|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
James McKendrew wrote:
So is it just me, or did traffic on the card forums take a sudden slowdown when the video game was released? (Video-game-related topics not withstanding...)
Quiet, we're playing our new app! :-)
Hey, I just unlocked the Song of Hawkmoon in a treasure chest! In case you're curious:
Song of Hawkmoon
Spell 6 (so it'll be hanging around in the vault until the Chapter 6 cards unlock)
Check to Acquire: Wisdom/Divine 11 or Intelligence/Arcane 13
Discard this card to decrease the difficulty of a check against a card with the Human trait by 4. If you are attempting the check, you may use your Arcane or Divine skill + 1d8 for the check.
After playing this card, if you do not have either the Arcane or Divine skill, banish it. Otherwise, you may succeed at an Arcane 15 or Divine 13 check to recharge this card instead of discarding it.
...So first I thought, "man, what sort of misanthrope must Hawkmoon be to hate Humans so much?" But then I realized it's against *any* card with the Human trait, and that means allies as well as enemies. So, for example, a tough to acquire card like the Mountaineer (if I'm remembering right) is something that you can make *anyone* do easier, and you can even use your sweet Arcane or Divine yourself. Hawkmoon doesn't hate Humans, he gets along with them very well!
Also, a word about the art:
I love the nod to the "classic" Three Wolf Moon image.
Thanks for the variant for RotR, it was a lot of fun. My group and I are looking forward to bloodsail corsairs but really like rolling d20s. Do you know when you are planning to release a variant to wotr by chance?
That's a good question! The short answer is that I'm not.
I just finished WotR with my primary group this weekend. We crushed Deskari, which was a lot of fun and felt like a good capstone, but I haven't really liked WotR as a whole. The difficulty is much too swingy in adventure design, and the ability to super-charge rolls feels gimmicky and not ultra-heroic to me. It's definitely my least favorite of the 3 APs released so far. The others I game with disagree (disliking RotRL most for being too easy, and S&S most for being too difficult-barrier-heavy, respectively), so I'm aware I don't share a common belief here. But it's hard for me to get motivated to revisit an AP I didn't love.
On a personal level, most of my writing and design time has been working on adventure path chapters for the RPG line (#108 Hell Comes to Westcrown, #111 Dreams of the Yellow King, and another that hasn't been announced yet), so by the time I'll be able to turn to designing another full alternate AP, I'll probably do so for Mummy's Mask, or for some combination of the previously released APs (which would include, but not focus on, WotR).
I agree with Kalindlara. I wrote both fetchling entry in Inner Sea Races as well as the fetchling spread here in Blood of Shadows. The former is more flavorful background and setting but light on rules; this book has lots more rules-wise for them, but does give some of their background at a high level.
Of course, I encourage you to get both! :-)
Keith Richmond wrote:
Well, if there are any points of feedback learned from SotR that would apply to SotRu (so, less to do with mythic charges and big rolls for bosses), please get them in ASAP. Like really really ASAP.
The upshot of a lot of the posts in this thread is that the random banes, and particularly the barriers, make for uneven play in SotR. In SotRu, you'll have less of a problem like this because there seems to be less of a swing in difficulty across the random banes, particularly in the first couple of adventures (I don't recall, but is there only one Falling Bell and only one Monster in the Closet? Those are the barriers that always caused us the greatest headaches.)
My only suggestion is to proxy less. I just don't like doing it. I've put my two home games of SotR on hold until the DriveThru cards are out, because they're just so darned much proxying going on.
Evelyn Jones wrote:
It's entertaining to see how an "Evil" campaign will be done, and hopefully it will be well-written (I have high hopes, considering most of the writers are not the "big-name" ones and will therefore have new views and opinions).
I'm trying to embiggen my name! :-)
Wayfinder 14 was published, and it contains 2 new scenarios written by Ron Lundeen, including a really hilarious doppleganger scenario. And it's free!
