[Kickstarter] Mantic Dwarf Kings Quest. ALL DONE.$1.05 million final.

[Neldoreth]

It is a very misleading definition, apparently a 'co-op' game does not mean anything about players co-operating to achieve an aim/goal, it just means they are all playing on the same side.
To make it work I think it highly likely that Jake will develop specific victory conditions for each player character. So just like you get non 'co-op' games where players win by co-operating, here you will get a 'co-op' where players win by not!

All games require some form of cooperation. That doesn't mean they are a co-op game.

A co-op game is one where players must cooperate to succeed (technically, you can't 'win' or 'lose' a co-op game) at the goals of the game. If the players can't get coordinated, then they fail as a group. Succeed or fail as a team/group.

A one-vs-all game is a game where all of the players except one have to cooperate to win against a single opponent. This includes Dwarf King's Quest, and also games like Shadows Over Camelot and Battlestar Galactica.

A game where one player wins - even if they are all on the same 'side' as in an adventuring group - isn't a co-op game. It can be played in a co-op way, like Castle Panic where players typically just choose not to compete, and simply try to protect the castle! So, if adventurers have to finish different goals and the one who finishes theirs first wins, then that's not a co-op game. But if you ignore those requirements, then it would be a co-op game!

Thanks
n

[robh]

For game value the basic set needs the 3D scenery, there are plenty of figures here but a lot less in the eventual retail box. If they include even the few pieces shown in the demo video then I think they have a winner here.

For the intended purpose (new/young inexperienced players, or more seasoned players wanting a bit of light relief) it is fine. The rules play well in alpha so can only get better. Accepted that at this level it will never be a alternative to playing an rpg but it is not intended to be.

We know very little of the rule enhancements in the Advanced section yet so have no idea on how skills and abilities will work or character advancement nor any of the non combat aspects.  For the price of the basic pledge I think this will turn out to be an excellent Kickstarter, I agree about the expansions and add ons so far though, very poor and little incentive to add $$.
The Mantic "big creatures"...Trolls and Werewolves are absolutely dreadful sculpts.

[Neldoreth]

This is purely a gut feel thing, and not based on any sort of logic, but I'm starting to regret backing this game. The initial enthusiasm was born of that fuzzy retro feeling of nostalgia for dungeon boxed games. but the more the stretch goals get revealed, the more it seems like we're just getting lots of complicated mechanics that don't interest me, lots of Kings of War figure bundles that aren't that great IMO, and very little in the way of funky cards, dice, board tiles, furniture, markers - the things that really grab me about dungeon crawl games anyhow.

Does that make any sense? Maybe I'm just having a poor emotional response to those horrible bloody Orcs in the stretch goals  

I'll stick with it for now, but the more like Kings of War it becomes, the less I'm likely to keep my pledge.

I can feel you... but, seriously...

Isn't what you're describing exactly what you were looking for?

• Lots of complicated mechanics: Warhammer Quest was second to none in this regard! Well... maybe that star fleet battles game was worse... But KoW isn't complex.
• Lots of figure bundles from the war game with mediocre sculpts*: Warhammer Quest was a gateway drug into Warhammer after all, and those sculpts were TERRIBLE

I would like to see dungeon furniture terrain as well though for sure.

Thanks
n

* I actually quite like many of the Mantic sculpts... Some are hard to work with though, for sure.

[Braxandur]

It is a very misleading definition, apparently a 'co-op' game does not mean anything about players co-operating to achieve an aim/goal, it just means they are all playing on the same side.
To make it work I think it highly likely that Jake will develop specific victory conditions for each player character. So just like you get non 'co-op' games where players win by co-operating, here you will get a 'co-op' where players win by not!

I suggest you read the following post on Jake his blog too see his point on co-op, it's an interesting read about his vision
http://quirkworthy.com/2014/06/06/why-co-op-and-i-dont-get-on/

[Quirkworthy]

One thought about co-op in DS, if I may.

As it stands, the primary incentive for the different Heroes to co-operate is that they jointly lose if one of them is crippled. The background for the mission is one that requires all of them to survive to get through the dungeon and complete the quest.

During a game they have to co-operate because each of them has different skills. This is most obvious with the physically weak wizard who doesn't last long in a fight. However, if they come to a warded door then no amount of strength will get them through it - you need the wizard. The two "journey" scenarios (the training ones) attempt to show each of the Heroes doing their thing, and the second requires a degree of co-operation between the elf and wizard for them to have much chance.

As the scenarios get larger this will become more apparent. It's early days and there's a lot of balancing and tweaking to do in order to get the pacing of each scenario right.

