|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Which game store? I live in Skokie, with relatives in Oak Park. I'm trying to get PACG started at our new FLGS, Aw Yeah Games.
Saturday afternoons are not ideal, but I might be able to make that work once a month or so. Weekday evenings tend to be better for me.
That reminds me of this old article.
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).
Andrew L Klein wrote:
That's the Man's Promise you're thinking of. It's our favorite in regular play. Being able to explore without spending a blessing in hand is very nice.
We have Jirelle in our regular group, and got very used to her structural damage reduction. Since we don't have that in organized play, we almost always take the Kraken for our OP games.
what sort of card-quantities are we talking about? - I'd certainly be interested in this, depending on how many cards I'd need to proxy
Four. Two villains new villains and two new henchmen (although you'd need up to seven of each henchmen, based on how many players you've got--Bandits or similar will do).
I'm a big fan of using what we've already got, just putting them together in new ways. For a higher-level adventure, though, I felt like I needed just a couple more villains and a couple more henchmen to make the story and power level fit right.
Ron Lundeen wrote:
Hey, all! I've put together a "Chapter 7" for Rise of the Runelords, for those people (like me) who wanted to give their Karzoug-killin' characters another high-powered adventure to play through.
I've tested it with my own group, but I know all high-level characters are different, so I'd like to get others' thoughts on it, too, before releasing it to the world.
If you'd like to playtest a five-scenario "Chapter 7" over the next week or two, please Private Message me and I'll send you the latest draft so you can play it and circle back to me with your thoughts.
Okay, so I put some thought into my problem with this scenario after my imaginary conversation above. I’m not complaining that the scenario is tough (tough scenarios are nice to see from time to time); I *do* think this scenario feels a little lazy in the design department, because it feels like someone came up with a generic “Tough Scenario Template” and applied to another, more reasonable scenario.
Here is the generic Tough Scenario Template:
1) In addition to all other locations, add the Torture Pit (if the Torture Pit is already included, add the Shrine to Norgorber instead).
2) When building the location decks, replace all allies with monsters.
3) When you defeat a henchman, do not banish it; instead, put it in a pile next to the scenario card. When you encounter the villain, each other character must summon and encounter a random henchman from this henchman pile.
4) The villain gains the power “After you act, discard 1d4 cards from the blessings deck.”
Viola--tough version of any scenario!
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.
DM_Kumo Gekkou wrote:
Do you guys have a specific program you use or what? How do you present the scenarios, adventure paths, etc to your characters? I've tried adjusting them down but they come out nearly unreadable when shrunk.
I don't shrink them down, I just print them out on regular paper. That's how they're intended to be used (that is, they aren't intended to be shrunk down to card size).
As Seelah I just completed the Brigandoom scenario and collected an item as my reward (Potion of Healing). As I create my deck to venture forth, can I add the item into my deck? The reason I'm confused is because Seelah's card list states that she can't have any items.
No, Seelah cannot keep items between scenarios. You can let someone else you are adventuring with (if any) keep it as one of their items, though.
As I said when I played Seelah, "Material items freight your soul, and I'll have none of it!"
I also agree with ThreeEyedSloth's assessment. Being restricted to the Class Decks severely cripples many characters, or makes them simply unplayable: Meliski, Siwar, Zarlova, Tontelizi, Vika, Wrathack, etc.
Although I imagine that a few of the characters are less than optimal when restricted to their deck cards, I think you're being overbroad in describing who is crippled or unplayable: my friend's Meliski and my Vika have both done very well, and we've had a lot of fun with each. Neither has seemed unreasonably constrained.
I want to see that card.
NPC: "You must undertake these three tests of might, mind, and quickness..."
The original question of this thread (can you explore outside of your explore step) was answered today. And the answer is no.