Hey, neat! I didn't see this was out until now. We had an awful lot of fun playtesting the Doppleganger Dreams scenario a couple of times.
Andrew L Klein wrote:
I wouldn't say it's not, only that I wish it wasn't. Don't get me wrong, I'm still buying this for the right price!
Heck, I'm buying it at any price. I'm quite excited for this!
Yes, and it's sometimes the best way to close a location with a really difficult or unpleasant closing check (like banishing a blessing).
This is an exciting look behind the curtain of scenario design. I love the drive toward the theme right from the beginning of design to the actual play. One of my WotR groups is about to start Adventure 2, and we'll be running through this scenario when we do.
Thanks for sharing this with us!
I really want to play a beast-master Commoner; but should I choose the role card for "Pig Farmer" or "Goat Herder"?
Ah, trick question: Commoners can't survive long enough to get role cards.
This really made my day! :-)
Vic Wertz wrote:
I've noticed several suggestions for additional products in this thread. Please note that the solution to the problem "you're producing things too quickly" is *not* "produce more things to fill the gap you just created!"
Although the solution might be for us, in the community, to produce more things to fill a perceived gap. I think the idea of using existing cards to align with an existing module--like "Feast of Ravenmoor" or PFS scenarios--seems like a neat idea. I've heard others are converting their own entire APs (like Carrion Crown).
Great to see this listing! I'll add my own: if you're a fan of the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, I have free materials--including two free alternate adventure paths--at welbybumpus.com. Everything there is published under the Community Use Policy, like Wayfinder.
Rebel Song wrote:
I learned last night that I need to read cards better and stop assuming I know what they say. Imrijka's power to reveal a card with the Divine or Ranged skill to add 1d4 and the Magic trait isn't only to a combat check, it's to "a check against a monster." So I could have been adding d4s to my Wisdom or Knowledge or Perception checks. Agh. *headdesk*
Holy crow, I didn't realize this, and I'm almost halfway through WotR with my Imrijka!!
I have a trick we've started doing: When someone examines a card, we turn it over so it sits face-up on its location deck. That way it's not a memory game; we know just what it is, and each of us can tell by looking. (If we have to shuffle that deck, of course, we flip it back over before shuffling.)
I don't remember which group I played with had picked that up, but it's helped speed play.
Also, I've never seen the need for one of the big play mats, but we used those in the OP at GenCon, and my wife insists they lay everything out more intuitively. So we bought one, and have used it regularly since GenCon.
So if a character plays a Tier 3 pregen starting Adventure 4, she'll never be able to get a role card.
It's to save them from the Umbral Dragon.
Like many criminals, they got caught because they were greedy. Meanwhile, over here, I'll just keep buying 10 quarterstaves at a time (for 0 gold) and selling them as 2 days of firewood (for 1 cp).
I found everyone involved to be exceedingly flexible, especially when I brought a group of players that were all Tier 1, with Adventure 3 tickets, and each with unique lists of scenarios they'd already played. I can't imagine the logistics to pull that off, but it was well and skillfully done all three times we came by to play.
What do you do when you've gone through the entire Skull and Shackles adventure path for the PACG? Rearrange the cards and do it again!
The Bloodlust Corsairs adventure path is an entirely new 35-scenario adventure path with an independent story. It uses only the cards from the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game: Skull and Shackles base set and its six adventure decks--no need to print your own cards (but you will need all six adventure decks to play it). It includes two new rules: one for using your ship as a location, and another for playing any character as a wereshark!
You can download it from WelbyBumpus.com for free.
Get it, play it, and let me know what you think (and how I can improve it!).
First World Bard wrote:
Alternatively, I might give the Shield of Rannick a try. If I try to solo it, I'd probably use Meliski; I've been itching to see how he'd do going Brawler with access to Amulets of Mighty / Fiery fists.
