by BodhiWolff
First off, I am not trying to pick a fight. I think everybody should be allowed to play any game in any way that they wish to. If everybody in your group is happy with the way things are set up, then everybody wins. The "Free Parking" houserules in Monopoly aren't in the rules, but if everybody wants to play with them, then go to town!I do think, though, that there is a common misconception running rampant amongst newer players.
Something keeps happening in the various threads, though, which always gives me pause. I believe it is coming from a good place, and I believe that there are genuinely nice people trying to make things better for their gaming group, but it always makes me wonder if everybody in that group is on the same page, and understands their full array of choices.
This is a boardgame, not a roleplaying game.
The Overlord in the game is often the person who happens to know the game best, and also often happens to be the person who teaches the others how to play. As such, we have a duty to teach the game fully, and fairly.
The Overlord is *not* a dungeon-master or game-master. Their job is not to tell a good story and keep the heroes on the edge of their seat. They are simply one side of the table in a two-sided game. The OL's job is to win, just like the heroes' job is to win.
But like in any two-sided game, both sides need to play by the same rules.
A lot of people worry about "spoilers". They talk about how much information to tell "their players". They worry about when to "reveal" the information, and they even tell stories about "surprising" their players midpoint during the game.
All of which would be fun in an RPG. None of which is at all fair in Descent.
You wouldn't put up with a hero hiding their skill cards from you, and claiming that they'll only read the card to you when they surprise you with its ability, would you? You wouldn't put up with a heroic player refusing to reveal their hitpoint total or their weapon's dice makeup, right?
Information is power.
Knowing the stats and powers of a monster group, knowing a lieutenant's abilities, or the setup of a quest, the monsters involved, the map, the objectives, the victory conditions, triggering effects, and potential rewards and hazards for failure --- *all* of these are part of the public knowledge base. These factors *all* have a bearing on whether or not a particular side of the table might wish to engage in a particular quest, or might attempt to bypass it.
Sharing this information isn't "spoiling" it.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that any decision to not *completely* share the information is flawed. Blurring information availability is unfair. Really unfair.
In its mildest form, one side is gaining unfair advantage in its decision-making processes. In its most severe form, it might even be construed as cheating.
I'm not saying that anybody out there is actively attempting to screw over the heroes! Like I said, I think that a lot of people are coming from a good place, and are simply misunderstanding a core idea.
Overlords who aren't completely opening the book for heroes are playing unfairly.
As an example, were I to learn a new game, and found out midway through the game that the other side was misguidedly holding back information that would impact my decisions, I would cry "foul"! In a two-player game, we immediately can sense the unfairness in this.
The same goes for team-based games, and for team-vs.-single games, too!
Other than tactical decisions and the cunning plans inside our heads, everything else in the game is an open book.
And that way everybody has a fun, fair, balanced time!
Now, that being said ... if everybody involved agrees that they wish to play a more roleplaying-styled, Pseudo-DM'ed game where the Overlord is privy to more information, and everybody is *happy* with this, then so be it! If all the players are comfortable with the handicap, then go to town!
But if I were to find out about it midway through a game, I'd be pretty upset.