by warfinger
Evolution or Complete Reboot?
I think one of the first questions FFG will inevitably ask themselves around the design table is going to be whether or not they plan to evolve the existing game system, or throw everything out and start from scratch. This genre of board gaming has become very crowded since the initial release of Descent 2E, so I could definitely see the appeal of inventing a whole new core system for 3E in order to generate more interest in the game and make it stand out in the market.
But re-inventing isn’t typically how FFG operates. They usually prefer to evolve on existing mechanics for their games, especially new editions, rather than completely re-invent. And in this case, I think that would be my hope as well for Descent 3E. One reason is that the existing “core system” remains fun, even after 40+ hours of play. It’s just a solid system that is reliable and works well. The other reason is flexibility. Compared to a lot of other modern games in this genre (I’m looking at you, Conan!) Descent let’s you play any scenario with any number of heroes, whatever heroes you want, the ability to pick different monster groups, class abilities, Overlord cards, etc. The fact that you can play Descent with anywhere between 1-5 players, single scenarios, full campaigns, mini campaigns, fully-coop, or opposed with an Overlord, and still have the system hold up and play well under all those circumstances is really unique. I’d hate for Descent to lose any of this amazing flexibility to play however you want, and I think keeping that core system around would help to keep that flexibility as well.
Fixes over 2E
If we take the path of evolution over revolution, we’ll be keeping around a lot of the core elements from 2E. But there are several aspects of the existing system that I think could use some fixes. So here they are.
Smooth the Complexity Curve
Everyone who’s played a full Descent 2E campaign is familiar with the complexity curve. During the first few scenarios, the game feels a simplistic because heroes and the Overlord don’t have much in the way of items, unique abilities and other mechanics. While the first scenario tends to be a little too simple, the last few scenarios tend to feel a little too overwhelming. Players end up accumulating a large amount items and abilities, and the Overlord tends to have multiple effects in play. All of this is usually on top of more ornate scenarios, with their own scenario-specific rules and effects in play as well. This makes the game state difficult to follow, and even experienced players have a hard time remembering all the little bonuses, special actions, and other effects that are in play. I don’t think I’ve ever played a late-campaign scenario without forgetting about some bonus or ability that I could have used but forgotten. In a 4-hero campaign, it’s very difficult for the Overlord to keep track of all the toys that the heroes have and avoid making big tactical mistakes due to overlooking some obvious ability or piece of equipment. I’d love for FFG to come up with some ways to make the early scenario’s feel a little more exciting and the later scenarios less overwhelming. This could be enforcing lower limits to how many abilities, items, and game effects can be in play at one time, or by changing how those things work. One idea is to have more advanced class abilities replace earlier abilities instead of adding onto them, such that each hero only has a max of 2.
Replace Miss with Dodge
This small change introduced in Imperial Assault got rid of the miss result on the attack die and added a Dodge result on one of the two different defense dice and fixed SO many little thematic and mechanical annoyances with Descent 2E. No longer will a skilled hero in a scenario attack an inanimate object like a statue or a door and “miss” (wtf?). And the thematic variation between characters that are armored and characters that are agile is great. I’ve looked at trying to port this change to the existing 2E of Descent, but there are too many abilities, cards, items, conditions, and other effects in the game that are designed around the existing system. That said, I think this change is a no-brainer for 3E.
Update LoS Rules
Everyone seems to prefer the LoS rules introduced in Imperial Assault over those in 2E. I think this is another no-brainer. They are just more intuitive to figure out and make more sense.
Clearer Map Diagrams
A small frustration with Descent 2E is that it can often be difficult to tell which dungeon tiles are being used in the pictured example. IA helped a little by including a list of the tiles used to construct the map, but it would be nice if this could be further improved to make scenario setup crystal clear.
Improved Miniatures
FFG has been getting better at miniatures. Just look at the difference between the mini’s in Descent 2E base game, compared to the most recent expansions. The difference in detail and quality have really improved over time. I’d love to see a slightly larger scale for the new round of miniatures to really make those models pop!
Free-Form Hero Actions
I’d love to see the core system modified to allow heroes to inter-mix their actions however they want during the hero turn. This has been one of the most fun aspects of some of the other games in this genre. In other words, one hero could could open a chest to see what they get, then another hero could move, then the first hero could move as well. It really opens up strategic planning possibilities when different heroes can take their actions in whatever order they choose.
The New Hotness
Not everything is about fixing existing parts of the game. Here are ideas for new additions for a third edition.
Skirmish Mode
There’s no doubt that skirmish mode has been successful for Imperial Assault, but it’s also made IA one of the best value games on the market by essentially providing two games in one box. I know a lot of us would love to see skirmish mode come to Descent. The question is how to pull it off thematically? The Star Wars universe is very delineated, with opposing factions that make skirmish battles easy to thematically justify. But Descent has always been about a group of heroes braving the perils of adventure rather than different factions in the world of Terrinoth clashing in a great war. I’m not sure how FFG would go about making Skirmish work for Descent as well as it does for IA, but if they could pull it off, it would easily make Descent 3E one of the best value games on the market.
