Sajan

Doppelschwert's page

Organized Play Member. 663 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 663 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Thanks for the kind words!

I'd definitely like to encourage you to come up with your own AP and publish it!

There is no need to start with making custom cards if you feel like it's a huge time investment, especially since there is no official template for the new cards yet.

The even more modular way the new sets are made, it's actually much easier to make new custom content, since most story banes are generic and can be made into specific characters by setting them up in the story book.

The good people at Lone Shark did a terrific job at making the whole process of designing scenarios much easier, both for themselves as well as for all of us, and this removes a lot of reasons that custom cards were needed in the first place. Just use the scenario rules to modify the story banes for your needs and you should be good to go.

And don't feel pressured into releasing a whole AP all at once. You can start with a stand alone adventure and slowly expand the story until you're satisfied with its conclusion, regardless of the number of adventures it has at the end. The most important part is that you're enjoying yourself while working on the adventures.

I'd like to do another AP some day as well, but I'm currently way too busy to even play the game as much as I'd like to (then again, my core set hasn't even arrived at my local retailer, so it'll be a while until I get to enjoy it). In the meantime, I'm sure you can come up with something amazing, so I'm looking forward to it!


Frencois wrote:
eddiephlash wrote:

Of course, this is all rendered irrelevant when Seoni checks off her power feat: "On your check to recharge an Arcane spell... ([x] You may instead shuffle it into your deck.)"

On the contrary Mr. Watson. You can decide to shuffle first the spells you want to draw again soon and then recharge the others thus maximizing the chances to draw again a needed spell.

Clever.


Great blog as usual, and congratulations to Keith for the new title!


isaic16 wrote:

In re: the questions about the change to locations, I think people are missing what is the actual primary reason. I'm betting that the locations are one-sided so two locations can fit on one card. They seem to be determined to have as many unique cards as possible (and no, they can't just 'print more cards'. that is not how mass printing works. they have a specific number of cards in each box and have to stick with that). This is also likely why they printed proxies instead of having multiple copies of the story banes. So, while we can disagree whether it was an appropriate use of resources, I disagree that there was absolutely no reason to change the location rules. The reason was to pack more total locations and/or other cards while staying within their allotted print limit.

(If I'm wrong and the locations are not one-to-a-side, an just have a standard back, then my point is null-in-void and I agree there is absolutely no reason for the change)

I seriouly doubt they used one card to denote 2 locations, for the simple reason that this cuts down massively the number of possible combinations of locations for *every* single scenario that can be played with the set.

To my understanding, the goal of the base set is to cover basic situations and equipment so they don't have to be repeated in every other box, and putting additional restrictions on the locations that can be used together is the exact opposite of that. They would be shooting themselves in the foot if they did that.

My guess would be that they are leaving the back empty on purpose, ensuring an optional design space that was already explored with some locations in WotR, which changed properties when being flipped. It would also allow you to randomly draw locations, in case you would want to do that.


I don't see what is not true in my paragaraph when you break it down to what actually happens:

You're saying that
- there is a street day, before which stores other than paizo won't sell the products
- I can order products from paizo before this date, and paizo will ship them before then

By my definition, that is exclusive availability from paizo between the day that shipping starts and the street day, which, in my experience, is roughly 2-3 weeks.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but having a subscription also means you get your stuff shipped at the earliest point in time (my understanding is that individual orders are sent out afterwards), so compared to stores that is early access. Any store has to ship the stuff to me as well after they get it from paizo, so it's bound to take longer.

I haven't said anything along the lines that paizo enforces or endorses this kind of exclusivity and neither meant to imply that, but that's just how the process breaks down in the end. If you think I phrased that poorly, that's fine, but with regards to content, I don't see how what you wrote is different from what I wrote.


Master_Grabnar wrote:

Where can I go to find updates about PACG and the subscription? It's definitely going to be something I need to watch.

I don't want to needlessly waste my money. I guess it's not really wasting my money since the shipping and subscription cancel one another out, but I am still not really getting anything by subscribing.

