Anyone played the Ravenloft boardgame?

malak · Post by **malak** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 12:48 pm

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:49 pm

malak wrote:Anyone played the Ravenloft boardgame?

Over at boardgamegeek.com the game has a 7.70 with 900 ratings, which is considerably high for BGG.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/5994 ... board-game

I believe it's ranked 172 out of a few thousand games, so it's holding it's own. How much of that is "the cult of the new" remains to be seen. In six months it's standings may fall significantly.

However, from a board game perspective, it's entirely playable and even enjoyable apparently. It is not an RPG experience however.

Go check the link out. There are reviews in the forums, as well as session plays so you can see how it flows.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:26 pm

I'm not sure how much those rankings actually reflect anything. 4rries seriously harass people who give it low rankings until they take their rankings down. I wish that was a joke, but it's not.

-Username17

malak · Post by **malak** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:29 pm

Thanks, I know boardgamegeek, but I was hoping for some den-style insightful yet blunt commentary...

DragonChild · Post by **DragonChild** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:36 pm

I've gotten a chance to play two small games of it so far, both in small groups. I can answer any questions you have about it.

In short:

It's brutal. Very brutal.
It is an entirely co-op experience, no competition.
There is no player elimination (if someone dies, you all lose).
The tiles are quite lovely looking.
The minis are also pretty cool, although none of them are painted, and I'm pretty sure they're all reprints. (I don't really care if the wraith is a clear blue and the skeleton dragon completely white, myself).
It's brutal. Have I mentioned brutal yet?
I would rate this as "Less fun, but more cooperative and less of a pain in the ass compared to Arkham Horror."

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:54 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:I'm not sure how much those rankings actually reflect anything. 4rries seriously harass people who give it low rankings until they take their rankings down. I wish that was a joke, but it's not.

-Username17

That's true. Wasn't it BGG where someone literally got trolled until the deleted their critical review of the game?

If you look at the score breakdown, for 700 ratings or whatever, there seems to be an unusual breakdown of 9's and 10's (almost 100 ratings of "perfect 10") and a huge spike of 8's (around 50%).

However, the geek rating is closer to 7, which is determined by throwing about 100 5.5 votes or so into the mix to help avoid the cult of the new from dominating the ratings.

In the end I'm passing on it not because it's a demon-spawn of 4th edition, but moreso because for the price they're asking (65 bucks), it doesn't deliver the depth or weight of experience that I'm looking for. IMHO, spending 70 bucks on a "light" gaming experience is absurd. For a few bucks more I can pick up Descent and have a much more extensive gaming experience (albeit the rules for Descent are fiddly and broken).

cthulhu · Post by **cthulhu** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:41 am

Yes, there is lots of retards who do it for games like Peurto Rico or Agricola. I understand that many people think it's the second coming of Christ. I think it's only okay, and I can see why you'd think it was shit, but posting bad reviews is UNACCEPTABLE!

Weird shit. Take the rankings with several grains of salt.

erik · Post by **erik** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 3:43 am

This makes me want to create an ID over there and create reviews lambasting favorite games.

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 3:52 am

Look, BBG still has Puerto Rico and Agricola as their #1 and #2 games. The rankings don't work.

cthulhu · Post by **cthulhu** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:46 am

They are actually pretty good games to be fair. Certainly like top 20 material.

ScottS · Post by **ScottS** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:10 am

Twilight Struggle is their #1 wargame, which is quite bizarre.

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:42 am

ScottS wrote:Twilight Struggle is their #1 wargame, which is quite bizarre.

How so?

A lot of wargamers are moving away from games like World in Flames (Game length time: 6000 minutes, which is a conservative estimate. 3-500 hours might be more accurate, and I read one story from a gamer who has played the game for nearly 10 years with his friend, every Saturday, for 3 or 4 hours a day) and towards games that can be finished in an afternoon/evening.

Wargaming is a niche among a niche and is having to streamline to still appeal to people who have families and jobs now. Taking three 12-hour days to play out an epic battle or campaign just isn't an option any more for most people, and it's easier to sell when you have a 3 hour play-time.

Wargaming has also moved pretty far past Advanced Squad Leader, and even the hardcore fans of ASL admit that it's pretty dated these days.

That being said, Twilight Struggle supposedly captures an immense feeling of tension due to it's mechanics and setting. I'm not a particular wargaming grognard, but I can see how the game earns some particular kudos.