Well, Shield of Rannick is pretty awesome, I'll admit. :-) If you can wait a few days, you can try Bloodlust Corsairs--my adventure path with the Skull and Shackles set--and see what you think. I've honestly playtested very little of that with just a solo character (my usual group is 3 players), and I'll be interested to see what a solo run of that is like.
Sure! You'll need one High Priest Y'Ganok villain available here.
You'll need one Bhole Jaws villain available here.
You'll need players + 1 (that is, up to seven) Titanic Bulk henchmen available here.
You'll need players + 2 (that is, up to eight) Denizen of Leng henchmen available here.
Please give it a try and let me know what you think!
Well, I'm a professional game designer, and I wrote Shield of Rannick, a full adventure path with 30 all new scenarios for your Rise of the Runelords game. I also wrote Mhar of Leng, a five-scenario "Adventure 7" for Rise of the Runelords. Both are absolutely free at welbybumpus.com, and I suppose that sells very well! :-)
I'm working on a new adventure path for the Skull and Shackles set called Bloodlust Corsairs. I haven't yet decided whether my project after that will be an adventure path for the Wrath of the Righteous set, or a large cross-over requiring all three base sets. Probably the latter, I think.
To most players, such abject failure to progress would be highly discouraging.
This is quite true. Let me give two data points from my own experience:
1) A year ago, I bought the LotR card game to play with my wife. We chose starting decks as recommended in the rules, and enjoyed the first scenario. We lost the second scenario in a quite demoralizing way, tried it again, and lost it again. I looked up online the next day, and found that a specific deck build--one not clearly presented in the rules--is necessary to win that particular scenario. We planned to try that deck trick someday, but that was a year ago-- we've shelved the game and haven't opened it since. I was telling someone the other day that I'm just not a fan of this game because it's crippling second-scenario difficulty lost me as a casual player.
2) My wife and friend and I are huge fans of the PACG. Despite the suggestion to play Adventure 1 before Adventure B, we've decided to go in the "normal" order. We loved scenario B-1 (The Godless Ones) and beat it on our first try. But we've lost scenario B-2 (The Elven Entanglement) four times and it's killed Kyra once. We will try it again for sure; but if we weren't already a fan of PACG, it would have been shelved just like the LotR card game for us.
I conclude that the uneven and harsh difficulty will cause people to shelve this game, unfortunately.
Hey, all. I'm writing my next full adventure path, which uses the Skull and Shackles base set. It's called Bloodlust Corsairs, and it uses two new sets of rules. The first of these is presented below, and I'd like to get some feedback on it. These are rules for playing lycanthropes; they are powerful, but can be very dangerous if your lycanthropy is reckless or ill-timed. In Bloodlust Corsairs, the PCs become were-sharks--hammerhead sharks and tiger sharks initially, but dire sharks and such later on--but I want rules that work equally well if you want to be were-crocodiles or were-stirges or were-bandits or whatever.
Please give me any comments, criticisms, or edits you have!
I'm really excited they let me contribute those scenarios, and I was very happy to see them at PaizoCon as well!
You can get it for FREE, linked here. The article is called "Playing Cards in Ustalav." You don't need any cards to play them other than the Rise of the Runelords set.
Please let me know what you think of the scenarios!
Man oh man oh man oh man. I'm *SO* excited to see this. Because these:
Item - Lymirin Discourses (2)
...are items I wrote for this adventure path!
Jason S wrote:
I was just curious what people have seen, on average, with convention play for OP. (APCG developers can feel free to post anonymously on their alts :) ) Yes, this is probably colored by the players that attended, but nevertheless I’m just interested in what you’ve seen.
I'll tick through with my experience. I played 4 sessions at PaizoCon.
Jason S wrote:
How many players did you have at your table? Did you ever have a solo or 2 player table? How often did you have a 6 player table?
4, 4, 5, 5
Jason S wrote:
What level was the player skill? Better than expected? Less than you expected?
Better than expected, especially from the guy who had barely played the game before.