And while I'm here -  psyberwyche - I'm not sure what "complicated mechanics" you're unhappy with. DS isn't KOW, though it is set in the same universe so many of the models can cross over. Not sure what's wrong with that (and that's all KOW has to do with DS). Including stats for the models that cross over sounds like a good thing for those who want to tinker with their own dungeon design. For people that don't it can be safely ignored. This is the crux of why there is a Core and an Advanced set of rules. The Core set allows people to play a simple and fast game and get that nostalgic dungeony goodness. Those that want to twiddle the knobs and waggle the levers can do so in their own sandbox called the Advanced rules. The two clearly share concepts and some rules, but are separate things. 

[Braxandur]

Thanks for dropping by Jake, it's good too hear your own points on the aspect of co-op and the rules.

[psyberwyche]

To clarify my earlier point, I think 'complicated mechanics' isn't what I meant. I'm not interested in add-on rules full stop, so for me, valuable stretch goals are new things unique to the game. I'd rather see some 3D furniture as a stretch goal before things like solo and co-op play, which I'm 99% sure I'll never use.

No offence to Jake as a rules writer, but it's the components that I'm really after, and while I think the base game components in this KS are nice, the Kings of War stuff isn't so much IMO. Personal preference and all that.

Cheers!

PS. @Neldorath - I love Warhammer Quest. There, I've said it. Only I replace all the duffest old sculpts with nicer ones. See, I'm all about nice-looking components!

[Argonor]

It has zombie trolls, what's not to like? 

I think I'll be getting the game - I never really felt satisfied by the WQ rules, so the whole taking-the-boardgame-to-an-RPG-like-level in the advanced rules - and making it possible to include minis from the extensive KOW-range - may be what I need to run a regular gaming group, not having the time to commit to full RPG game mastering.

I'll be on the fence for now, but I'm likely to jump in - the whole undead theme of the game is up my alley, and the repeated troll sculpts can be converted with a little effort. 

[Quirkworthy]

No offence taken psyberwyche. I've bought many a model for the model myself, and ignored the game it was ostensibly for

Value is a personal thing, and if it's components that you're focussing on then you'd be best served just watching to see what gets unlocked. Still well over a fortnight of stretch goals to come...

[Mr Brown]

Whilst the value you receive is hard to argue, I think by the end the value to me will not be worth my pledge. I already have a large collection of miniatures so was hoping to see more stretch goals for the base set including rules and 'gubbins' such as tiles and tokens. Also, not having a group to play board games regularly with means that I don't think I'll get the full benefit of the game. Solo play sounds fun enough but as with most things, its better with others involved.

Stretch goals unlocking expansions are fine and well but it's very difficult to judge whether they will be of any use to me before actually having the base game? Its like buying the 2nd and 3rd book in a trilogy before reading the 1st. Sure they are relatively cheap and you could always resell but there is no appeal personally.

I guess its trying to remember that this is a board game with nice playing pieces. Sure some of them will be suitable for other games but not without modification. I'll obviously wait until the end before making a decision on whether to keep my pledge or not but hearing that there is a Mantic fantasy skirmish game in the works makes me think I'd be best to hold fire and go all in on that instead   

[Argonor]

hearing that there is a Mantic fantasy skirmish game in the works makes me think I'd be best to hold fire and go all in on that instead   

I'm pretty sure, as Mantic goes, every mini is going to be useable for both - and as I'm going to base/rebase everything on washers, anyway, I'm just going to have more pieces to play with 

But everyone his own cake - if you're primarily after the minis, I can see the reason for not staying on board for this - I like the concept of the game, as I expect it to be understandable for my children, all the while being 'scalable' to appeal to adult gamers, too.

[robh]

I am sticking with this pledge for the moment (basic game only no add-ons unless they release the furniture). To me the real value is the Advanced rulebook and all the associated card sets and tokens, and although I dont need them the figures are great and getting more figures, especially free ones, is never a problem. With the likelihood is of many more still to come.
However there was some interesting discussion yesterday on the comments thread (during one of its rare lucid periods) about the overall scope of the game and what it was likely to be and not be. Chris from Mantic mentioned that the Advanced section is now becoming very large and for eventual retail sale may be split away as a separate product as it is in danger of going beyond the retail price point they intend for the Dungeon Saga game.

Only guessing here but I see that giving a basic intro level boardgame that is a cross between Heroquest (play) and Advanced Heroquest (tiles): Rules and scenarios, dice/rulers/counters/tokens, 4 hero figures, 4 evil bosses, 18 enemy/monsters and presumably the basic scenery pack (which we have still not seen officially) and all the floorplan cards and rooms. I would imagine this will also have the co-op/solo system cards even though they are currently listed as an Advanced option, as not including them would lose Mantic a potential market.

An "Advanced" expansion which has more scenarios, all the KoW model range stats (plus hopefully the stats for monster types Mantic do not make yet), the design your own dungeon rules and all the extra hero figures and expanded character class rules and scenarios that they have along with the enhanced skills/abilities for existing basic game characters.

