The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Eclipse
Gunship: First Strike!
Mage Knight: Board Game
Midnight Men
Agricola: Die Bauern und das liebe Vieh
Hawaii
Star Wars: Battle of Hoth
Wiz-War
Ora et Labora
Rex: Final Days of an Empire
Snowdonia
Barbarian Prince
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
Twilight Struggle
War of the Ring
Agricola
7 Wonders
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (second edition)
Dominion
7 Wonders: Cities
Kingdoms
A Few Acres of Snow
Risk Legacy
Arkham Horror
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Thunderstone Advance: Towers of Ruin
1812: The Invasion of Canada
Dixit: Journey
Elder Sign
D-Day Dice
The Castles of Burgundy
Le Havre
Kingdom Builder
Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game
Race for the Galaxy
Cosmic Encounter
Dominant Species
Dungeon Petz
Battlestar Galactica
Power Grid
Mansions of Madness
Last Will
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Nexus Ops
Agents of SMERSH
Puerto Rico
Star Trek: Fleet Captains
Kairo
Core Worlds
Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective
Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Thumb up
11 Posts

Descent: The Road to Legend» Forums » Rules

Subject: FFG Ruling on Spawning in LT Encounters rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mike Clarke
Canada
New Westminster
B.C.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just received Kevin's reply to a rules email on this topic:

Quote:
The reinforcement marker isn't used in outdoor encounters, but monsters should be brought in from off the board as per the reinforcement rule.

-Kevin Wilson
Fantasy Flight Games


The question was whether you needed to use the Reinforcement Marker as per RTL and whether monsters spawned with Treachery in LT enounters were brought on to the board via LOS rules...or off the board (Reinforcement Rules).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Magnar S
Norway
Fredrikstad
Unspecified
Avatar
mbmb
Thanks for sharing! That changes things alot.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Michael Powell


msg tools
Oh, that IS interesting. The reinforcement marker doesn't surprise me (I'd say the rules were ambiguous on that point), but I'm really surprised that spawns are brought in like reinforcements.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Rob "Bodhi" Wolff
United States
Vancouver
Washington
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
I really like this ruling.

It means that you only have one mechanic for bringing in critters while outdoors, but you may use an alternative rota if you pay for it via Treachery cards. There is no extra threat penalty for the Spawn Token, so all you're really doing is adding to the reinforcement list available to a particular scenario, with no real threat 'hit' for it coming off a card instead of the normal list.

On the other side, the creatures still come on the board in the same fashion, through the same entry points, with the same one-turn delay.

One mechanic for bringing new monsters in, but with a system for adding to that limited list -- if you've paid for the treachery.

Simple and slick, but fair.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Jeff Long
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
Hmm, interesting, very interesting.

I know there are people who will disagree, but there was never any question in my mind about the Reinforcement token - using it would have made more than one point of Red Treachery incredibly useless in outdoor encounters.

Coming in like Reinforcements is a huge nerf for the spawn cards, because it means you need to wait until Overlord Turn 2 for them to arrive. Of course, maybe they were too strong otherwise, especially with the many trees in outdoor encounters making for very easy spawn points.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Nathan Johnson
United States
Bellevue
Washington
mbmbmbmb
I agree Jeff...not sure where the confusion on this one was...it was pretty clear to me that the reinforcement marker is not used. I think people are reading way too much into the rules and hence causing confusion.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Michael Powell


msg tools
Nostromos wrote:
I agree Jeff...not sure where the confusion on this one was...it was pretty clear to me that the reinforcement marker is not used. I think people are reading way too much into the rules and hence causing confusion.


The rules WERE ambiguous on that point, actually. Personally, I figured it wasn't used in encounters, but that was just my interpretation, based on what seemed to lead to a better balance. There was an equally valid interpretation which said that the reinforcement marker was still used.

It's key to remember, when encountering ambiguities like these, that it's rarely as obvious as you think it is which interpretation is the right one. When you have interpretation A and interpretation B, you may think that interpretation A is OBVIOUSLY right, because it's the first one that occurred to you, but somebody else will likely think that interpretation B is OBVIOUSLY right, because it's the first one that occurred to them. If neither interpretation is directly contradicted by the rules, then who is to say which of you is right?

(Of course, there are places where the seemingly obvious interpretation IS contradicted by the rules. From what I've seen, when the clarification comes down from FFG, it's 50/50 odds on whether the rules as written are correct, or the obvious interpretation is correct. So, I think it's a fallacy to assume that there must be a mistake in the rules when you see that the "obvious" interpretation is contradicted by the rules.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Mike Clarke
Canada
New Westminster
B.C.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like it too.

It streamlines the introduction of replacement monsters and balances powerful treachery spawns like Lone Troll by delaying their introduction.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Richard Would
United Kingdom
Gosport
Hampshire
mbmbmbmbmb
As it only refers to the reinforcement marker as being used in dungeons I fail to see how that part is in the slightest bit ambigous....

As to where and how the summons come on though that certainly (along with the whole treachery part) is badly worded (or not at all!). FFG really needed to have cheat sheets for what happens in the different sorts of encounters, and how the rules vary from standard descent.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Michael Powell


msg tools
rwould wrote:
As it only refers to the reinforcement marker as being used in dungeons I fail to see how that part is in the slightest bit ambigous....


I'd rather not recap all the old debates, since it'd be purely academic at this point. If you're really curious, the forum threads still exist, here and on the FFG forums. You can go and read up on both sides of the argument.

rwould wrote:
As to where and how the summons come on though that certainly (along with the whole treachery part) is badly worded (or not at all!). FFG really needed to have cheat sheets for what happens in the different sorts of encounters, and how the rules vary from standard descent.


I may be wrong, but I would classify this as an errata, not a clarification. There was no real basis, in the rules, to assert that new spawns, from spawn cards, came in like reinforcements, though some people preferred to play that way for balance reasons.

It's possible that they simply forgot to print this detail in the rules. However, it's also fully possible that they chose to CHANGE the rules on this point, after more play testing revealed that spawning by LOS rules in outdoor encounters was unbalanced.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Gyorgy Boda


msg tools
In addition to the above report, there is heated discussion over there in FFG forums regarding a point, which actually can be important, and myself is interested about the result.

The answer from FFG clearly states, that the monsters should be brought off the as per reinforcement rule, however it does not clearly states if monsters activated the same round or not.

There is a significant difference from OL viewpoint:
- spawn placement is made before monster activation
- reinforcement placement is made after monster activation, at the end of the OL turn.

Checking FFG site clearly shows this can be read either way. After all, expensive treachery cards are literally spawns. So playing it happens before monster activation. It would sounds logical that they can be activated still same round, and this would be a benefit of expensive monster treachery cards.

Somehow I have the gut feeling, if rule is taken that way, that monsters come off the board AND activates only the next turn, then monster treachery is not so good any more in Lt encounters. E.g. for 6 threat you can get a master troll, but an Lt can anytime reinforce a normal one for 6 threat.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.