Jason S wrote:
Did anyone roleplay? :)
If you mean, "did something that didn't seem like a good idea because they felt it was what their character would do," the answer is no. And Kyra didn't ever shout "Blessing of the Dawnflower upon you!" before using Cure, or anything like that.
Jason S wrote:
Did anyone at the table misunderstand a rule and then have it corrected by playing OP? (I think this is one of the greatest benefits of OP).
Only once. One of the other players and I weren't sure how a summoned creature and location interacted. But Tanis happened to be right there to set us straight. (Quite a perk of playing at PaizoCon.)
Jason S wrote:
Were players teamwork orientated and did players discuss choices (at critical points) or did everyone "do their own thing"? Did players ask for blessings at critical points (or where they were in trouble) or did they just roll and fail without asking for help?
We all helped and coordinated a lot. This is probably because the first scenario is ruthlessly brutal; one player at our table and a few at other tables were trying it for the second (or more!) time, hoping to finally win it. After that, we learned some good cooperation pretty darned fast.
Jason S wrote:
Did players try to work as a group or did some players "go rogue" and start exploring locations that benefitted them in terms of boons (but perhaps they couldn’t close the location)?
No, we all worked well together about what locations each of us would be best at (and best at closing).
Jason S wrote:
Did you ever have time to harvest locations for loot (by not closing a location on purpose)?
No, harvesting locations for loot doesn't seem particularly useful in OP, particularly once you know someone's already got a weapon 1 or item 1 you're looking for.
Jason S wrote:
Were there any characters archetypes that were played more than others? Were Seoni and Kyra really common? :) Were any class decks more common than others? Were any class decks rarely seen?
We had two Arabundis, which mean a lot of extra d4s on combat checks for everyone!
Jason S wrote:
Were healers frequent or were people flexible enough someone would play one if no one else was playing support? Were there ever too many support characters at a table? Did you ever play in a group with no support characters (and were you successful)?
Let me expand on my earlier response to say we had the following:
Tables 1 and 2: Enora (me), Kyra, Arabundi, Merisiel
Jason S wrote:
I imagine players are very flexible with what characters they play in adventures 1+2, but in adventures 4+ do the trends in the paragraph above still hold true?
As your question is specifically about convention play, which I haven't done at those levels, I couldn't say.
Jason S wrote:
Was there anything else you were surprised by?
Yes, how much we had to just do ourselves (or were empowered to do by ourselves, you might say). We had a volunteer "run the box" at our first table, but he had to leave after that. He set up the second scenario, but I "ran the box" thereafter. I had a couple of questions at one point, but literally couldn't find any volunteers in the area to ask (although, as I mentioned above, the one time we had a pretty critical--like, win-or-lose-the-scenario-based-on-the-answer critical--question, Tanis happened to be there).
In all, though, I played with very pleasant, skilled people and would gladly play with any or all of them again.
Yay, I get a Councilor's Ring! And Enora.
Are we going to have whole tables of Enoras with Councilor's Rings at PaizoCon, I wonder?
At the risk of a mere "I'm awesome" post, I did this last night with Heggal and won it on the first turn.
Only one location: Helm. Start there.
Starting hand includes a Farglass, Blessing of the Gods, and a couple other useful cards.
First turn, flip Blessing of Asmodeus onto the blessing discard pile.
Play the Farglass, note that the Hurricane Winds henchman is the second card down, move it to the top.
Encounter the Hurricane Winds and defeat it.
A Wisdom 29 check is required to close my location. Play the Blessing of the Gods as the Blessing of Asmodeus atop the blessings discard pile.
Bury hand. Close location. Win game.
I'm super skeptical of people's amazingly lucky play reports, so feel free to be skeptical of mine, but I found it pretty amazingly fortunate.
On the most recent earning's call, Hasbro's CEO acknowledged that its games were overall on an upswing, and singled out Dungeons and Dragons in particular as doing well.