Then a series of smaller theme specific expansions containing new enemy figures and bosses and all the cards, tiles etc necessary to play them. Orc/Gobin expansion, Abyssal Dwarf expansion etc

Chris also said that would not affect the Kickstarter if that does turn out to be the case as backers will still get everything funded during the project. Just speculation on my part but does make the Kickstarter set a much more valuable offering, especially with the expansions being such a low price add-on (being partly made up of Stretch Goal extras).

I have asked about getting printed or pdf rules and scenario books separate from the game but no joy. Initially they will only be within the game box and expansions but may be published via Mantic Digital later.

[Neldoreth]

Personally, I don’t enjoy Pure Co-op games. Perhaps this is because I’m overly competitive, perhaps I’m just a curmudgeon who doesn’t play nice with others. However, every time I have played one of these games the following happens. Depending on which player you are, either:

• Someone else knows the game better then you do. They tell you what you need to do and so all you are doing is moving the pieces where you’re told to. Help in learning rules is fine and expected in any game. That may happen here too, but it is not the same thing. I don’t find this interesting or fun.
• You know the game better than everyone else. Either you tell them what they need to do (see first bullet point) or you sit and watch them mess things up. Losing because my allies did daft things isn’t fun either.

Now that I know you're watching this thread... I totally have a question for you regarding the above. If you could please have a look and tell me what you think I'd greatly appreciate it!

First, my experience with competitive games

Personally, I don’t enjoy competitive games. Perhaps this is because I’m overly lovey-dovey, perhaps I’m just a wuss who just can't man-it-up long enough to bring out the red in my personality and destroy my friends. However, every time I have played one of these competitive games the following happens. Depending on which player you are, either:

• Someone else knows the game better then you do. They quietly watch you make mistakes and exploit them brutally, destroying your will and self confidence and often gloating over it for weeks afterward. Help in learning rules is fine and expected in any game. That may happen here too, but it is not the same thing. I don’t find this interesting or fun.
• You know the game better than everyone else. Either you tell them about all of the mistakes they're making and work against your goal to win, or you sit and watch them mess things up and then brutally destroy them, gloating for weeks afterward (see first bullet point). Winning because my enemies did daft things isn’t fun either.

I find both of these situations extremely frustrating, intellectually stultifying and generally no fun at all. Nor do I relish the choice between meddling with someone else’s enjoyment or losing my own.

So, based on my experiences with competitive games above, I have two questions:

• Do you realize that your two very narrow points about cooperative games don't nearly cover the entire range of possibilities? Did you read my experience of competitive games and think of other scenarios (for example, both players are equally good) that are also possible? And then realize that that's also the case with co-op games?
• Did you realize that based on my competitive experience that I must have a pack of worthless friends?!? You are right of course.* Friends that make you feel worse about yourself aren't really friends, and that's true for both competitive games and co-op games.

So, based on your blog post about co-op games, I'm beginning to think that part of your issue with them is that you're not open minded about them. Have you started any co-op game with a pre-conception that it's not going to suck? It's sad really, because you have talent when it comes to game rules, and I'm sure that if you took up the challenge to create a good co-op you'd make an amazing one!

Thanks
n

* Just for the record, my friends are actually pretty cool We play co-op games all the time and it's fantastic fun!

[Elbows]

I think any games designer obviously seeks to design a game that he enjoys --- with the hopes that others will enjoy it.  I admit when I created my first game, it was an answer to all of the things I didn't like, or liked about other games.  It was only after some friendly games and cons that people convinced me to sell it to other people.  I agree with the right group of friends a co-op game can be fantastic.

I play computer games exclusively co-op.  My concern is more with games which are created in one fashion...and then molded into another fashion.  While they've announced a kind of co-op/AI option for Dungeon Saga I can't imagine it's going to be quite as polished or have as much enthusiasm behind the design.  My take is simple, I have no vested interest in Mantic's success.  If they design a game the way they want I either like or I don't.

It's their baby, and they can do what they want with it.  I can vote with my moneys. 

[robh]

It was only after some friendly games and cons that people convinced me to sell it to other people. 

Elbows: Which game have you done?

I have to admit that co-op is not my thing at all, I much prefer a GM moderated game, both as a GM and as a player. For me the rebirth of 0ed D&D/AD&D in whichever flavour you prefer (Osric, Swords and Wizardry, Lamentations, Labyrinth Lord) is wonderful, putting the emphasis back on the story and the roleplay, as opposed to the rule and table bloat of Pathfinder and D&D 3.5/4. This is where I hope Jake is taking the advanced option version of Dwarf Kings Quest, giving the players a basic selection of attributes and skills and putting the onus on them to "be the character" rather than rely on a myriad of stats, tables and dice rolls to resolve everything.