Merisiel… in… SPACE!

Dave Riley's page

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber. 821 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 821 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

"You" applies universally, but other parts of the phrase do not. "At the start of your turn" only affects the player taking their turn because the other players aren't taking their turn. The one about rerolling falls under "no one can take your turn for you," I think (don't have the rulebook in front of me for the exact wording). Basically, if the "you" that's discarding a card to reroll a die hasn't rolled any dice (because it's not *their* "your check"), then it's an impossible condition and can't be done.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Yikes! There's egg on my ADHD-havin' face. While I'm embarrassed to have aired such an obvious error, I'm glad I did because there's no way I would've noticed it otherwise, so thanks for the corrections! I did think it was *really* weird that I couldn't find anything talking about this since it troubled us so much.

I don't suppose there might be any errata for how both runs we've tried at this scenario have included two copies of Maze and a Magic Ray Fusillade that neither Ramexes nor Brielle is equipped to deal with...?

...no? :<


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Checking in 2+ years late on this, so I'm sorry for being behind the curve, but after taking the L on this one, we were wondering HOW you're supposed to win it if locations can't be temporarily closed and the Abyssal Rift can't be permanently closed. Was there a ruling that villains can't escape to their own location or something? Either way, functionally is the only way to finish this one by closing everything BUT the Abyssal Rift and dragging the villain over there?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Playable Shalelu would have me got in a heartbeat.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

So happy that our extreme inertia on Seasons has finally paid off. ;_; Now we can play through most of SotR with proxies!


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I liked Rogue Eidolon, but I *loved* Owlbeartross. As much for the grueling difficulty of its pun as its checks. In 2 player games, anyway, time constraints are usually nonexistent and resource management isn't that tough, so we tend to be pretty up for turning over cards with a high quotient of "how the hell are we supposed to deal with this???"

My favorite promo bane is still always gonna be The Squealy Nord, tho. ;_;


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

How many Poogs can I reasonably, if not legally, insert into the game box? And will I become destitute before I reach that limit?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

If a monster had a power that said "if you played a spell on this check, discard a card," you'd discard a card after using that staff, right? I believe "this counts as" is an all intents and purposes thing.

Though these staves may not be very good, the simpler explanation is that class decks have gotten a lot more refined since the 4 character days, but still tend to have a couple "why is THIS here? :<" cards


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Curious if people go the effort of making their own versions of the OP cards on DriveThru (or if it's even permitted to do so)? I think I've said this here in the past, so sorry if I'm repeating myself, but having the real cards for the S&S OP greatly improved our experience (especially in the final scenario with all the boat locations), and playing the WotR OP has been a lot slower for us, in part, because of having to proxy all the cards being less fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Don't even need to go that far. You're displaying it for his power, not for a power on the card, so the card itself isn't "played."


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Eliandra Giltessan wrote:
I can't speak to why he's not simply an ally with the Owner mechanic. Perhaps just to call attention to him.

I would think so you couldn't encounter/acquire him as a non-Estra player. Though that doesn't stop you from grabbing him in AP3 and beyond.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Iammars wrote:
Panic deck? Aaaaaaah!

I initially thought this would be No Big Thing until Simoun kept running into henchman that could only be defeated by Charisma/Diplomacy. :<

Don't think we went over 7 cards in the panic deck, but random distribution of Cha/Diplomacy-requiring henchman in the decks Simoun could reasonably close and Combat henchmen in the decks she couldn't, really, lead to a lot of "well, I set this deck up for you, Estra, I-l'll just start scouting the next location..."


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Count me among those who were sad there would be no Ron Lundeen campaign for WotR. So this post immediately perked my ears up!

