I love seeing the cross-path milestones like this.
I'm trying a Rise of the Runelords run right now using only class deck characters. I randomly selected a class that wouldn't be in it, which left me 6 classes. Then, a d4 to randomly select a character from each.
If we get lucky, someone will find a way to make every RotR scenario compatible with 51 players, and someone will run through the whole path using every single character at the same time!
My plan is to run four player S&S with the Character Add-On and just not put their decks back into the box when running the OP scenarios. That will suck out enough of the B/C cards to more or less work out.
As long as you are aren't reporting those OP scenarios you're fine. If you are reporting them, you can't have any custom rules like that, and you will need to put all those cards back in. Really, the only difference any game of OP should have from the others is whether the Character Add-On deck is in the box or not.
I'd also throw in the Amulet of Fortitude as a great card to have. That reveal power is really useful given increased number of banes that force you to bury cards if you can't pass a constitution/fortitude check.
Our CD Seoni carries hers, and always seems to have it when a recharge to pass is most needed. Between that and our Oloch carrying a Ring of Fortitude, half our party is covered, and the others have at least a d8 anyways.
When you take the Weapon 1 Upgrade, you immediately go to your deck and pull a level B or 1 weapon. You can then use it to replace one of the weapons in your deck. You don't need a card feat for that. You only need a card feat if you want to hold a higher number of weapons in your deck AFTER rebuilding.
When you get a card feat though, you are correct. You will be stuck with a Basic B until you get far enough into the adventure, unless you get a card reward in the same scenario asthe feat.
Correct, the card upgrades are not pooled. You pick a specific card of that type immediately, and you are done with your upgrade. If you banish that card, you are going to be pulling a Basic B after the scenario to replace it.
Our 4 player group (Jirelle, Damiel, Oloch, and CD Seoni) finished Adventure 2 last night. Every character definitely has their areas of expertise. Boon collecting typically goes to Seoni (+4 to acquire magic booms, non magics are almost worthless to us most of the time now), but everyone can do well at their own (Str weapons for Oloch, Dex for Jirelle and to an extent Damiel).
As far as combat goes, I say Seoni and Damiel hit the hardest, but Jirelle carries Old Salt's Bandana and gets 2-die rerolls on just about everything she happens to miss. Oloch hits pretty hard with weapons, and has started going to utility and heal with his spells. Picking up his displayed card at the start of his turn, it's rare he doesn't display his whole 4 card hand for +2 each at various points during the round. Looking forward to him getting a fifth!
Overall, I think it is pretty well balanced. Where Damiel tends to be above other characters, he is very much above them (my average combat is d8+2d6+d10+8 just by playing a potion and using its ability to discard/recharge another card to add Craft, before anything else). However, he's going to struggle with Wisdom and I think Strength (can't remember if that was a d8 or d6). For Charisma, he has no chance without people nearly dumping their hands if it's anything worth passing. He definitely is a minmax character to me.
For his powers, they really are what make him shine. I never use Fire Lance as a bury (2d12 combat), but frequently recharge it (normally a banish for others, 4d8 combat, alchemical trait) and then follow up with a Call Weapon to take it back.
I didn't use his discard assist power much in the beginning, but now that he is giving a d6+2 each time (usually 2d6+2, I try to use alchemicals when I can) I use it more frequently.
His items are 3 combat potions, a Masterwork Tools, the Loot amulet (bury to take a random item from the box, plus another power I don't remember), Sapphire of Intelligence (d10), and another I can't recall. I took a weapon feat early on for the Loot Dex weapon, a whip or something. I regret that greatly, there is only one Fire Lance and nothing else is worth it for me. He is all about utility when it comes to spells, so it's Call Weapon and Find Traps for me, a personal and a group spell.
