Dungeonquest: GW (1987) vs FFG (2014)

Dear Dungeonquester,
What version of Dungeonquest do you prefer and why?

- Games Workshop Edition 1987 or
- Fantasy Flight Games Revised Edition 2014 (with the old-style combat)

On the FFG reprint: It got the usual treatment and I find it a mixed bag. It's a bit excessive and all components are of very good quality, as is expected. The FFG version plays smoother (which is good) and aims at less frustration (which is not exactly good).

Changes are most obviously apparent in the probability distribution of the room cards. In the GW edition it is roughly twice as likely to encounter really bad stuff. In the FFG edition it is roughly twice as likely two find something that might add a second level of randomness depending on the playes choice - so there is a higher chance that some thing happens, but there are less staggering strokes of fate. (So one can opt to play more safe.)

GW version:
35% monsters, traps, sneak attacks
40% empty
13% adventurer or crypt
12% rest

FFG version:
18% monsters & traps
22% empty
32% adventurer & crypt
28% rest

More changes that aim at less punishment:
- option to flee once combat started
- mechanics to mitigate sustained bad die results
- doors open every second time in contrast to every third time
- no more "Sneak Attack"

Other changes:
- reference text is printed on cards (helpful)
- characters all have special abities (ok)
- Catacombs expansion is included (sounds good in theory, because "more stuff". On the other hand, I don't feel like it adds anything particularly interesting and it always felt somewhat clunky.)
- setting has been changed to "Terrinoth" (meh)
- no reaction matrices of the monsters (bad)
- Terrinoth demon instead of Chaos Knight (super meh)

All things considered, I prefer the GW edition. Attention for detail can be seen everywhere, e.g. from the decorated tiles to the different art on the markers, and I find it charming in a way similar to watching a B movie that comes from the heart.

What is your opinion about this?

I prefer the FFG with the combat die hack.

boardgamegeek.com/thread/589442/dq-comba...fix-bumps-game-10-me

A new edition of the original Swedish version (Drakborgen, with the original art) was Kickstarted a couple of years ago & is just now getting to be available to buy. Alas I believe it is only in Swedish.

I've only played the GW version, but I was excited about the FFG one until I saw it previewed and didn't really see any reason to upgrade. The new art didn't look too appealing, nothing I heard about the mechanics sounded much better, and yeah Terrinoth is meh to me as well. (In fact, can we ban all -<vowel>th suffixes in fantasy names? You too, Azeroth.)

I haven't actually played the game in years, but my group would make the door deck easier by removing something like 2 "door locked" and one "door trapped" card. (It's been a while so I might not have that 100% correct.) It's not hard to make changes like that. And that might seem very minor but it was enough to skew the probabilities such that doors are still risky, but not as likely to be huge blockers. And just personal taste-wise, we didn't like doors to be quite so evil.

The reaction matrices are a ton of fun and I love those moments when another player gets to play the pseudo-GM, like when handling Amulets triggering as well. So it's a shame that FFG removed any of that IMO. On that note, and to shamelessly plug a little bit, I made my own Amulet deck to improve the ratio of good to bad and add additional chaos. There are still plenty of horrible things, and I even added some, but before the "bad" amulets were so frequent/severe that nobody ever wanted to use them. Here's my whole deck with the old cards included. (Note that there is at least one reference to PvP combat; an optional rule I wrote up once.)

I agree about the attention to detail in the GW game feeling like a B-movie that comes from the heart - a great way to put it. The artwork and presentation as a whole has a lot of soul.

Make sure we are talking about the REVISED FFG edition- it’s markedly better than the original FFG release.

On points I prefer GW (the shaped cards are wonderful)) and it has plenty of GW-ness about it. The FFG edition loses that and replaces it with Terrinoth which is mostly unfortunate but not a dealbreaker, really.

FFG also doesn’t have the Heroes expansion, which I adore. However, Catacombs is built into the game and it is actually WAY better than the GW version. Like, we didn’t ever want to play with the expansion but the FFG redo fixes it and integrates it better.

I’ve also played the original Drakenborgen. It’s definitely not worth seeking out over these options. GW really developed the game.

You can’t go wrong with either GW or FFG revised, really. It’s just an awesome game either way.

NeonPeon: The reaction matrices are a ton of fun [...] So it's a shame that FFG removed any of that IMO.

Yes, exactly!

NeonPeon: Here's my whole deck with the old cards included. (Note that there is at least one reference to PvP combat; an optional rule I wrote up once.)

Thank you for sharing, very nice. I will definately print & use these. Would you mind sharing your PvP rules with me? I thought about implementing a variant of Enhanced! Advanced Heroquest to introduce a higher level of interaction. Unfortunately, without result, because of time and laziness...

FYI
enhancedadvancedheroquest.blogspot.com

NeonPeon: It's not hard to make changes like that.

Out of curiosity, do you have best practice resommendations for the ratio of empty rooms, combat & traps? (locked doors have never been an issue, but traps & enemies seem to happen just a little bit too frequently.)

fightcitymayor: A new edition of the original Swedish version (Drakborgen, with the original art) was Kickstarted a couple of years ago & is just now getting to be available to buy.

I registered for the Newsletter at fandrake.com a year ago, but haven't received any information about an version in English so far.

I am thankful for all the feedback. Keep it coming, please.

Would you mind sharing your PvP rules with me?

I wrote the PvP rules mostly to deal with clutter at the center when I played with an 8-player variant map. ( BTW, here's a 7-player session report of what is quite possibly the last time I played. ) I don't recall if anyone in my group ever used them. Maybe just once or twice.

Here is a thread I wrote on BGG that's not a well-written set of rules, but more like a brain dump of my ideas and subsequent updates. boardgamegeek.com/thread/463622/optional...yer-vs-player-combat I do recall compiling all that into a more coherent document, but I've since lost it.

Out of curiosity, do you have best practice resommendations for the ratio of empty rooms, combat & traps? (locked doors have never been an issue, but traps & enemies seem to happen just a little bit too frequently.)

I'm out of touch with the probability skews per deck as again, it's been a while. But I only remember feeling like the Door deck needed tweaking. And trips into the Catacombs can be unfortunately boring, but that may need more of an overhaul than just removing a few cards here and there.

Love the GW version. This still makes me smile after all these years.

https://bgg.cc/thread/847433/boy-kwisatz-saderach-dungeonquest

I've only played the FFG version with the alternate combat. Although Terrinoth is pretty boring, I was able to make my own crossover characters using the other Runebound characters. It is a stupidly fun and brutal game that my wife and I will spend all night playing sessions with all the characters.