I'm among those who thought Mythic Paths made WotR pretty stale. I felt like the amount of static +s you have trivialized almost all banes, except for the ones you really, really needed them for, so I'm interested how you shake things up. I definitely like the idea of having more cohort pals, and it seems like the structure of having them function as a powerful "nope, don't want to deal with THAT" button would get around some of the issues you might raise with needing mythic paths for high-level banes.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I recommend giving Seelah another look sometime. :D The d6 definitely seems underwhelming at first, but by the middle of an AP she can add 1d6+3 to any check, giving her an extremely high chance of succeeding at many BYA or checks to close a location without need for blessings or other external help--essentially Seelah's worst stats are at least 1d4+1d6+3. I was initially hesitant, but having played her through Season of the Shackles, I'd take that gamble even before you factor in that you can load her deck with spells/blessings, which get recharged.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
cartmanbeck wrote:
@Dave: Fair point. I had meant for them to add to every check, but you make a fair point about leveraging the addition of an elemental type to every check you make. I actually just added the recharge ability to the Wysps yesterday that essentially limits you to displaying a single Wysp at once... before that, you could theoretically display any number of them, and I realized how quickly that could escalate. I'll think more on the idea of restricting their bonuses to Combat checks with some specific exceptions for some of the Wysps, perhaps.

Like I said, I really like the idea of the character, and I LOVE the Wysps, I just get a vibe that this might be something past the level of "Lini's animal reveal trivializes everything" in certain sets. Like, I played Adowyn in Wrath and I went straight for not just the Lini power, but Steal Soul never left my deck, so we were talking about 2d4+2 to everything I did. With the option for that, there's no way I'd got for anything but Wysp master as a role. We're talking 1d4+1d6+3 to all checks by AP3, and once that Master Wysp comes into play, oh baby!

For my part, I didn't find the "treat as if in your hand" confusing, but I can see why it doesn't feel like it adds a whole ton for the extra mental bandwidth. Of course, if you get the large reveal for damage reduction power, that should all but make you immune, outside of massive check failure, to the next idea:

I like the limit on burying displayed Wysps if you take damage. It feels like the Barbarian War Paint to me, which I think is a good choice. My wife's been playing Brielle in SotR and we were surprised how often "no cards in your hand" actually ends up coming up. It's good to have balance like that on cards that do a lot outside of your hand and are basically permanent.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

So while I like the idea of this, especially with all the unique/displayable allies, I wonder if the intent is for Wysps to add to "checks" vs "combat checks"? There are probably many ways to break this, but it's immediate in Mummy's Mask, where you can get an Eye of Horus and heavy electricity on every check.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

All this is true, but, after a quick scan of the MM box, I wanted to add: I don't think there ARE boons with the Obstacle trait (at least not currently). Are you maybe thinking Object?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Compass is a basic card with non-banish move power that lets you discard for an explore, so it doesn't seem completely OP for twitch tonic to be discard for an examine/explore (even if it is quite strong, and somewhat out of character for alchemical items)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Rysky wrote:

ALASE!

TONBARSE!

They look awesome! Has anyone told Dave?

I hope it's not to presumptuous to assume I'm the Dave in question, considering two weeks ago, when mine arrived, I immediately jumped on writing this blog post(/declaration of love)

AAAAH :o I can't believe it's time for new woof friend who is a shadow woof with insane helper/support utility & also runner-up egotist summoner with shadow friend who is just herself (the best friend one can ask for) :o

Like Eliandra, this deck put the super-tough choice of which character to play at me in a way few of the others have. The super-NOT-tough choice is that this is definitely my next deck for OP, not just because the characters are awesome, but because their boons seem like some of the most perfectly tailored (w/ that crazy spell utility, too) of any of the class decks. All those displayed spells, all those weird allies. I'm in (shadow woof) heaven. <3

(only with MM and our halfway-through SotRighteous campaign, I won't be seeing these cards in use any time soon D:)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I'm sure Triggers will ramp up as the set goes on, but a penalty of 2 combat damage or a +3 difficulty to a combat check is usually worth the free encounter, to say nothing of The First Law-type cards that are the same whether you explore or examine them. We've found the benefits of examining outweigh the costs, most of the time.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

We banished Locate Object in a closed location deck and I shed tears of jealousy. Imagine a situation where you cast it and skim past 2 or 3 barriers or monsters that force you encounter them, essentially getting 3+ encounters for one recharged card! <3


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Staff of Minor Healing was one of those items I thought was NEVER coming back, so I was pretty surprised to see in when rifling through the Summoner deck, then I was REALLY surprised to turn it over and encounter it during a MM game. Consider me happy!