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
I was referring just to my party, I definitely don't expect most to consistently have Find Traps and a blessing to spare. We don't hold the cards just for this purpose, it's just something we tend to have. Our Oloch almost never plays his blessings, and usually holds them for +2s until truly needed. We use Man's Promise, and he explores with the blessings deck. It works for our playstyle. To me Find Traps is the kind of card that gets used once or twice per scenario, usually out of "well I won't need this anytime soon, use it now". However, when you really need it, you're glad you have it. There is no spell we've encountered that is better than it for me. I haven't seen any in the decks either.
Keep in mind, I'm not saying "Wow, this a great card, everyone should hope to be so lucky as to find it". I'm saying that, for the group I play with, finding it would not be a problem unless all 4 of us got completely hosed on card draws at the same time, and two of us have 6 size, plus Jirelle and Oloch, so with our playatyle that is extremely unlikely.
If every bane had similar difficulties and consequences, no one would play the game. If it were more frequent, I would be more concerned. One card out of all the barriers, then mixed in with all the other cards in location decks? Finding that one card isn't a concern for us. When it gets to 15 difficulty, yea I'll be less excited about it. But for now? The benefits far outweigh the risks with the current difficulty. I doubt it will cause many deaths, due to the rarity of finding it in the first place.
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
Its one of the few cards in the game that can kill you with a single bad roll. Yes, you can usually make it, but if it comes out at the wrong time and you get a bad roll it can single handily kill large hand-size characters. The rewards are great, but the risk should worry you.
Our 4-man party always has assistance cards, and for something like that would definitely use them. I play Damiel, and have a 6 card hand, going to 7 at the next feat (already pumped my assist power to the max, weapon proficiency is worthless for me). That's quite a reward for what little would have to be played to help on it. The draw is risky, but considering you get the plunder no matter what, I'm willing to risk roll 4d8 (We rarely find barriers worthy of me using my Find Traps, plus a blessing at a minimum) to get currently a 9 is very much worth it.
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
Keelhauling? Please, when we close a location, I sit there asking the group "Goblin Keelhauling wasn't in there, was it?" If I get a random barrier, I think "C'mon Keelhaul, c'mon Keelhaul". The benefits outweigh the risk for me.
Could you not put the "This change also effects" on a single base set card for each of the FAQs, and only have it 3 times total? I follow them all, but I would think that as long as a certain product is in print, any entries applicable to it should added.
Sorry, I know this probably isn't the thread to ask, but it was already brought up, and if I need to post a follow-up I'll do it as a separate thread.
I think you could just add "At the end of your turn," to the start of her power and it'd be fine. That would make it clear that it only applies to your EOT reset that every turn has, not ones caused by failing to defeat monsters and such. It doesn't change the way it works, and makes it clear how it is done.
Orbis Orboros wrote:
I just finished my RotR run with only Lini last night, as a combat spellcaster from day one, the only exception being always keeping a Cure around, and later on a Find Traps. I stomped the first four adventures, and only slightly struggled in 5 and 6. Very effective even solo with one set. I will point out, I trashed things like Resto and Toad every time I got them.
Maybe it's less that the casters can't be built effectively, and more that your playstyle doesn't allow it?
Tanis O'Connor wrote:
Man, that guy ruins everything.
Well, he says he also added some banes. Although, I'd be interested to see the ratio between the two, and how many of those banes were things like chests and other beneficial barriers.
Vic, one thing I have noticed is that most people who thought the game was too easy are either intentionally or unintentionally doing something to give them an advantage over how the game should be played as it was balanced by you guys. Of course, if it's fun for them great.
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
It was all part of my diabolical plan. I secretly agree with you but wanted Mike to clarify for others.
Wait... are you not supposed to tell people about your secret diabolical plans?
Orbis Orboros wrote:
My head hates you for making me read that
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
I'm not a mind reader
Well, crap. If I'd known that I would have approached this differently. You need to catch with the times, we're all mind readers on the internet now!
Haha agreed. I wish I could go to work thinking "Alright, today we need to figure how this cool card works in this really cool game... and get paid for it"
19702: The primary issue isn't that it can't be recharged. It's that not casters don't have to banish it. If it can't be recharged, fine. In all his disagreements, Josh has yet to actually explain how it makes sense that a non caster can make a spell more powerful in exchange for getting to keep the spell. It makes no sense that you have the two following options
Weak spell, and banish it
No one has been able to explain why that is right.