Paizo exclusively sells its products for a limited amount of time after they release. Retailers usually have to wait a couple weeks until they are able to sell new Paizo products, so by having a subscription you usually get early access, which is something you get for your money if shipping and subscription cancel each other out.

Being in europe + buying from a retailer usually means having to wait for 2 months (1 month for shipping and 1 for retailer access), so there is that.


I cancelled my subscription yesterday (europe here).

My local online retailer already lists both sets with free domestic shipping, tracking and roughly at the price of the subscription (without shipping), so it was clear what to do. Shipping from paizo would cost me +60$ with no tracking, which is not worth the promo cards for me (in the worst case that this is the only way to get them).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think there was a lot of confusion regarding the usage of the word side quest; the majority of people I know, myself included, understands the term the same way that yewstance does. That being said, there are side quests in the sense of 'optional objectives during a scenario that give additional rewards' in many scenarios of various official and inofficial APs.
Shameless advertisement: In my homebrew Emerald Legacy, side quests have an actual impact on the story.

Beagle wrote:
We effectively already have side-quests with the 'Season of...' missions. But these have never been formally made into products of a similar ilk of the other big box and pack releases.

What exactly do you expect to be turned into a product here?

In case you are not aware, you can buy the PDFs containing the scenarios here on paizo, and the corresponding officially printed cards (for the older seasons) can be ordered at drivethrucards.com.
By my definition, that is 100% product coverage.

That said, drivethru has insane shipping rates to everywhere outside the US, which turns the officially printed cards into an unaffordable luxury item that you should rather print yourself. I can easily get Core and CotCT for the price it would cost me to get those cards over here...


Hi,

please cancel my pathfinder adventure card game subscription; unfortunately, shipping the big boxes to europe makes them unaffordably expensive, so I need to buy them from a local vendor.

I'll start a new one if small boxes are announced.

Best regards,
Doppelschwert


My impression is that enough has changed that you can decide on your own whether you consider the next box as PACG or PACG 2.0.

There are big errata articles online for each product, so there is an easy algorithm during play even without errata'd cards:
Is something strange / badly worded? If yes, look up the errata, if not, you're fine.
If this is not enough for you, you can still easily make a printout of the most common ones.

I don't think making errata sets is profitable given the actual willingness to buy them compared to how many people are bound on making them (when they could be working on new products in the same time instead). You can also never know when you are done with making errata, so making a finalized errata'd card set is a flawed concept to begin with.

I also don't understand your perceived lack of game as compared to characters. Counting the organized play APs, we are currently at 2/3/2/3 = 10 official APs in total (counting RotR/SnS/WotR/MM).
If you add the 1/1/1/0 = 3 complete homebrew APs from Ron Lundeen and the 0/1/1/0 = 2 from myself, you end up at 15. The current number of characters is not even 1.5 times the number of characters you would need to play through all of those 15 APs with 6 different characters each.

Finally, I'm not sure why you are stressing that you will wait for reviews before you buy. No one is asking you to blindly buy the next set if you don't know whether you will like it or not. In fact, as an informed customer, you should always gather enough information before deciding on a purchase, regardless of what you are buying.


Calthaer wrote:
cartmanbeck wrote:
I don't think you can use objectively here when there are those of us, like me, that actually like the new designs. Just sayin'.
You might be in the minority there, Tyler. But...they have already gone to the printer, so there's not much point in commenting on it further. It will be what it will be, and the rest of the excellent improvements will surely make up for it.

That's what I think as well. There was already similiar feedback in the last preview thread, where the cards hadn't been sent to the printer yet, so it was a conscious decision to keep the new design as it is. I'm glad that they moved the set icon from the lower left to the lower right at least.

My solution will probably be not to mix old and new cards and treat them as two separate games. The visual discrepancy is just too much for me.

Still excited for the new mechanics though.


I'm using KMC perfect size for everything but RotR (Ultra Pro) as well. They are much cheaper than the standard ultra pro sleeves without being worse at their job, which makes a big difference after several base sets and class decks.


Master_Grabnar wrote:

I have a feeling you're the same guy from Reddit.

[...]
So please lay the f@&* off of me. You may be able to jump into a game right away, but I can't.

