Sellswords & Spellslingers degree of difficulty?

[robh]

For those who have played the S&S campaign/campaigns how well balanced is the difficulty?

I have just ordered the print version and all the cards and have been looking through forum posts and YouTube videos and get the impression that the game seems weighted heavily in favour of the player/s.
Compared to the boxes full of dead enemies the player characters invariably suffer no more than a simple wound.

Is this right?  Is there a built in way of increasing the difficulty if wanted?

[Spinal Tap]

The game is rarely too easy in my experience and I have had a few total party kills.

If you find it too easy then you can move the activation target number up or use
more difficult enemies.

It's my favourite solo fantasy game.

[mweaver]

I played a couple of Conan-based scenarios at Historicon, about three years back.  Fun game. If I remember correctly we won the first came, with heavy casualties (including Conan!) and were defeated in the second game.

I subsequently bought the rules and cards and tried a couple of solo games before I was distracted (that happens to me a lot), and lost both games.  So, my impression is that the game is not especially easy.  But maybe its just that my dice hate me (I have my suspicions).

-Michael

[bazookajoe]

It is not as easy as it looks.  The "Through the Badlands" scenario is particularly difficult given that it is supposed to be an intro level game.  A lot depends on the dice roles.  I found the scenario with the giant spider (forget the name) comparatively easy but I only tried it once and probably got lucky.  Many of the enemy minions will die but I think that gives the game its heroic flavor sort of like the tons of orcs who get killed in Lord of the Rings.  Of course, if too many enter the board then you are in trouble.  It also depends on the number of points you put into making the party.  A low level party is fragile.  It is also my favourite solo game.  The gambling aspect or tension of "do I play it safe with one or maybe two activation dice or take a chance with three?" is the main attraction for me.  However, and at the risk of repeating myself, the game needs more content.

[Ethelred the Almost Ready]

It can be a very swingy game based on how many activation fails you have and what cards you draw.  I have had the odd game that was easy and I have had more that were very hard with a couple of games where all characters were killed.  I have also had a few games that were frustrating - too many failed activations with too many monsters generated by the cards saw my characters move no further than a few inches from the base line.

Mostly I have enjoyed the games. If you link games you can work in a disaster for the new scenario eg where most characters are taken out of action you could decide they were captured and send the remaining characters to rescue them.
If a game is too easy you probably have time for another game - perhaps add an extra monster or horde to make things harder.

[TWD]

I'd agree I don't think it's particularly 'easy'.
I've had a TPK and several games where I've only survived on the last roll of the dice.
That said I'm sure the game is a bit weighted in favour of success for the party. I don't think you want it to be completely "fair". It's a solo game aimed at building an ongoing narrative with the party against an AI. If the AI 'wins' 50% or more of the games you won't get the attachment to characters and story development the game is aiming to create.
I was pretty hacked off after the TPK experience and it was a while before I went back to the game.

As noted above the first scenario is a really quite hard and not the best one to start with.

[Froggy the Great]

One or two hardened heroes will do much better than a party of 4 OK ones due to the reduced possibility of failed activations.  Even so, this game excells at automating the Killer GM for Koboldmaggeddon.  I think we racked up a kill count over 100 one game, obviously recycling enemy models as we killed them.

If 'Rangers of Shadow Deep' is Lord of the Rings and 'Five Leagues from the Borderlands' is The Black Company, Sellswords is closest to Rambo with Swords.

[boneio]

If 'Rangers of Shadow Deep' is Lord of the Rings and 'Five Leagues from the Borderlands' is The Black Company, Sellswords is closest to Rambo with Swords.

Excellent analogy!

[robh]

Thanks for the thoughts.  I want the game for experienced RPG and Skirmish gamers not as an intro so am looking to make players think about their actions not just know they can carve their way through everything that appears on the table.

If the difficulty can be adjusted (as mentioned above) by manipulating the Activation number, could you also play with the build XP limit to eliminate the "min-max" Rambo characters? (love that analogy as that hits exactly what I saw in the playthrough videos). Do enemies increase in ability and quantity as the PCs develop or are they still fixed as a function of the number
 of players?

Also a PC or NPC Barbarian has min 3HP (+ more with traits) but a "monster" Barbarian only gets 1 fixed. Is there any game critical reason not to beef up the enemies?

[Spinal Tap]

There's lots of powerful enemies in the deck that can cause you real problems, even for higher level PC's.

The Greater Werewolf is one of the most powerful - you have to roll a 15 or higher to hit him, he has 6 HP so you'll have to hit him a few times to kill him, he causes 2 points of damage to you per hit, if he puts your character out of action then that character has to pass a 12 plus Will roll or becomes a slightly weaker werewolf.

Plus these are legacy beasts so, if not killed, will reappear in the next scenario with their target number increased by one - this applies to all the PC's he turns as well.

You will have a choice of what enemies you field; the goblin, orc, orc brute combo is the starting point and, even then, can be hard work if your rolls/cards are not favourable, especially at the start where your PC's only have a small XP each.

[Froggy the Great]

You're making me want to rifle through my SS&SS cards again for inspiration.

[ZeroTwentythree]

The game was referred to above as "swingy" and I'd tend to agree with that. But maybe that's just my dice rolling. 

I played a small campaign with four heroes. There were times when the heroes just walked in and killed everything in sight. But there were other games in which they suffered multiple casualties/deaths and the survivors barely made a frantic escape.

And that was a good part of the fun of it for me. The highs & lows and the uncertainty was a load of fun. So much so that I've put together a second group and have been planning a new campaign -- if only the real life responsibilities would quit getting in the way.

[robh]

.........There were times when the heroes just walked in and killed everything in sight. But there were other games in which they suffered multiple casualties/deaths and the survivors barely made a frantic escape.......

On the surface that works as a narrative..."we explored the area around the old caves, at first things were going well but before long we found obstacles that we could not overcome and creatures too powerful for our small band...."
But mechanically, rather than through structure of the scenario difficulty SS would seem to arrive at that purely by the luck of the dice.

I gave up waiting for my printed copy and cards and bought the pdf to do some test runs before "going public" with group games.  I played through 3 attempts at the first scenario (as it is the most commonly played on YouTube reviews); 2 ended up with my characters needing a couple of band-aids and some muscle rub to ease a sore sword arm, the other where everybody died before getting further than 18" onto the table.
Same characters with same abilities, same player, same terrain set up, the difference only being the dice rolls (particularly the roll to determine where monsters appear which seems to be the one which determines success of failure regardless of how the combats go)

I think the core concept of the system is great but success in an adventure needs to reflect the skill and ability of the players with an element of luck. Not be all about how hot your dice roll on a given afternoon.

[Ethelred the Almost Ready]

Sellswords works best with a smaller table size.  It can be hard to cover a large distance with the characters.  Several failed activations mean you don't only move less, but you have to face more enemies.  As much as I usually enjoy the game I have become bogged down in a couple where all I have done is stood in one place fighting more and more creatures.
It does do a very good job of keeping you on your toes.
Spinal Tap is correct, it only takes one powerful enemy to tip the balance.

[Spinal Tap]

It's still one of my most played games though and I've definitely improved with time.

My game plan usually involves lots of movement and minimise fighting; only get involved when I have to.

Vital to get away from your starting point before killing anything to negate 'They are at our backs'.

And only chase loot when you're well in control.