SamusDrake wrote:callidusx3 wrote:SamusDrake wrote:Feels like "Underworlds-Quest" this time around. For the time being I'm keeping an open mind.
Tell me you haven’t played Underworlds without saying you haven’t played it.
There is absolutely nothing in the rules they described in today’s article that draws on Underworlds.. not movement (beyond hex boards, which Blackstone shares), not combat, not vulnerable status, not activation, not a damn thing!
Its not the hard-wired mechanics of Underworlds, which is a valid point you make, but it honestly feels like the same minds that made Underworlds were given the task of overhauling the system for this Quest game.
To be fair, your initial comment did begin with "Feels like..." But I am not a 'feels' kind of person. I look at the nuts and bolts to determine how a game functions.
SamusDrake wrote:For example, we no longer have tiles to make up the maps but underworld-style retangular layouts. We even have the half-used hexes around the edge of each Darkwater map, which wasn't in Blackstone Fortress. That alone doesn't suggest that Dark Water will play like Underworlds, but the feeling of Underworlds is there.
That is a fair example. I thought it looked like Underworlds when I first saw Darkwater. But without knowing more, I did not develop a 'feeling' about the relationship between the games. I needed to wait for more details on gameplay.
SamusDrake wrote:Where has the dice pools and action dice gone? Hmmm...we now have symbol dice that fell out of an Underworlds box, but they're used to decide the hostiles behaviour. Not the same function, because the symbol dice in Underworlds are for determining combat. But the symbols have the same feel as those used in Underworlds.
There were symbols on the dice in Blackstone Fortress and in Betrayal at Calth. I mean, I can see where one might make the association with Underworlds given the board layout. But, in my estimation, that feeling should be discarded once one is made aware of how the game works.
SamusDrake wrote:We no longer spend actions but roll for them, and it now involves ability and equipment cards. So to make an action we have to score and consider which card to play at the right time.
Here I am not following you. In Darkwater, one spends action cards to activate actions or power them up. I don't believe we roll for them. This differs significantly from Underworlds which mostly provides freedom of choice as to what actions to take with a given character. The equipment cards in Darkwater seem similar to prior
WHQ titles, as they are not randomly drawn, in-game, from a deck to be played.
SamusDrake wrote:The character cards have a health track on the side, which I think is nice, but it seems to be only a health track instead of a wound reducing the activation pool in previous Quest games. This feels like a neat solution to the wound tokens of Underworlds which pile up on the card.
I'm not sure how I feel about the change to how health tracking has changed from prior
WHQ. I agree a wound tracker would have been nice in Underworlds, but that too would have been challenging to keep sorted with the larger 5-7 model warbands. In terms of modern
GW boardgame design, Gorechosen first had this type of wound tracking.
Those are quite good. In fact, I think Direchasm was one of the most balanced season boxes
GW released for Underworlds. I own everything
GW released for Underworlds from 2017 through the new edition in 2024. It is my most played game over the last 8 years. I own the recent
WHQ games too, but haven't had a chance to play Cursed City yet (and the reviews are giving me pause).
Automatically Appended Next Post: 
Clockpunk wrote:callidusx3 wrote:
Clockpunk wrote:I do wonder if Underworlds is doing *so well* in terms of sales that
GW are looking to build on that …
To repeat the above, there is nothing here that is built upon Underworlds.
You say to someone who has bought every set since the original Shadespire box? Get back under your bridge. If you cannot see the likenesses in play... well, that's your (weirdly wilful for some reason. Have you even played either game system, I do wonder given your response even) blindness.
This is the first time in my 35+ years on the Internet (BBS'es in the early years) that any one has called me a troll or insinuated I was one. Perhaps you should rebut my statements with an actual argument regarding the games' similarities instead of casting aspersions on my character...
Having read the rules previews
GW has provided, no, there is no similarity to Underworlds' unique mechanics. Sure, it has hexes upon which one moves models and dice one uses to attack enemies, but many
GW boardgames have this (Gorechosen, Fireteam, Bladeborn, Blackstone Fortress, etc...). Yesterday's article does reveal that it shares a couple of map elements with Underworlds (red lethal hexes and white blocked hexes), yet other
GW boardgames also have "terrain" effects printed on the board space.
As for having played Underworlds, it is my most played game (of any type) since its release in 2017. I have attended numerous tournaments for it (including the Tacoma Open). I have
TO'd several tournaments and organized monthly game nights at local shops. I own all releases for its 1st edition (2017-'24; didn't care for the blandification of the game in the current season). I also have played thousands of games in my time (from board to card, miniature to traditional), and comparing game mechanics is part of the joy I get in experiencing the gamut of gaming. So, when I say Darkwater does not share significant game mechanics with Underworlds, it comes from reasoned analysis and depth of experience.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Exactly...