The guy from reddit would be me, so Brother Tylor has nothing to do with the issue there.

I don't mind you asking questions (neither here nor on reddit nor anywhere else) and I'm sympathetic for your situation, but there comes a point at which the number of these threads gets out of hand, and I think it's alright to point that out to you. It seems that I've been insensitive in the way I did so, and I apologize for that.

If you have problems remembering the questions you have already asked, how about starting a folder with bookmarks on them, so you can have a look there the next time? The paizo forum even allows you to turn threads into RSS feeds, so that might help you as well. You would have instant access to answers that way, and there would be fewer duplicates on the forum.


Thanks for the feedback Reinfild!

It took me some time, but here is another update for Revenge of the Wicked, now up to v1.30:

Changelog:

General changes (mostly inspired by Emerald Legacy and feedback):
- Scenario rules now list card names bolded. Regular boons/banes other than henchman now also have a note whether they come from a higher adventure deck or have been previously removed from the game, so you can find them more easily when setting up
- Basic Cards are removed starting at AD2
- Elite Cards are removed starting at AD4
- Removed Cult Acolyte from the HV card lists
- New AP reward that benefits Emerald Legacy

Changes for scenarios:
- Simplified scenarios that treated banes as being listed as cohorts
- Several minor adjustments due to another pass of proof reading (just scenario powers though)
- 0B: Size of blessings deck now scales with number of players
- 4D: Added reward for defeating villains. Simplified check to defeat for villains and henchman to 20 + #AD
- 4E: Removed Transmogrify from the reward (and thus from the AP, as it easily trivialized a lot of encounters, including the final villain). Made Book of the Damned necessary to unlock Undead Company
- 5D: Changed story text to make more sense and adjusted scenario accordingly
- 6A: Removed the option to close locations prematurely after defeating the villain
- 6D: Size of blessings deck now scales with number of players
- 6E: Reduced debuff for villain for each closed location from 5 to 4

None of the cards were changed!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can do that, sure. The power is played when another character would encounter it, but since you encounter it instead, the first encounter never happens and evasion does not apply.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's not an ultimate deck, but the class deck Pathfinder Tales has several pirate themed boons (and certainly the most of all the class decks), so it might be a good choice as a supplement as well.
It also includes a pirate character (the naga) that has good synergies with the set.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not to be cynical, but I'd like to have some official character sheets first before even more ambitious projects are started.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't like the new card design either, for a lot of the reasons already mentioned. I wouldn't call them grotesque, but there seems to be an awful lot of empty space, which isn't helped by the distracting pattern.

While I think that I get where most of the changes in arrangement are coming from, I think switching the sides of the checks to acquire and the traits compared to the current cards is a bad move. I guess that the benefit is in having a left aligned text, but you also have the text of the powers box wraping around the card icon in the lower left corner.

I really think that the simple change of mirroring the layout already feels much better, as the layout is closer to the original cards, and there is no text wrapping around the corner.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cards that list a character as their owner count as basic for that character when building his deck, so adding the mask is already covered by the rules, yes :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Following Yewstance, the most powerful card is obviously Miracle (as it should be), since it allows you to play any spell from the box, which in the case of WotR includes Time Stop, which lets you draw your complete deck and removes the limit of cards you may play in the encounter it was played in.

That being said, I agree that healing has the best ratio of usefulness and availability, especially in smaller parties.


Huh.

I verified the rule Parody pointed out before as well, but I'm with Yewstance on this. In particular, I'm not sure that the addendum of capping the hierarchy has been in the prior versions of the guide as well.

It would be nice if one of the designers could chime in and clarify the intent on this, but this is probably the wrong thread and forum to make the issue visible to them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Version 1.03 is online now!

Changelog:

- Added power feat for Order of the Raging Wave as reward to AD0
- Adapted rules of engaging Triceratops to punish low dex characters less in 4-C
- Adapted evading rules to punish low dex characters less in 4-D
- Updated artwork of Shen-Tei to use the picture from the blog

@Longshot:
I've been thinking a lot about the power feats for the order and adapted them according as seen above (it was actually like that in an earlier draft). I was hesitant to do so since I want the choices to feel meaningful (in particular, that implies you shouldn't get access to 9 feats for them so that one power stays weak throughout), but you've convinced me that one feat more is more in line. You can end up with 8 feats now for the final scenario, which is fine with me.