This is a pretty comprehensive change to how we play. It was typical for us to, for example, draw a Detect Magic into our hand and then play it at the end of the turn. Just last weekend, I felt like I'd pulled off a good maneuver by starting my turn (not at the Torture Pit), using the Pteranodon to move to the Torture Pit and explore, then use my move to go back to my original location and explore there. That seemed a slow but effective way to get through a difficult location safely.
Upon initial consideration, I think the FAQ isn't complete enough. If a card lets you do X and explore, can you still play that card outside of your explore step for X, but not get the explore? More specifically:
* Can I reset my hand then, if I drew a Detect Magic, play Detect Magic to examine the top card of my location deck (being unable to encounter it, even if it is a blessing or has the Magic trait)?
* Can I use the Pteranodon (or similar move card) to move at the start of my turn, even though I can't then explore when I do?
I'm currently playing in a two character campaign as Meliski and I'm just curious as to how other people are building him. I think we're on the third pack/expansion and we're playing the Shield of Rannick campaign (or whatever it's called).
First, you're correct, it's "Shield of Rannick." /shameless plug
The Meliski in our group is only through adventure 2, but also plans to go Brawler. He's taken +1 to Strength and +2 to Charisma, with a 2-dice reroll power feat, +1 weapon, and +1 spell. His player uses Meliski as a buffer primarily, following others around in order to grant them rerolls as necessary.
Same here, and it looks like an interesting set of scenarios. I'm looking forward to throwing my Vika or my Heggal at them!
We've noticed that the increase in difficulty has served to limit our choices.
With RotRL, we feel like we could play practically any combination of the characters and have a good shot at success (although we have one player who insists that a healer is always required, even in RotRL).
Due to the increased difficulty in S&S, we feel more constrained in our character choices: taking characters with poor Wisdom and Constitution, or without either Survival or Craft, is a noticeable hindrance that the other players have to make up for. So we avoid those characters. We also found that we need to run with at least one dedicated healer and preferably one other divine caster with a Cure or two.
The few times we deviated from this in S&S, we found the game frustratingly difficult.
Our success rate with S&S has been pretty good, but only because of the constraint in our "party building." I also hope WotR is partway between the two games for difficulty, if only so we again feel like we can run with nearly any combination of the characters and succeed.
Scott Keim wrote:
The low-hanging joke here, of course, is that the undead took your brain...
I anxiously eye the Season O downloads about the middle of every month, as I'm not connected to a store so have to be a month behind on them (and pay for them).
I understand there was a week off from the program about the end of the year, but I was still hoping to see adventure 0-4 available by now--any ETA on that?
I don't sleeve.
We've played through Rise of the Runelords one full time, along with using the cards for a lot of one-off games (including playtesting for my variant-RotRL AP Shield of Rannick). The cards are showing wear, particularly the set B and 1 cards that have seen more use than the set 5 and 6 cards.
Our Skull and Shackles set is only up to set 4 (set 5 just came yesterday!), but those cards have gotten even more play than our RotRL set, with the main campaign, the OP campaign, and playtesting for my next variant AP. Those cards are also showing wear; again, it's mostly the set B and 1 cards.
We've only had one "giveaway" damage: the Fox in my wife's deck has a peeled corner that indicates when it's coming. We just swapped out for a Fox from one of the class decks.
I imagine we play this game much more than most players. The fact that these cards can stand up to our rigorous play is a real testament to the durability of the game. If we were going to take a third run--for example, if we planned to restart RotRL one holiday weekend and power through the whole thing with a new group--I might deem our set just a little too worn out, and buy another base set. That would give "fresh" set B and 1 cards, which is all we need; the other cards have held up just fine. (It's money I'd rather throw at Paizo than at a card-sleeve company and take up a lot of my own time--but I know that's not a decision everyone can make.)
I'm not rabidly anti-sleeving, and I do have some experience with sleeving: one of the game stores I played OP at sleeves their cards, so I have to sleeve my Tarlin deck cards when I go play there. I don't much mind using sleeved cards, but it's not my preference.