In all, D&D sales probably contribute an amount not much more than a balance sheet rounding error to Hasbro, but the CEO calling it out seems a good sign for the game.
Any of them. Seriously.
I've run Rise of the Runelords as gestalt, and I'm just about through Shattered Star with gestalt.
Here's the sneaky trick of it: you control your PCs' leveling. If they are one or two levels behind the "recommended" levels for the adventure, the challenge level works itself out just fine.
For example, we started Into the Nightmare Rift (recommended for PCs of level 13) when they were still 11th level.
If you want to put a little bit of extra work into the world-building, you can do that: for example, I make a few of the NPCs that the PCs face (both opponents and allies) gestalt as well, so the PCs aren't the only ones out there.
Full disclosure: in my gestalt campaigns, I limit people to only two classes: no multiclassing or prestige classes. Archetypes for either or both classes are okay, though. In Shattered Star, I have:
* a magus/wizard
Andrew L Klein wrote:
Any chance of this getting put up to DriveThru?
As TES mentions, there shouldn't be any proxying or new cards required at all to play this. That was part of my design--you already have all the cards you need to play.
I suppose you could have scenario cards, like LudwigO made, but I suspect there wouldn't be room on a regular card for these--some of the rules text and flavor text is really long, since I had a half-page rather than card-size to work with.
Have you defeated Karzoug and want to keep playing?
The Mhar of Leng adventure is a five-scenario adventure scaled as a "Chapter 7" for the Rise of the Runelords PACG adventure path. It uses primarily the cards you've already got, with a handful of villains and henchmen you can print out from the .pdf, proxy, or order from DriveThruCards.com.
You can download it from WelbyBumpus.com here for free.
Get it, play it, and let me know what you think!
If you could be any ally in PACG, which ally would you be?
The RotRL ally Aldern Foxglove, because I just can't see anything bad ever happening to that guy (although I haven't played past Deck 1).
We, too, have breezed through AP 4 and 5 so far but hit a wall with this. We've lost it twice and it hasn't been close either time.
We will play it again, and play until we win it, but we'll definitely have to adopt the "spread out and temporarily close locations strategy" to beat it. We have Damiel, Jirelle, and Feiya, so we have limited scouting ability.
This scenario just feels like petulant meanness. It's difficult, but isn't a clever kind of difficult, like Bizarre Love Triangle, just an additive sort of meanness that seems a bit lazy in the design department:
"I've designed this well-crafted scenario about finally beating a nemesis of the PCs."
"Is it SUPER TOUGH? Did you use ALL the tough locations?"
"I could; I don't know if it matches the theme of..."
"DO IT! And y'know what would be tougher? Adding another location!"
"Sure, but you don't even know what the scenario is about..."
"Plus the ship is anchored, so they can't even use their ship powers!"
"And a henchman that wipes a random character's hand! And one that makes you banish your most awesome cards! And make it so you have to fight THOSE SAME HENCHMEN OVER AND OVER."
"I suppose we could craft a story that..."
"FORGET STORY! FIGHT THE SAME TERRIBLE HENCHMEN OVER AND OVER FOR NO GOOD REASON! RANDOMLY!!"
"Plus, you discard blessings from the blessing deck for fighting the villain. EVERY TIME you fight the villain!"
"That doesn't even make sense...losing blessing is like losing time. Does the villain delay you, or something? How does it fit into the story?"
"FORGET STORY! TOUGHEST LOCATIONS! EXTRA LOCATION! ANCHOR THE SHIP! KILLER HENCHMEN YOU FIGHT RANDOMLY OVER AND OVER FOR NO GOOD REASON! PLUS THE VILLAIN COSTS YOU TIME--AND MAKES YOU RECHARGE A CRAP-TON OF CARDS EVERY TIME, LIKE SOME SORT OF HOPPED-UP JUBRAYL VHISKI! DO IT!"
I put my first skill feat into Wisdom, primarily to more reliably recharge my spells. I put the second into Strength, because I found myself in melee a lot.