Regarding the power feats for characters, I'm mostly following the MM distribution, which grants the feats earlier than RotR in every AD except AD4. I actually prefer it that way, since the first power-feat post role feels more meaningful to me that way, while getting access to your powers earlier in general.


So, I'm very late to answer, and I'm sorry for that, but I needed to take a step back to deal with some private issues, so that couldn't be helped unfortunately.

Thanks a lot for your feedback Longshot - I will adress it once I've thought through everything properly, and then there will be an update to the PDF as well!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow, that's a lot of cool ideas you had - thanks for sharing! :)

How do your upgrades influence the setup time? I hope it doesn't suffer too much.


Hey Frencois,
thanks for sharing your work, this looks amazing! I'm glad we finally get to see what you have talked about when you alluded to your own homebrew scenarios :)

Can you explain a bit more about the differences/connections to Ron's AP? I'm a bit lost to what is actually changed, never having played it. Is it only the orange text, or what does the orange text mean?
I guess the story is changed as well, but it's text is still black.

I'll take a closer look once I have the time :)


What Yewstance says is true for the most part, but I think he vastly underestimated the spells.

Athnul can learn to properly use spells in both roles and besides Cure (which you automatically get back every time you banish it pre-role, since it's the lowest AD spell), the deck contains the excellent Steal Soul which grants you 1d4 to EVERY check until the end of the scenario. I took her through SotRu at home and it was a blast to play her. Sajan is stronger for combats but she is much more versatile; her static combat bonus still grows up to 9, which is pretty impressive. I never played Rooboo as I don't like Tengu; I'm still waiting for another Monk other than Sajan and Athnul.

Considering the lack of loot, that might as well be an advantage since you're not relying on deck upgrades to get better for the most part. I haven't checked out the Ultimate Decks for her because that wasn't a thing back then, but there are a lot of cool items in the Monk CD she can use that no one else can. For example, she can early on auto recharge the conch that allows you to examine your location and also use other items. She can also cycle her deck very easily.

She's the only PACG monk that properly feels like the old DnD monk to me in that she uses wisdom and no weapons. It's ironic that CD Sajan and Athnul are among my top 10 PACG characters, while Rooboo is easily at the other end of the spectrum.

Unfortunately, the Monk CD has almost no unlocks since it doesn't have any armor. The only character that could actually apply would be Ostog from the Barbarian deck; I can only encourage to play him with the deck in a home game, as that turns out to be a lot of crazy fun with a lot of roleplaying opportunities as well.


Thanks for bringing this up!
I haven't opened my last few decks yet due to time constraints, but it looks like I should take a look this evening to make sure everything's there. I'll give an update once I've done so.

I also encountered a subset of cards being stuck at the other end of the deck as well.


I'm a bit shocked at the negative attitude in this thread, especially towards Obsidian, and a lot of the information in this thread about the working behind the scenes seems like it's more based on conjecture than facts.

I don't think that Obsidian had the authority to decide on the micro-transactions without Paizo having a word in this, and I think it's unfair to blame everything on Obsidian without having insider information on how things actually transpired. You also have to consider that the team that worked on the digital game was far smaller than the team working on the actual card game.

Whether the current state of the game is Obsidian's fault for not working efficiently enough or Paizo's fault for not giving them more resources (or due to another reason) is certainly something no one is able to say for sure without further insights (do you expect Obsidian to work for free after the development resources have been used up? If paizo orders another DLC and they use their resources up for that, there won't be any bugfixes either).

Overpriced character alts DLC aside, you can get the whole RotR digital game for 25$, compared to the 180$ I paid when the game released physically (also, it's sold out now). With discounts, you are still looking at 5$ compared to 50$. I think the bugs are acceptable for what you save over the physical version. The DLC with new content isn't actual that expensive either if you compare it to promo characters and OP scenarios for the physical game.


