dr Seward. With only an arsenal of conventional gunpowder weapons to protect himself and with Dracula worked up into a 'Rage', the brave Doctor soon met his fate, joining the ranks of the undead. Godalming and Van Helsing then sprang into action, both causing significant blood loss including a particularly well timed Holy Water attack. So although i now had 5 vampires in play, i was on the verge of total blood loss and cornered in a remote location far from Castle Dracula. However in a parallel to the original Bram Stoker novel, time was on Dracula's side. The hour was now very late and we were simply to tired to continue. My plans had not been fulfilled but neither had i been destroyed. So after several hours and the final outcome still very much in the balance, the result was decided to be a stalemate. I would have to return to my home in Transylvania, to lick my wounds and try again in another century or so....or indeed until next Wednesday, when we go through it all again!

So in conclusion, 20 years after seeing that original advert in White Dwarf magazine, I'd finally got to play a very enjoyable and eventful game of The Fury of Dracula. I can however understand some of the criticism levelled towards this original version. The theme and atmosphere is not in question but I can envisage how the hunters could at times feel like they are simply chasing shadows, and how a poorly played or unlucky session could drag on for some time. But i do feel however it is a title that will improve with each play, as we become more experienced in the nuiances of the game and strategies available, these possible pitfalls should be largely avoided. Indeed I'm eagerly looking forward to our next game, to employ some of the tactics I've already discovered from this first session. Maybe this time round "I will have my revenge"...

Thread: Re: Is it a secret?

Vickers — 2007-02-27T09:51:12+00:00

Right ok, makes sense now.

Thanks.

Thread: Re: Is it a secret?

robartin — 2007-02-23T15:15:00+00:00

You don't have to declare your actions, but you do have to declare cards in order to give the hunters a chance to respond to them (for example canceling them out with Good Luck).

Thread: Is it a secret?

Vickers — 2007-02-22T20:45:30+00:00

Hello,
Finally got round to playing a game of FOD last night and at a couple of points i was wondering whether i should be keeping my actions secret. I choose to Pass in a couple of rounds to exchange my chits - should this be declared? But also at one point i used the "Evasion" event card - should the Dracula player declare he's used this?

Thx

Thread: Re: Movement Phase - Passing and an Action Phase?

Sphere — 2007-02-10T01:39:14+00:00

This brings up the only tweak I've ever felt was beneficial to the game when played by experienced players. We rule that Drac can't pass and cycle counters on successive turns. Once you do it, you have to move before doing so again.

Thread: Re: Movement Phase - Passing and an Action Phase?

Vickers — 2007-02-09T22:47:04+00:00

Ah, its ok, read the rules again. No Action Phase for characters who choose to Pass.

Thread: Movement Phase - Passing and an Action Phase?

Vickers — 2007-02-09T22:31:11+00:00

Hello,
I'm a little unclear on the rules regarding Passing. If a player chooses to Pass in his Movement Phase does he have a normal Action Phase? Or does discarding and drawing new Chits count as his action?

Thx

Thread: Re: Great Hunt, Awful combat

rubberchicken — 2007-02-07T02:15:13+00:00

the new version has replaced the battle chits with battle cards that say roughly do roughly the same thing as the chits did. BUT the cards hold the information about the result of the combat. So you no longer have to look up on a table. It is an improvement. But sometimes the combats can be long. But they have more flavour than a die roll with modifiers.

Thread: Great Hunt, Awful combat

ALGO — 2007-02-07T00:49:12+00:00

Be gentle with me as this is my first ever BGG review and I'll try to behave myself. As this game has already been superseded by a new version that may iron out some of the issues I have, I am concentrating on the premise and main thrust of play (and the way it makes me feel when I play it) rather than lay out the slightly overcomplicated rules.

I thought I'd start with a game from my past frequently dug out and never forgotten as it was a great idea. A basic turn of this game is

MOVE
SEARCH
REACT

And thats it.

But come on Algo, surely there's good stuff. You gave it a 6!

Here are the good points:

1. It's Scotland Yard but, like, with Dracula!

-What a great premise! Dracula moves entriely in secret. The three hunters have to find him before he places a certain number (six if memory serves) of vampires on the board. He will of course try not only to avoid you but also to cause you trouble along the way by placing wolves, storms, rats and my personal favourite, the unpronouncable Szagny, Sagzny, Szegeny (sp?) which all hinder the hunters in a variety of ways.