Josh, you're assuming that your interpretation must be correct and it can't be any other way. I'm not rewriting it based on how I think it should work. I'm saying that I think they timed it as end of turn, thinking that would apply to both, and didn't think about possible heals and things like that.
Saying I think they overlooked something isn't trying to change how the card works, it's saying that I don't think the current wording reflects the way it's SUPPOSED to work, the way they intended for it to work. There's 3 FAQs on these forums full of rewordings that clarify how they wanted a card to work, because the initial wording caused problems, even if the FAQ entry doesn't actually change how the cards is supposed to work, but tells you they wrote the wrong words to tell you how it is supposed to work.
You seem to be under the assumption that they could never possibly choose poor wording to get their point across and that everything must be intended exactly as written no matter what problems might come along. Check the FAQs, it happens a lot.
Josh, I'm not talking about how I think it should work. I'm talking about how I think it does work, and the fact that I believe it is simply a poor wording that overlooked the scenarios like healing or pulling a spell from your discard pile.
As for the mechanical problems you claim, it's easy. Bury it for the extra d6, and allow a recharge on the bury. The only difference would be that you don't have to worry about it going into your deck/hand. However, I think the more logical answer (if I am correct that it shouldn't be ignoring the banish/recharge) would just be to reword the recharge so it is when you discard it, not the end of the turn.
An errata is a should question, a general clarification FAQ (which is all I think is needed) is not.
At the end of the day, you don't need his permission for anything. Showing he is incorrect is a good idea, so he doesn't tell other people they can't play without him. However, if he refuses to believe you, there's nothing more you can do.
In the end, just go to the store, explain the situation so he can't tell them you aren't able to play without him, and do it. Set up events, go to the store and play, and report when you're done. There is no involvement needed from him, and hopefully you can explain to him how it works, but if you can't then there's nothing you can do and you just play anyways.
Because it makes that power just like 99% of the other spells in the game (Summon Monster the only exception I know). You play the spell, and when it goes away you banish it unless you have Arcane/Divine.
I'm confused that you aren't finding that a viable interpretation, let alone the only viable interpretation.
A better question than why would it work like every single other spell in the game, is why wouldn't it? Why would this be some special exception, especially one that makes as little sense as "Oh, you aren't a magic user? Well here, this spell lets you use it for even more power in exchange for taking away its only real downside".
All I've noticed so far is a missing Bracers of Protection, and I only noticed because I was setting up for the S&S Demo which requires them for Lem. Luckily, my set is a replacement for the one I bought that had really bad cutting issues -- the Bracers of Protection in that box were unharmed, and they are now sitting in my usable set!
In the above example, she isn't playing the spell. She is playing the Staff, an item, that just happens to require her to discard the spell. It's the same reason she doesn't recharge spells that she discards for her power to let her roll Arcane + 1d6. You are only playing a card if you are using a power written on that card.
You aren't likely to find a place to get more of a card, because this isn't a collectible card game. You aren't intended to play with what comes in the box, plus any promo cards. You can of course, but they aren't built to be played that way in a balanced manner in the case of every card. Believe me, by the time you get through adventure 2, you aren't going to want the inflicts, or probably even the crow.
With how wording in PACG works, "the check" 100% means only the one referred to earlier in the power (the one when you actually put down the cards and said "I display these"). Considering that he can display them for +2, adding +8 (assuming no hand size increases) to every single check in a six person game by playing them on the first check of the player's turn following yours, and getting the cards back at the beginning of your turn, is so indescribably broken that there is no way in hell they ever would have let it be in the game.
Part of what's nice about OP is that it's the same for everyone. Everyone buys one $20, and no one has a distinct advantage over anyone else. I'm all for including more, or better, cards in each box, but I think giving people the option to buy more decks and have an advantage over other players is a terrible and unfair idea.