Thanks again for your feedback!
I've uploaded version 1.02 which fixes most of the issues you've mentioned.

While I'm not a native speaker, I'm a bit ashamed about all those grammar/spelling mistakes, so let me shortly give some excuses so I can feel better about myself:
While I was writing the texts, I somehow got the wrong impression that in the context of rules for games, you always use [it's] instead of [its], no matter if it makes sense or not, and I was actually going out of my way to make a lot of those mistakes, as crazy as that may sound. I also think the style guides are very confusing, so I'm fine with having screwed up the titles, but the remaining errors are totally on me.

Anyway, let's adress the remaining issues that weren't changed:

Longshot11 wrote:
Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?

I agree with you, but the main issue is that I want the power to affect the scenario check in 5-E regardless of whether you choose Diplomacy or Charisma. I'll leave it as it is for now in good faith that the RAI are clear enough. I'm open to better formulations of course.

Adventure 5 wrote:

This adventure is supposed to challenge parties that overly rely on overspecialization (in this order: high combat skills at the cost of low non-combat skills, heavy examining, high non-combat skills at the cost of low combat skills, heavy casting), with the failsafe that you can always summon the Raging Wave if you skilled them to cover your weaknesses.

Scenario 5-A wrote:

This scenario reminds you of Siege of Drezen because it is modelled after it. However, I think there are two changes that make it significantly easier:

- The henchmen are not Armies
- Only the banes move on to the next location instead of all cards, and there aren't too many banes around
Regarding your fears:
1) While not mandatory, you CAN use the Order of the Raging Wave to defeat the ships if you skilled them accordingly (...which you should if your party can't deal with ships otherwise), but the cohort is helping you as well
2) When a henchman allows you to close, the closing is part of the encounter, and you can still use the Order of the Raging Wave
3) You don't need to defeat the villain in order to close
If anything, the scenario felt a bit too easy with my party of 3 characters, and I had to explore almost every card of each location before finding the henchmen
Yamashi Scouts being anchored wrote:

Now that you mention it, there is a disconnect with my previous explanation; I think at some point, the intention was that the Scouts should actually allow mass movement, but don't trigger the ship summons on cards like Elizmara or Pirate Hunt, and don't give you any benefit from cards that get better when you are on a ship.

The way I read the rules is that while the scouts deny you being on a ship, you are still commanding them, which is only relevant to enabling the mass movement here, given that their power can be used everywhere.
The anchoring is to deny you the mass movement as well.
I guess the bottom line is that as written, they do allow mass movement, but I'm fine with everyone deciding on their own if they'd rather disallow it.
Scenario 5-B wrote:

-I agree on the Blink Spiders from a story perspective, but I really want to punish you for doing any examining in this scenario.

-"When you encounter" is defined in the rulebook as the first step before you can evade a card, but I've adjusted the text a bit to emphasize that I'm refering to this step.
Scenario 5-C wrote:

- Yes, you only need to close both locations, but since no one can help you with the first location, it takes longer

- Casters have the option to close the first location after emptying it instead of defeating the henchman, and they can use the Order of the Raging Wave for combat as well
- The Hall of Champions has 4 weapons you can acquire (with the help of the Raging Wave if needed be) in order to close it, so if you don't have any, you can refuse to close after encountering the henchman to have enough opportunities to acquire one of those
- When I playtested, I decided on a champion character to rush through both locations, while the other two dedicated all of their ressources to make him succeed at everything on his way. With more characters, I also would've made a rush party and a support party that supports who made it out of the murderhole first
Scenario 5-D wrote:
If you can reliably recharge your spells, you'll usually have a chance of over 50% to cast your spells as normal, but you'll need some resources to keep your spells around. The first villain fight is known beforehand so you can prepare, and after that you get access to the cohort, which can help you with both casting and recharging. If everything else fails, there is always the Raging Wave to help you out
Scenario 6-B wrote:

Changed as suggested. Who says you can't have nice things? :P

Scenario 6-D wrote:

My interpretation is this: The more sidequests you complete, the more you earn their annoyance or respect (depending on the character), and that motivates them to get back at you

Scenario 7-A wrote:

-It's only about the Human trait for balance reasons; it's no fun if you're heavily invested in fire and/or poison and everything in the last scenario is immune to it, without you having a chance to know beforehand. I forgot to add the Outsider trait in the current version but will do so in the next one.