ScottS · Post by **ScottS** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 9:35 am

It's not a question of clunky/outdated vs fresh/elegant/whatever mechanics; it's whether the thing being represented can be called "war" in any traditional sense (there's no killing folks and blowing shit up). I don't actually like TS as a game, but that's not my argument here; I'm saying calling it a wargame is misleading. It has a version of the standard CDG mechanic, so it has that in common with actual wargames like Wilderness War, Paths of Glory etc., but it's a game of laying down influence counters while doing damage control on your hand (keeping bad events from being played and managing scoring cards). Cold War = no actual fighting between the main opponents. The small amount of "armed conflict" that actually takes place (coups etc.) doesn't involve any tactics and is abstracted down to a single die roll...

If Twilight Struggle is a wargame, then why isn't 1960: The Making of the President also a wargame?

malak · Post by **malak** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 9:45 am

So I ordered the Ravenloft game. Why? It sounds fun and - it's short. If I want to spent 4+ hours, I rather play a real RPG. Ravenloft's duration of 60-90 minutes sounds perfect for a short dungeon crawl and for hooking new people to fantasy games...

cthulhu · Post by **cthulhu** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:00 am

The best current wargame is nexus ops. Easily

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:30 pm

cthulhu wrote:They are actually pretty good games to be fair. Certainly like top 20 material.

Top 20, to be sure. But the length of their stay at the top isn't really justified given all the new stuff that has come out since then.

Regarding Twilight Struggle though... card-driven wargames are probably the best-selling games in the historical wargame category, and Twilight Struggle is the lightest and easiest one to get into.

Zinegata · Post by **Zinegata** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:36 pm

malak wrote:So I ordered the Ravenloft game. Why? It sounds fun and - it's short. If I want to spent 4+ hours, I rather play a real RPG. Ravenloft's duration of 60-90 minutes sounds perfect for a short dungeon crawl and for hooking new people to fantasy games...

I just played two sessions... 30 minutes ago. So some initial impressions.

The Good

* The pieces are impressive.
* The game plays fast.
* Some scenarios have quite novel ideas behind them. Our first scenario was basically a "Defense" scenario where we're fighting endless waves of monsters. Our second was a dungeon crawl with a time limit where the object is to get as much treasure as possible.
* The pieces are really, really nice.

The Bad

* The theme is spurious at best, at least for old time gamers. We had more fun by pretending that we were playing the game under the command of a sadistic and drunk killer DM who rewrote the plot on a whim. The best moment was when the immobilized wizard was killed by somehow stepping on a presure plate and activating a trap. Followed by how the scenario was supposed to occur in daylight when Stahd was asleep... yet we drew 3 encounter cards where Strahd showd up and messes with the party.

The Ugly

* There is very little tactical skill involved. Most monsters just have 1 or 2 HP. Random encounters seriously killed us more than the monsters.
* The game can't decide if it wants movement done by squares or by tiles.
* The rules can get a little clunky.

But yeah, if you want a quick short dungeon crawl, Ravenloft isn't bad. I'd compare it to Space Hulk.

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:44 pm

ScottS wrote:It's not a question of clunky/outdated vs fresh/elegant/whatever mechanics; it's whether the thing being represented can be called "war" in any traditional sense (there's no killing folks and blowing shit up). I don't actually like TS as a game, but that's not my argument here; I'm saying calling it a wargame is misleading. It has a version of the standard CDG mechanic, so it has that in common with actual wargames like Wilderness War, Paths of Glory etc., but it's a game of laying down influence counters while doing damage control on your hand (keeping bad events from being played and managing scoring cards). Cold War = no actual fighting between the main opponents. The small amount of "armed conflict" that actually takes place (coups etc.) doesn't involve any tactics and is abstracted down to a single die roll...

If Twilight Struggle is a wargame, then why isn't 1960: The Making of the President also a wargame?

Ah gotcha... I haven't personally played TS, so I didn't know it was a game covering influence moreso than actual wargames. My apologies.

You have an excellent point. In that light I wouldn't classify TS as a wargame either, but moreso a gray area that borders on wargame.

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:46 pm

cthulhu wrote:The best current wargame is nexus ops. Easily

But only if you play it under black light...

cthulhu · Post by **cthulhu** » Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:29 pm

Ha! Yeah, though we play it a fair bit anyway.

The Gaming Den

Anyone played the Ravenloft boardgame?

Anyone played the Ravenloft boardgame?

Re: Anyone played the Ravenloft boardgame?