As for the future, I don't intend to sleeve Wrath of the Righteous, either.
Hope this feedback is helpful.
Myth Lord wrote:
That awesome Aurumvorax ripping through that robot should be my background from now on. Love that picture.
I loved seeing the art for The Choking Tower throughout, as it's a thrill to see my words come alive in art, but I particularly liked that aurumvorax image!
Mike Selinker wrote:
We are discussing this.
Quick, everybody fill your decks with blessings from the blessing deck discard pile before they tell us not to!
Let me put the question a little more precisely: when an adventure gives you a card feat, do you add a corresponding Basic card to your deck, or do you add a card you gained during play of the final scenario (which may or may not be Loot cards)?
This is a thorny issue. When I first read this, I thought the Theryon Method was definitely right. But after some thought, I realize that the Pluvia Method is how we actually play: if the final scenario of an adventure gives you Loot cards, and the adventure gives you a card feat, we'll often take the card feat and then fill that new "open spot" with a Loot card. This wouldn't be possible if Theryon was right--in that case, you'd have to take your loot, rebuild your decks, and then get the card feat--meaning before you start the first scenario of the next adventure, you must take a Basic card in order to fill the "open spot" you earned. Does anyone play that way? Are my groups just outliers?
Page one has v1.1, but it wouldn't accept that as the file name, so I renamed the file name to "v2" instead. I'm terrible at version-naming things; you can tell I don't do programming!
And I also noticed that for the 6C Scenario there is twice the same location "The old Light"
Oh, snap! Yes, that's an error that was once slated for correction but didn't get corrected. The second appearance (that is, the location for 3 players) should be the Dam. I'll fix this in the next version.
Boons put back in the box after you rebuild your deck are not banished. So they can't be removed from the game.
Oh! We've been removing too many cards from the game, then. Even after hundreds of games, you can still learn something new! Thanks!
Thanks to everyone for the thoughts and feedback here--I've uploaded a new version of Shield of Rannick to WelbyBumpus.com (you'll know it's the newest version because it has v2 in the file name).
In the new version, I've cleaned up some text, improved some of the story, and clarified the Sihedron Medallion rules in each scenario. This took a bit of doing, since what you do with the blessing deck is different based on what you're doing with the Sihedron Medallion.
* Banish or Display: you reveal the medallion, banish or display it, do the thing it makes you do, then advance the blessing deck.
* Shuffle: you reveal the medallion, do the thing it makes you do, then advance the blessings deck, then shuffle the medallion back in.
This is now set forth in each scenario, so should be clear--let me know if it's not!
For those interested in the gory details, here's one of the cases we went through in hammering this out:
Let's say you're playing 5A: Unearthing the Battlefield. You've done not so great, and your blessing deck has two medallions and two blessings in it. For your turn, you flip the medallion. You have to look at the "When the Sihedron Appears" section immediately and do what it says, so you make the check, then advance the blessings deck (say you flip a blessing), then shuffle the medallion back in. Now you've got one blessing and two medallions in your blessings deck.
At the beginning of the next turn, you flip a medallion so you again do the steps in "When the Sihedron Appears"--make the check, then advance the blessings deck--but you flip another medallion when you do. Since you've revealed a medallion, you immediately perform the "When the Sihedron Appears" step: make the check, then advance the blessings deck (flipping over the final blessing). Then "shuffle" both medallions back into the empty blessings deck. Your blessings deck now consists of two medallions, and that's it.
At the start of the next turn, you'll flip a medallion, make the check, then flip the other medallion and make the check, then try to advance the blessings deck again but fail to do so, immediately losing the scenario.
It's pretty rough when you get down that low but--and here was the important point for me--you're out of the infinite loop.
Unless someone at the table has lost an armor in the scenario (a rarity, in my experience), then the effect is functionally the same, just delayed: instead of being removed from the game when you use it, it's removed from the game when you select cards for your deck at the end of the scenario.