-It's intended that you can move freely between different Shrine of Sealing locations.
-Yes, you're not supposed to shuffle the banes into the siege deck. That would make the scenario far too hard, especially for smaller parties (since the number of locations is fixed)
The Art of Shipping wrote:

I forgot to include this in the current version but it will be in the next one.


I completely agree with Irgy here. It makes a difference in which phase you play the card, so you should announce how you use it beforehand if you want to play by the rules.


MorkXII wrote:

I have one suggestion, actually, after playing 4-C: I would recommend removing Cult Acolyte from the list of boons to add in from the HV decks. The original version of the card would have been fine, but the HV2 version is slightly different and tells you search the blessings deck for a blessing, which shuffles the blessing deck and allows you to break all the timing from several scenarios (3-D, 4-A, 4-C).

I don't think we used it in 3-D and 4-A, but in 4-C, we managed to completely avoid Melazmera. :)

I have another question/suggestion, but I'll send you a PM to avoid spoilers for anyone who's planning to play.

Thanks for the excellent point, I wasn't aware of the change in wording of the Cult Acolyte! If you don't mind, I'd like to wait for you to play through the rest of the AP before I update the pdf, so that I can incorporate any further feedback from you as well in a single update. :)

For now, everyone reading this can assume that the Cult Acolyte should be removed from the game.


Thanks everyone for the feedback! Especially you Longshot, who raised a lot of good and helpful points!

Please excuse the amount of inconsistencies and writing mistakes; I wasn't able to properly read through the whole document again after working on it for so long and just wanted to publish it :)

I've updated to Version 1.01 by fixing most of the issues you raised and included you in the credits; most of the mechanical issues were because I changed a lot of things and forgot to adapt everything that was affected by the change. I'll shortly comment on the rest:

Longshot11 wrote:
Basic removal starts at AD1, and Elites – at AD4 – is that correct?

That's intended; I want the game to pick up faster, and it's necessary to give you a better chance at actually using the ship facilities.

Longshot11 wrote:
Trial of Mind, Art of Shipping

Changed as suggested.

Longshot11 wrote:

Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?

- Meeting the Locals: “Check that lists Diplomacy” => Diplomacy check

I'm aware of the wording, but I want the bonus to also apply to using Charisma on a Charisma/Diplomacy check that happens before you act or that is imposed by the scenario rules.

Longshot11 wrote:
Ogre Mage: doesn’t seem to be a particular reason why its AD indicator is “B” instead of “1” ?

It's for consistency mostly; there is one new oni in each adventure up to AD5, and they shouldn't differ in #AD for the sake of cards that care about it.

Longshot11 wrote:
One minor aesthetic gripe: the flat bright-green background can get too much at times. While it's something you can get used to in scenario headers etc., it's always jarring on the "cover" of the AP. If you can find access to a nice -and free!- "emerald" texture, you might consider switching it in on at least the front and back covers.

I'll look into that once I have more time on my hands, thanks for the note.

Longshot11 wrote:
-Ice Yai – you should update his power, to specify that he only need ANY check to be beaten with 3+ to allow you to close (if that’s indeed the intent).

I already updated this in my files, but forgot to have the card updated. Sorry, I'll take care of it in the near future.

Longshot11 wrote:

Without being sure how phantoms and hobgoblins are treated in the RPG:

-Masao may need the Incorporeal trait?
-Takeshi may need a Goblin trait?

I used Honaire for the traits of Masao and forgot the Goblin trait on Takeshi. But I think he's better of without it so he doesn't have unintended interactions with the goblin characters/decks.

Longshot11 wrote:
-Cloudy With a Chance…: Playing the PACG treatment of Sharknado I never knew I needed? Yes, please!

