No more than Slay was inspired by Dream Quest. I’d say Roguebook does a better job of differentiating itself from StS than 90-95% of the roguelike deckbuilders out there.
I agree the pricing on the dlc is noxious, but there are many games where people spend absurd amounts of money on cosmetics.
I’m with @Vinraith here, MT has a ton of stuff to unlock, between factions, champions for those factions, cards, relics.
I hadn’t thought about this, but you have a point here. I would argue MT certainly had some power in the unlocks, but this skill tree is more akin to something like Hades, for instance. I will come back to this in a minute.
Sure you do. There’s considerable strategy in uncovering as much of the map as possible. I get that some people won’t like the randomness of it, but I like this method as a substitute for Slay-style maps.
This is really interesting. I hadn’t considered this at all. It seems vastly closer to Slay to me, but maybe I haven’t seen enough? And your point about the passive tree is well-made. OTOH, I have to ask whether the cards you think are awful truly are. And I’ve seen some pretty broken combos in Slay. Curious what cards you think qualify as instant wins.
And the passive unlocks? Is that perhaps the crux of the matter, here? Then again, I watched a streamer doing his first run a couple of days ago, and it didn’t seem this way to me…at least any more so than Slay or any other game in the genre.
I really can’t speak to this. I haven’t seen enough of it. I have a feeling a discussion about this would revolve around whether the map traversal is skill-based.
I wish I knew more about the ascension/modifier system, as I suspect it is an important point in the discussion about difficulty tuning, but I haven’t seen it at all.
At any rate, thanks for the reply.