Though it's a lot harder to fit it in Simoun's 4 item deck than it is in Merisiel's (eventually) 9 item deck (which had two :D)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

In many cases you won't have the option. A bunch of blessings, including the Basic one, force an examine before you explore.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Seeing that made me double check! But no, still the "Axe" trait, my memory did not deceive me.

No big, though. As I've been playing Simoun, she doesn't want for good combat checks, and for her this would really just be 2d6+d12+X, which is right in line with what she gets from 'discarding' a regular Chakram (d12+d8+d4+X), which also has a decent BYA power, and an upgraded version with a +1 and a d6 instead of a d4 on discard. Quirky weapon, but no actual loss.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

It does not have the knife trait. :(

Source: One Disappointed Simoun Player


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I'd like some clarity (or just additional thoughts) on the Trigger trait--the rulebook entry is scant. For example, say you play Augury and one of the cards you examine is a Trigger that makes you encounter it. Per "finish one thing before you start another," you'd finish what you were doing with your Augury, then encounter the card. Of course, there seems to be more than a few examples of things where you do NOT finish one thing before starting another.

That's not really what I'm asking about, though. My primary question is how Trigger, and encounters forced by Trigger, interact with cards that grant a combination examine/explore. We know that you can't "bank" additional explores. We also know that "encounter" and "explore" are two separate concepts (a Fortune Teller's free encounter at the beginning of the turn does not waste your free First Exploration) Two examples from our game today, creating questions of whether the explore granted by, say, Blessing of the Ancients, "evaporates" if a Trigger card is examined.

Examining a Curse that says "when you examine this card, display it next to the Blessings deck." So the examined card is out of the way, and not encountered. Are you then permitted to explore? We thought this was a pretty bulletproof Yes.

Examining a Hyena, which instructs you to encounter it when you examine it. Hyena is dealt with. You've had an encounter. Do you then take your granted explore? Given that explores are not encounters, we thought this was a pretty safe bet. But our answer was more like a "........yesssss?"

Mostly just asking for additional opinions, to make sure we're not making the game too easy on ourselves. I could see these "free" explores being kind of a balancing agent for Triggers (usually cards that force you to encounter them are banes--some of them fairly punishing). There's really no reason why it shouldn't work, but I could also see this being a quirk of the rules I'm ignoring/not getting.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Gawain Themitya wrote:
I'm guessing that the wording of this card recalls the other "summon and defeat a random monster". It means that you choose a type of boon between weapon, armor or item, draw one at random, then try to acquire. If you succeed, the location is closed/temp closed, if you fail it is not. Both situations, the boon is returned to the box 'cause it was summoned.

In this case, it's on the "When Permanently Closed" box, not the "To Close This Location" box, hence the confusion (it's just a dexterity check to close). If it were to close, it'd all follow to me.

Longshot11 wrote:
Only a dev can answer that one, but I don't see why it wouldn't be. Yes, there are some locations that give you a free card ("draw whatever"); this one makes you work for it - you need to succeed at the check(s) to acquire if you want the card.(on the bright side, this spares you cluttering your discard pile with random junk; also, post AD3, you can at least RFG some Basics)

So I get the idea of making you work for it via "summon and acquire," but I'd also more naturally expect that to be "summon and encounter," since the location is already closed, and the chips can fall where they may--unless there's something implicit in the word "acquire" that means "you keep this even though it's a summoned card" (which is how we've been playing it unconsciously since the beginning--so I'm sure it's simple as that). I just naturally read "summon and acquire" as a pass/fail conditional connected to another action, equal to "summon and defeat," and wanted to vent my thought process a bit.

