I put Runebound 3rd Edition on my table this month. This includes the Unbreakable Bonds expansion that introduces co-op play to a game that should have been co-operative from the beginning.
Part of my reasoning for buying Runebound is that it was meant to be a much better dungeon/adventuring game compared to another seemingly popular game with a distinctive orange box. I won’t mention it by name, but if you’re still unsure, to box is adorned with a heavily armored mage or knight looking character on the front. I don’t think that game could work out whether it was a mage or a knight either. Fortunately, the rules are much more simpler in Runebound. In classic Fantasy Flight fashion, there’s a learn to play guide and a reference manual. Neither manual is perfect, I’d like to see some important points made more prominent in text as opposed to boring Terrinoth lore occupying my rulebook. Maybe I’m alone here, but I much prefer my rulebook to have rules only, and would gladly have lore placed elsewhere. Even as an appendix or something. Those little callout boxes explaining lore would be much better served by examples or reiterating important points.
Playing the game. Gosh it is hard. I do not recommend it for co-op. Playing through failed scenario after failed scenario shows just how bolted on this mode is. The skill deck is made out of 6 distinct card families. One family is the party/co-op deck and that deck gives added options when at least two characters can link up and move around the map together. Maybe they’ll get enough trophies to learn these co-op skills. To get to that point, I spent the first half of the game having each character do their own thing trying to explore as much as possible and build them up. If there were another person present, it would still be solitaire gaming. The second half was all about linking up to defeat the big bad together. Total failures thanks to being under-equipped.
One character from the base game isn’t even suited for co-op. One of his inherent skills is about battling another hero. Why would anyone do that in co-op is beyond me. I suppose they could if they want this character to get an extra two gold and one trophy, at the expense of making another player lose an action. Might as well throw the fight then I guess. I don’t know, it just doesn’t make sense. Some of the cards in the game still apply where an option is to harm the other heroes in some indirect way; fine in a competitve sense, but out of place in a co-op game.
Flipping tokens for battle is pretty cool. I like it, but don’t love it. The monster AI sheets are nice, though I learned that trying to kill monsters from the start to get trophies is going to be painful, bordering on impossible. It seems to be imperative that heroes get some sort of economy happening, buying new items/tokens to then take to battle with them later on. With time pressure, there’s not a lot of room to waste healing up and/or being delayed. To get an economy happening means grabbing supplies from a city, then delivering to a settlement on the map and making a small profit on the way. Yay! (sarcasm) Otherwise, earning gold by being lucky with card draws and succeeding with the requirements.
I’ve shelved Runebound for the time being. For a solo/co-op game, I never found any synergy between characters unlike say, Pathfinder ACG or Darkest Night. I never felt like I was on an adventure eagerly delving into the unknown to pull out some amazing weapon or item to empower me like I’d get with Eldritch Horror. And while I would stop and carefully plan out my options with combat, it was far from burning my brain. I believed internet opinion that the co-op makes Runebound fantastic; it had me excited about busting it out and playing it. Right now, I disagree completely with the enthusiasm.