2. Three players get to play together (with the host, traditionally in our group, as Dracula)

- Teamwork, group strategy, cutting off escape routes to the sea. It's all good. The big downside of this is downtime for Dracula. By the end of the first of the three hunters goes he realises where he needs to be heading and starts planning immediately (unless he's asleep). If analysis paralysis kicks in on anyone's part then you're really stuffed. And if combat happens you may as well start defrosting dinner (see below)

3. There is genuine tension as the Dracula player realises he is for it unless he pulls something great out of his cape.

- As I feel like the undead frequently (around 7am), I appreciate it's hard for your heart to beat faster if you're a creature of the night (if you even have a heart!) but the real challenge is keeping a straight face when you realise that all it will take is one more move and the hunters find the local rumours marker which is always placed in the last town that Dracula visited (much like a stale fart it hangs around until he goes again). Then the game'll be up. Van Helsing will probably find the stash of Vampires in Vienna while the others are staking you through the heart Oh No! Must... not... whimper....

4. But....

- Unfortunately the main downside IMHO is the combat system in this game - so dull and lifeless it could be one of Dracula's many, many, minions.

-It basically consists of each player selecting a chit from a pile (choosing, not randomly) and playing it and consulting a table. This is of course a time honoured method of playing, but I never got on with it. It doesn't have the excitement of instant success or failure like dice, but that's an argument for another time. In this game it makes an already fairly long turn sequence intermiable, especially if neither player can't be bothered to escape. It is fun imagining Dr Seward and Dracula dodging at the same time. I reckon it would look like the knife fight in "Beat It"

So it's a bit like Fox Hunting - a nice ride until the violence and then you suddenly think "what's the point?"

There's a new version, so my main advice to anyone before they buy it is to check out the combat system here on BGG first. If it is marked in its similarity I'd steer clear in favour of something more immediate, but each to their own. I gave this old flame;

And that's it. Hope it hasn't caused any ill effects. See you around.

Thread: Re: Need replacement hunter weapon counters!

robartin — 2007-01-18T21:31:03+00:00

Yeah, that's my backup plan but I really want to avoid home-made components if I can.

Thread: Re: Need replacement hunter weapon counters!

zombiegod — 2007-01-18T18:54:45+00:00

Check the PDF's here for some pretty decent scans.

Thread: Need replacement hunter weapon counters!

robartin — 2007-01-18T16:42:06+00:00

Hi all -

Last night I discovered that 9 of my hunter weapons had mysteriously disappeared from my copy of the game. I'm looking to replace these, so if anyone has some extra counters or has an old beat up copy of the game they'd be willing to sell or trade, please contact me. Thanks!

Note: I'll delete this message when I've replaced the parts.

Thread: FoD- Old or new?

Redhawke — 2007-01-17T16:50:01+00:00

I am debating which of the versions of FoD to buy. Could anyone tell me

1. The differances between them, and

2. Which one is better (and why)

Thread: Re: Fury of Dracula - A Design Gem

SanguinousRex — 2007-01-04T00:25:58+00:00

MattDP wrote:
In this sense the reprint has become less of a hunt and more of a chase.

Not to argue with your review, but if you read the actual novel, Bram Stoker's Dracula, it really is BOTH a hunt and a chase. If you read the book, Dracula really isn't all that powerful if you have the right items with you. If you don't, that's a different story all together - but if you're armed with a crucifix and holy water, or surround your room with garlic, the Prince of Darkness is a wimp

The cool thing was that he could travel during the day, something that current Vampire fiction has totally forgotten about, albeit he would lose his powers and have the strength of an ordinary man.

Anyway, that's beside the point - once the Hunters found Dracula in London, they began a bitter chase that cumulated in his death at the hands of the Hunters. Dracula was running scared at the end, and the Hunters chased him down and killed him.

Thread: Re: Importing Day/Night Tracking into FoD

Sphere — 2006-11-17T06:52:07+00:00

I think the canned Day/Night cycle makes player choices less interesting. In the original game, you never know for sure if it will be day or night, which adds a nice element of risk. Even if you have a card, your opponent may as well.

In the re-make, all doubt is removed. The fixed day/night cycle means there is one less variable you have to consider, and decision making becomes easier.

The original is a classic that needs no tweaking. All it requires is players who are patient enough to stick with it for a number of games. It's very easy to draw incorrect conclusions about balance or problems after the first couple of plays. Experience reveals a beautiful game with endless variety.

Thread: Re: Importing Day/Night Tracking into FoD

robartin — 2006-11-15T18:12:10+00:00

Seems like it would work OK.