I'm happy you caught the (admittedly fairly obvious) reference :)

Longshot11 wrote:

-All Aboard the Wormwood: the List 1 stack always contains only a single Ice Yai, correct?

- I don’t have the Wormwood card on hand; what’s the point of it being displayed next to a location?!? Does this prevent me from summoning it when encountering Elizmara or is there something else…?

Yes, only one Ice Yai. The idea is that you are boarding each others ships, and since your ship is already displayed at one location, the Wormwood is displayed at the other location, so that they are physically next to each other as well.

Longshot11 wrote:

- Just to be sure what’s the deal with villain here: 1) I encounter it 2) I discard 1 from Blessing deck 3)I go through the CtDs to prevent taking damage 4)Villain can’t escape to his current location (it’s temp-closed); 5) I lose MORE blessings from Blessings Deck when the villain escapes. Is that all correct?

- Displaying Umiko is purely “cosmetic” , right? Since I can never move to her location?

Yes. Worst case that happens when you spread out and temp close everything is that you lose 3 cards from the blessings deck the first encounter and another 2 cards from the blessings deck on the second encounter that puts him guaranteed into the Shrine of Sealing. Instead of spending resources on the fight, it's most of the time more efficient to put them into explorations instead and just accept your beating, as the story implies, but defeating them while still winning is an optional challenge. Umiko is only there to setup the narrative.

Longshot11 wrote:
-> Starting this scenario with a displayed Curse of Flesheaters is incredibly punishing for small parties, and downright homicidal for solo play. You may want to consider introducing a way to remove this Curse before the end of the scenario

Defeating a Witch Doctor henchman allows you to remove a card that has the curse trait; it's usually enough to quickly tear through one location to get rid of it in time.

Longshot11 wrote:
-Yamashi Scouts: this card confuses me a bit – is it only a “placeholder” for the Raging Wave summon? Traditionally, powers on “ships” only apply to the person *commanding* the ship; OTOH, you never “command” a ship you’re not “on “ (and you never count as being “on” the Scouts). So, do I “command” the Scouts, even if I’m not on them (in which case – can I use them for ship “mass movement”?!?) . If not – maybe they should be reworded to the effect of “While displayed, when a character encounters a non-villain card, she may banish…”

The power box of both ships actually says "While displayed" instead of "While commanding this ship", so you can always use the summon independent of where you are relative to your ship.

The intent is that the Scouts don't allow mass movement, don't trigger the ship summons on cards like Elizmara or Pirate Hunt, and lastly to not give you any benefit from those cards that get better when you are on a ship. They are also there to give you access to the cargo table and ship facilities when it doesn't make sense to be on the ship from a narrative point of view, e.g. you're walking away from your ship into a cavern / on land / into a dungeon.

I'm looking forward to further comments from you on the rest of the AP! :)


Thanks for all your hard work!
I'm using those dividers in my Skulls and Shackles box and they helped a lot with also enabling other players besides myself to quickly find the correct card types in the box, increasing the setup speed by a great amount :)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

After another roughly 9 months of work after Revenge of the Wicked , I proudly present to you my new custom AP

Emerald Legacy!

In this AP for Skulls and Shackles, you get to join a warship from Tian Xia - including Ninjas and Samurais - and go on a wild chase through the Shackles to find a Tian noble that stole a valuable heirloom from his clan; no ones knows what he's up to, but you might find out that you need to stop him!

Instead of the various ships of the original game, you get a powerful ship from Tian Xia that acts as your base and is similiar to a character in that it gets analogues to skill feats, card feats and even power feats for its crew during the the AP!

But don't get too confident because of your ship, since this time, you will face an adventuring party from Tian Xia which grows in strength just as you do! Eventually, they even learn some new tricks and acquire new power feats during the course of your journey!

There are 28 (!) new custom cards included this time, made beautiful by the awesome LudwigO, and I even painted some of the artwork myself!

The AP is meant to be compatible with all class decks, and there are special rules to incorporate them thematically into your game. While not necessary, the recently released Hayato and Reiko with their ultimate decks, as well as the Monk deck can make for a great thematic experience!