Curse of the Ravenous, boiled down, is "roll a d4 at the end of your turn, bury all (blessings/weapons&armor/allies/items) in your discard pile." Considerably meaner than the other Curses so far--fortunately, the way our decks are set up right now, between easily rechargable blessings/allies, an ally that recharges a card every time you beat a monster, discard piles stay nearly empty. :D

The options for curse removal don't have a ton of versatility so far (Game of the Afterlife is decent), and we tend to run six locations with two characters, so we keep our decks as broadly optimized as possible and that doesn't leave a lot of room for cards you can't use on almost any given turn. It hasn't been a problem so far--Curse of Poisoning is annoying, but pretty rare (only had it once or twice), and Curse of Vulnerability has practically never been a factor (gotten it plenty of times, maybe had it actually pop, like, twice in 7-8 scenarios). Curse of the Ravenous might have us recalibrate. But we'll see~


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Got a couple questions that are more idle musings than actual concerns:

Warehouse's "When Permanently Closed" says "Summon and acquire a weapon, armor, or item." Is this the correct wording? Most places will say something like "draw a random armor from the box." I know, for whatever reason, the Warehouse might want you to activate whatever powers you have that relate specifically to acquiring a card. I also know that different wording for the same concept sometimes sneaks its way onto finished cards and muddies the works, so I figured I'd check.

First Law/Second Law/Third Law (I presume, haven't see it), list their convoluted pass/fail conditions like so: "While displayed, when a character suceeds at a check to defeat a barrier, roll 1d6; if the difficulty of the check was exceeded by that amount or more, each character at that character's location banishes a card or summons and encounters the henchman Voices of the Spire, then banish this card." This is really just a double-check to confirm we're not making the game harder on ourselves, but since "then banish this card" is part of a phrase that starts with "if" and is separated off by a semi-colon, I'm assuming you only banish the card if the bad event happens?

Which is fine and makes sense to me, just making sure, since that means The First Law is a near-certain chance of someone getting Curse of the Ravenous at some point, and Curse of the Ravenous super-duper sucks. :D


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

And here I was hoping for a special deciphering magnifying glass--like the red film thing they used to include with video game hint books. D:


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

As you've quoted, temp closes only prevent the villain from escaping there, they're considered open for all other purposes. So as written, you could use temp closes to corral the villain where you want her (and reduce the strain on the blessings deck), but you gotta permanently close them to beat Vellexia for good.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I got relatively little skin in this game, but doesn't the die your rolling automatically add its trait to the check? If you're rolling a combat check with your Melee skill, but no weapon, it's still a Melee combat check. I guess maybe there's some weird double-think thing where it's still an Arcane combat check, since you're rolling your Arcane skill, but since the power doesn't specify Arcane as a trait, like a physical spell would, the "card" you're playing doesn't have the Arcane trait, and therefore wouldn't trigger Thalassion Dungeon's power.

I'd probably play that it would, tho~


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

The new Basic blessings showed a lot of versatility in the first scenario with us last night. I played Simoun and my wife played Estra, which meant I could recharge a blessing for most of her combat checks, which was doubly useful when I was camped at the Ruined Temple, which buries any cards with the Divine trait you play. Blessing of the Ancients recharging when the top blessing discard is a Basic was hugely helpful.

People are probably going to want to zero-in on the dwarf clansman allies that recharge for an explore when the blessings discard is Basic too (there are a few of them, and they're Basic). Having a ton of ways to recharge meant we were able to play the scenario pretty aggressively, where usually we come into the initial Basic scenario ready to burn through our decks like we usually do and come to a worrying realization that we've almost killed ourselves 2/3rds of the way through the scenario.

(Simoun did end the scenario with 0 cards left in her deck, but that was on purpose!)

So with these Basic blessings being so strong when Combat checks and healing ability are lacking, we're in this weird position where we got 3 non-basic Blessings in the first scenario and aren't sure if we actually want any of them right now. We'll probably want them by AD1, of course, but easy-access recharge for your Blessings is something to consider.