Dungeon Keeper Mode
The Road to Legend app for Descent 2E has been a huge hit and rightly so. Besides allowing players who don’t enjoy the Overlord aspect to play fully cooperatively, it’s also a way for those of us with a large Descent collection to play our game solitaire style when we just can’t get enough. The only limitation is that we always have to play as the heroes. I’d love to see a mode that emulates the game Dungeon Keeper, in which a single player acts as an Overlord, building and protecting his dungeon from annoying heroes attempting to steal all the loot from the dungeon. It would be a completely different take on the game and I think the existing components and systems would support it extremely well, provided that FFG could create an AI system for the heroes that is fun to play against.
Mega-Dungeons
Descent 2E has always had the ability to play single scenarios instead of committing to a full campaign, which is great. But this style of play hasn’t been emphasized very much in comparison to the actual campaigns. I’d love to see single scenarios designed by FFG that are larger than the typical campaign scenario, but meant to be played stand-alone. As a bonus, FFG could sell deluxe Mega-Dungeon maps, similar to the deluxe skirmish maps they already sell for Imperial Assault. These deluxe maps would make it easier to quickly get a one-shot scenario onto the table, and could also possibly used for Skirmish mode, Mega-Dunegons, and Dungeon-Keeper mode. I know I’d buy them!
HP Monster Trackers
FFG is adept at inventing new physical bits and components for games to make them more convenient and are also fun to use (X-Wing, Armada, Legion, etc.). One component issue with Descent is the amount of board clutter that can pile up when placing damage markers near individual monsters on the board. Some of us end up making little off-board trackers to place those markers, but then it’s not as convenient to just look at the board and see what’s going on. It also eats up more table space. So it would be great if FFG could give us little clips to go around bases that can be used to track health/wounds.
Do More with Stamina
The resource usage of stamina is one of the most fun parts of the core Descent system. But typically, stamina is only used to activate buffs on equipment and use class abilities, as well as provide some additional movement. That's not bad, but it would be great to see stamina become a resource that can be used for a wider variety of tasks for the heroes. Conan has some really interesting ideas such as provided extra dice during tests, for example. Maybe heroes could gain extra dice during attribute tests by spending stamina, or spend it on dice re-rolls. There are a lot of possibilities and they would obviously require play-testing and balance-tweaking. But the idea of just having a wider range of things to spend stamina on would increase the number of options the heroes have in compelling ways.
Things to Keep the Same
Hero & Overlord Turn Structure
A lot of players prefer the alternating activations system introduced in IA over the Descent 2E system in which the Overlord has to wait for all heroes to complete their turn before getting a turn of his/her own. But this is one thing from IA that I would not like to see ported to Descent 3E. While there isn’t as much downtime for the Overlord, the IA system sacrifices the ability for the Overlord and the heroes to coordinate their actions beyond a single activation. I don’t like this change, and as the Overlord in Descent, a lot of my strategy revolves around being able to position one monster group and then immediately activate another monster group. Coordination allows the heroes and the Overlord to benefit from AoE effects, map positioning, or just changing your plan after seeing how some key die rolls turn out. I’m personally never bored when I’m the Overlord and it’s the Hero’s turn. There is a lot of fun to be had just listening to the heroes debate about what they should do and watching them shudder in fear every time I threaten to interrupt them with a nasty Overlord card.
The Overlord Deck
Another change introduced in Imperial Assault is the way the card system in IA works for the Overlord player. I don’t like it as much. One of the most fun aspects of being an Overlord in Descent is having that unique deck that you’ve built up during the campaign, and a hidden hand of cards that could threaten the heroes at any time. It’s the only bit of hidden information from the heroes (outside of scenario specific things) and works so well. I’d hate to lose my Overlord deck in 3E. This would be probably the thing I'd hate to see copied from IA the most.
Open Scenario Information
When I first started playing Imperial Assault, I was really excited about the hidden scenario design. It sounded great on paper. But after a while, it started to lose it’s novelty. It didn’t take long before the heroes started to be able to predict when new enemies would spawn, where they would spawn, or some kind of scenario event would trigger. In IA, seeing an empty room behind a closed door is like playing a video game and seeing tons of ammo and health packs right next to a save spot before going into the next room. The scenarios can’t help but telegraph the surprises to savvy players. And of course, once you know, you know. The other downside we’ve found is that having so much of the scenario hidden from the heroes increases the cognitive load on the Overlord player to get the rules right. Scenarios almost always introduce special rules and conditions into play, which can be hard to remember and take into account as you play. Having all of that information completely open makes it easier to share all of the scenario rules with all the players, and to have more players that are likely to catch rules mistakes or remember to apply scenario-specific effects. I much prefer the open information design of Descent 2E now, even though I thought I would like IA’s approach better.
Map Tiles
Some people complain about the extra time it takes to set the game up due to having to construct the map out of tiles. And when you compare Descent to games like Conan, where you just lay the one big board out on the table and you are good to go, it’s definitely appealing. But I’d hate to lose the flexibility to create my own maps and try others created by fans. The endless amount of variations provided by the dungeon tiles more than make up for the extra time required to set them up, and I hope that never changes.