If someone had lost an armor, and you've gained no other armors, they have to keep it. But then, the effect is pretty much the same anyway: if someone had lost an armor and ended with an open "armor slot", she'd have to go hunting in the box for a Basic armor anyway (and might be stuck with that Leather Armor!).
Dave Riley wrote:
We're in adventure 3 and loving it. Playing with locations +1. Accidentally played with 5 locations on 3-A, which should only have 3 with two players, I think?
I'm compiling edits from the various discussions, and this caught my eye--you should have the normal 4 locations with 2 players in adventure 3-A...were you talking about one of the other scenarios?
I created cards using my templates to thank you for the fun I took playing your adventure path Ron.
I love this! I'd only ask you to wait a day or two if you mock up 4C or 4D, since I'll have a few tweaks there in response to some comments.
New version coming soon.
Neat concept! A few initial thoughts here:
1) Seems nicely well-rounded and functions as a slightly more versatile fighter in a group.
2) There are too few Dragon cards to make the first power really worthwhile, initially. It's really only effective when you use your second power to add the Dragon trait (although it's not clear whether that adds the Dragon trait to your check--I think the intent is that it does). I don't know the source material you're pulling from, but perhaps you could apply it as "Draconic Majesty" or something and get the bonus against a more common trait instead (like Humans, or Animals, or both if you drop the bonus to +1 ([ ]+2)).
Dave Riley wrote:
Agreed it's more logical, and likely the best solution. I've been running through a few options, particularly at a low blessings deck size, in order to find the best solution (while preserving the groans around the table when the medallion is revealed!).
I'd love to hear all about it! I'm particularly interested in how you fare in those scenarios where the Sihedron Medallion is shuffled back into the deck. I've been kicking around a minor rules revision for that--as well as a few other edits that the fine folks at BGG have spotted--but I'm not quite yet ready to release version 1.1.
Still have my money on Jade Regent.
I want this to be Iron Gods, out of sheer vanity--I'd like to see my third chapter of that, The Choking Tower, made into an official card adventure!
Fantastic job. There was no mention of the Set Type indicator of P for Promo. Are we not supposed to be playing with the promos?
You can, but I'm not counting on anyone necessarily having or using those. We expressly removed them from our box for playtesting, because some of them (looking at you, Fire Sneeze and Poog) are pretty powerful for B-level cards.
I'd treat P cards as B, C, or 1, just like in other games. I'll clarify when I make some edits.
Thanks for the clarification, Vic. Ron had submitted a scenario using PACG resources for an article in Wayfinder, and I was going to ask you about it. Looks like its permissible.
Yay! Now that I've passed the hurdle of technicality, my submission can be judged based on its merits (if any)! :-)
I am thinking of joining the organized play. Which is the best character if I wanted to focus on allies?
Heggal, without a doubt. He really relies on allies, and has the ability to get several. Heggal is my favorite of the 4 or 5 OP characters I play. (As a useful aside, I also think he's the most powerful of the characters I play.)
To get nitty gritty: I shuffle all the decks at the beginning of each scenario, but leave them in the box during gameplay. When I'm required to banish a card, I put it in the front of the deck. When I'm required to draw a random card of that type (plunder, large chest .etc) I draw from the back of the deck so I can't see what card it is, effectively 'random'.
This is what we do, but even lazier: we only shuffle the decks once every adventure or so, or until we feel like we're likely to have gotten deeply into that type of card (as is often the case with blessings, which we shuffle every scenario).
Nathaniel Gousset wrote:
Or you can simply remove the card for all the groups.
We sort of do this. We remove Basic cards banished by our "higher level" (now in AP 4) but not by our "lower level" (now in AP 3) group.
Plenty of times I've had to put BotG back in the box after our "low level" game when I've wanted to banish them; but I figure it works out because I've already banished some in our "high level" game.
Not precise. But easier.