...especially when one of the blessings is Nethys. Normally I'd be all like "gimme that!" But Triggers already have me reconsidering default scouting choices (nice touch that Blessing of Ancients is balanced by its compulsory Examine, tho)

Simoun's power to add her perception to barriers with the Obstacle trait came in handy on every barrier I encountered. With most/all of them letting you roll Perception, that meant she was rolling 2d8+4 to roll a six, in some cases. :3 :3 :3 I'm pretty sold on that aspect of her, but I was let down by her other powers, and the fact that she's packing 5 weapons by default (and maxes out at 4 items). I guess it depends if we start getting some better knives with more versatile powers ("d4 to X non-combat check", etc). As it stands now, it seems like she's meant to have one "good" weapon to keep around and recharge the rest--unfortunately, the best Basic ranged weapon is a Blowgun, which only adds a d6 and has the Poison trait. :/ Since we don't peek ahead at cards, I'm hoping there'll be some Ranged stuff in there as interesting as some of the Melee weapons we've already turned over (and promptly ignored). At least having 5 weapons leaves space for Torches--certainly don't mind having a weapon that gives you an explore. Her starting knives recharge to add 1 for each die you roll, which is a nice bit of certainty when you've got limited resources to your Combat checks in the beginning, but I'm sure the need for that will last as long as it ever does (until the first Skill feat)

Estra's ghost is definitely powerful, but requires a touch of micromanagement. Having a d4+d10 before blessings was nice for closing rolls we couldn't really accomplish (6 Strength or Con), but it also means you don't get to use him for other stuff that turn (or for the combat itself, if you're flat-footed without a spell).

As we were playing, my wife's glass of water was sweating on her coaster and we didn't notice as it crept closer and closer to her cards. Fortunately, the only casualty was her Viper Strike spell which I think most people would agree is just about the best card you could lose to table malpractice, especially in a set that seems to involve so many Undead monsters. :<


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
cartmanbeck wrote:
See, I don't agree there.. "When you attempt a check" is applying to "you may display..." then there's a semicolon and the "for each card displayed" is a separate phrase. It would be more clear if it said "While each card is displayed", but I'm pretty sure as written it applies to all his checks.

My difference of opinion is the semicolon means what comes after is part of the initial activation of the power. If it were meant to be separate, they would probably have made it a separate sentence. Like how a "<blank>bane" weapon doesn't require you to discard it to get its extra d8 against whatever.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Longshot11 wrote:
You're correct. In fact, I don't know anything about the Sandstorm, I just *assumed* it will be "encounter, then advance the blessings deck" deal. Of course, with MM, it seems assumptions are the wrong way to go altogether.

This is what I was assuming too. Assumptions can be wrong! But I'm sure people who play in 6 person parties are pretty skittish, after Wrath.

For me, who only plays in 2s, I'm more excited about the changes to scouting than I am against them. Scouting is bar none my favorite thing to do in the game, and the scariness of the proto-Trigger banes in Wrath, like that one demon who makes you bury whatever boon you scouted it with, went away when we realized Leryn wasn't technically a boon. With the difficulty margins still trending towards "extremely easy" in two player games, I'm pumped for the spice of Triggers, especially since the involve the mechanic that most trivializes the difficulty.

I'm also super pumped that Disable barriers appear to be coming back into style AND that there's a Rogue-type character who can add her not-too-shabby Perception skill to her already substantial Disable skill right from the jump. I haven't seen the rest of the characters yet, but something's telling me I won't need to! :D

And then there's traders~ Plunder in S&S felt like a good patch to the RNG whims of getting the proper boons in RotR (still have played exactly one RotR where I'm so much as SEEN a Sihedron Ring--still have yet to see, let alone acquire, an Icy Frost Spear of Whatever The Name Is Because I've Never Actually Encountered It) After more than a year with Wrath, I'd started subconsciously missing plunder without realizing it. From this hint of what traders are, they look like a good method of giving you better odds of getting the stuff you need, if not what you want.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I had a momentary flash of confusion with my first scan of Dry Quicksand, but I think I lot of that comes from us (and many people, I'd think) abstracting out their character token to a standee. But if the "token" is treated as a mechanical card, in this sense, as your character card or deck or anything in your hand is, then it makes sense implicitly: you can't move your character token to another location if you don't have your character token to move.

Of course, we've all seen what people will and will not understand "implicitly" about Pathfinder rules. So I expect a lot of rules confusion, because while the intent of the card is to stop you from moving around until you get your token back, it doesn't say anything about moving at all on the card. I feel like a lot of people are gonna come around with cards like this and be like "So... Dry Quicksand does nothing? Or...???"


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Though I only play in two character games, I'm with Longshot. Taking it a step further even, this is the first class deck in a while that didn't have at least one character that had me champing at the bit to see them in action.

The favored weapon mechanic is cool, and I'm down with putting more rules like that on the back of the card. Starting the game with a Greatsword is a nice perk, but, from my memory, Warhammer and Scimitar are both Not Super Great (warhammer is d8+d6 on a discard? same as a longsword--though bludgeoning is (rarely) better; scimitar is d6+d6 on a discard (or maybe d6+1?) so default worse than a longsword on most characters). Either way, since it's only allowing B weapons, chances are it'll be completely irrelevant by the end of the B/1 scenarios. If these were powers that allowed one weapon with a certain trait--"hammer", "finesse", whatevs--that'd be a different story. But as it stands, it's got nothin' on a Wolf (or evil doll) cohort that lasts the entire AP.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

This thread made me think to change my shipping preference, since I had it set to "cheapest possible" for the class decks. When I looked at my subscriptions, however, the estimated shipping is nearly $30 no matter what option I pick (and many options are cheaper than the "cheapest option"). Is this normal? Or maybe just an estimation error on the part of the automated software? Because I've sent a PACG base set via USPS and shipping wasn't anywhere close to $30...


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Not trying to harsh your buzz (and I bet I'd allow it too, in a solo game!) but I don't think playing Sphere of Fire before encountering a monster allows you to circumvent the restriction. I think this would fall under the FAQ from a while back that says using a displayed spell for a combat check counts as playing a spell. :(

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1gu#v5748eaic9sjs

(I'd totally do it, though)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

As written, that's definitely correct (Black Magga says hi), but I feel like it might've lost something in the need for brevity, given how wordy Zibini's powers are, and how cumbersome it must've been to sneak "open" into something that also refers to character decks. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything that lets you put stuff in a closed location with any regularity, but that ain't a bad power if it does (even if it requires damage)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Rebel Song wrote:
I actually agree with your suggested wording, basing it on a recharge ability.

There's probably wording that could clean up this issue, but I take issues with skizzerz's draft because it'd deny Damiel's use of certain spells it shouldn't, like my personal favorite: Shapeshift D:


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Ragadolf wrote:

Hah!

Like the cards Cartmanbeck! :)
Very fun.

Pygmy Orca is an A++ job. :D


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

That's a wrinkle I hadn't thought about, going into Season of the Righteous. Playing Merisiel initially, and having a general preference for rogue-y characters, the complete void of Dexterity loot weapons (leading to me using the Returning Throwing Axe +1 and Deathbane Light Crossbow for the entire AP) was one of my biggest issues with the original set. :( Maybe it'll be nostalgic, to relive those fond memories all over again!


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Transmog Ezren has a similar power as A+++ Cool Kid Radillo, that being the ability to swap out acquired boons for other boons of the same type. This is the best power! Especially if you're playing by OP rules, effectively doubling your chances to get higher AD cards is a pretty big benefit--at least from where I'm standin'. It can be a huge bummer, coming out of an OP scenario with exactly 0 card upgrades. Characters like Ezren and Radillo can help with that... though, my experience is only in 2 character games. I'm guessing it's less of an issue in 6 ones.

Still, Hedge Maze Ezren's consolidating +Combat and +Recharge into three power feats for both instead of like... 6? Is a boon all by itself. During RotR, to me Ezren felt like the most boring character on paper--with most of his power feats devoted to increasing his raw dice rolls--which was okay, because spells were far and away the most interesting type of card, and he had the most of them by a large margin. But RotR Ezren and CD Ezren are drawing from the same pool of spells regardless, so why not pick one that's got more interesting powers than "+4 to your check to acquire a spell"??? :D


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

From the post, it was a hypothetical. The henchman in the scenario made you draw up to your full hand size. So Bottle > hand wipe > Henchman > draw up > hand wipe > RIP :( :( :(


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Missed the edit window! I meant I couldn't think of any instances where a dead character COULD banish cards from a location deck.

Longshot11 wrote:
1) Maybe I'm missing some future context from MM (or Tup's powers) but while would you display the sheep in the first place? Seems to me the same purpose would be achieved by "Shuffle this card into your deck to move..." ?

I think it's so Deliverance ends up in the location deck you move to, not the one you're coming from. I'm not sure if there's a substantive difference having it being "display," versus "reveal," but maybe it's to circumvent locations (or effects) that would have you discard/bury/recharge a card when you move to them.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Theryon's description got me actively hype for Mummy's Mask now, versus the sort of latent "oh, it'll be cool when that comes out" I've been experiencing as we plod through Season of the Righteous. Our pace of Pathfinder consumption slowed considerably with Wrath, and I think it had a lot to do with mechanical fatigue--we understand everything inside and out, and know how to bust these games too well. So I'm totally into the idea that MM is torquing the mechanics in new ways. All the talk of tomb raiding and curses makes me think there'll be a bigger focus on "weird" barriers, which is something I really dug about Skull & Shackles.

Also like Skull & Shackles, it seems like the stakes will be a little lower? The ridiculous power levels of Wrath were fun for a while, but the excitement of having a +9 to your Melee check in AD2 wore off pretty quick, so I'm totally down if MM ratchets that back a bit and gives you different ways to circumvent obstacles and feel powerful without relying too hard on pure numerical superiority.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

The way I read the text you've posted, you only put Deliverance in your hand if you banish it from a location deck. Since I can't think of any edge cases where a dead character couldn't banish cards from a location deck, Deliverance couldn't end up in Tup's hand once he's dead.

However, that power being on the cohort itself makes Deliverance pretty safe from being removed from the game, right? If *anyone* banishes Deliverance, it goes into their hand, and thus isn't banished. If the game ends, you return cards from the location deck back to the box, which also isn't banishing, so Deliverance is available for Tup to take right back.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
cartmanbeck wrote:
I get much satisfaction from destroying combat checks. Gaining boons is great, but only if they're actually upgrades. :-P

That's what makes Radillo so great, and all these other characters just pretenders to the throne. They might be good at GETTING boons, but Radillo is good at getting MORE boons, she actually has a use for the crappy ones she picks up that doesn't clog her hand/deck/discard pile, and she can evade the ones she doesn't. Who cares about some d10 Knowledge blah blah blah? If you want a *specific* boon, play a blessing, anyone can do that. But only one character can effectively *double* the boons you encounter, and every time she swaps out an encountered boon for a new one, she gets a +1 at acquiring boons for the rest of the scenario. Never has there been a more perfect machine! b('.')b Playing Radillo through Rise of the Runelords is the only time I've seen a substantial amount of any base set's AP6 cards, and now I'm hungry to play her again and just keep stoking that boon engine.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I will not let this slight of omission stand. With her ability not just to ~acquire~ the boons, but bury a card to redraw a new boon of the same type (or a spell! (or an ally!)), Radillo is clearly the best boon puppy. Rerolling a crappy Short Sword into bigger and better things, or a Wooden Shield into an ally for a free explode. Even if you don't get a good boon draw, you acquire it anyway so you can bury it for the next check (and bee-tee-dubs, each buried card is a +1 to your checks to acquire) AND you draw a card every time you acquire something. Radillo isn't just good at GETTING the boons, she uses them with panache (~just like everything else she does~).

<3 <3 <3 Radillo in all things <3 <3 <3


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Wraithguard wrote:

That is possibly the best advice to give a Witch. Safest method I can think of is to have the Witch go first and make sure they are not at a location that requires a "At the start of your turn" shenanigan.

Avoiding using the power that puts it on the top of your deck and then back into your hand when you reset it (thus vulnerable) is probably advisable as well.

Maybe I'm reading too deep into your post, but it seems like you're thinking it needs to be YOUR turn to Display the cohort. Like Padrig, nothing on the card says you have to play it on your turn; the instant the blessing deck turns over for the first time, Mr. Compo is displayed. Thus (outside of shenanigans, like you mention) the cohort should really never be vulnerable during normal play.

1 to 50 of 821 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>