By the way; there are also sidequests that you can do (or neglect), and they will have minor and major repercussions on the overall story, which may or may not include how the ending turns out!

This first draft surely has some typos and inconsistencies, but if you help me to find them, I'm dedicated to fixing them :)

Looking forward to hear what everyone thinks
- Doppelschwert.


Thanks for the feedback, and I'm very happy you had a good time! :)
I look forward to hearing what you think about AD4 and the special rewards you get during AD4 and AD5.

I think the difficulty is a bit lower overall, and in particular compared to WotR, but the characters are also a big part of it.
While playtesting, I used characters from the first few class decks and the challenge was appropriate, but when I went through it again with some friends with characters from newer class deck, I felt it was easier as well.

Personally, I think that's fine for the most part, since you're supposed to feel powerful by having less constrained access to all the corrupted boons you'd otherwise have to think about more carefully.

I'm open to adjustments though, so if you feel like there is a very high difficulty spike/drop, please tell me :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
IronGiant wrote:
Xexyz wrote:

I'm going to go against the grain and say I'm not interested in more story unless the story becomes a meaningful part of the gameplay. As it stands, the story bits is just background info that doesn't have any effect on the game; if the story demands the villain we defeat in a scenario gets away then the villain will get away no matter how the scenario plays out. It's like being railroaded in an RPG and it makes me completely tune out.

I would love to see a branching storyline. It doesn't have to branch very far, but a certain flavor of "you didn't save the princess (which was an optional side quest in a scenario) so the king will not help you here" or "you chose to kill the baron and replace him so now you need to defeat his brother (as an additional henchmen in a later scenario)". At the final AD, the game could branch more completely to a "light side / dark side" finale and that would be a great ending that we could feel a part of.

I think you'll like my current homebrew project; it's almost done, and I'll post it soon in the homebrew section ;)


So looking forward to this deck to arrive! :)
Thanks for all the hard work chad!

Btw, this thread seems to be missing in the PACG forum.


I might be wrong about this, but in my interpretation, the CUP doesn't extend to the artwork used in the cards featured on the blog.

But this is something someone like Vic should verify I guess.


Not to rain on your parade, but I don't think that this card complies with the community use policy (the template should be fine though).
At the very least, you need to mention the CUP, and even then I'm not sure that you have the rights to use the artwork (was it ever used in the paizo blog or did you contact the artist?)

I'd advise you to put it down until you've sorted out any copyright issues.


Yewstance wrote:
The Promo goblin characters are timed-exclusives to subscribers, for example; that's a good solution that I have no problem with. If they were a situation where "You get this character by attending this convention or being a subscriber, otherwise you can never get this character and too bad if you just got into the game and you like the look of them", then I'd be upset. Fortunately, I don't really see that as happening with how Paizo and Lone Shark treat the PACG product line.

The closest they got to this is a boon that unlocks Arueshalae for OP, which was a convention exclusive reward.


VampByDay wrote:
I agree that one of the Goblin decks would probably be most theamatic, but I also don’t want to spend $40 on a one-off ‘Joke’ deck that I may only play once. No one in my area really plays the card game (I’m trying to start it up, but it is hard going) and I plan on doing this we be Goblins online. $20 for a one-off joke? Sure, but $40 seems a bit steep. That’s why I was looking for a solution in the decks I already have (most of which were gifts given to me by my friends from their free PaizoCon gift bag, because they don’t play the card game.)

I agree that $40 is too much for that if you have no intention in using the deck again afterwards. However, you can easily get Goblins Fight for $10 on amazon.com, so it's an option if you change your mind; there is no need to get Goblin's Burn as well.


When you're playing him as scribble face in a goblin AP, you might as well get Goblins Fight and use that. It has plenty finesse weapons (not sure about weapon proficiency though) and a healing potion you can get back after every scenario once you hit AD3.

In general, playing the season of the goblins without the goblin decks (either shuffled into the box or used as character deck) is only half the fun.


I appreciate your attempt at positivity in this thread Yewstance, but I think you're making a rather weak argument here:

Updated character sheets with a potential updated wording would be rather confusing to use with the old sets, as that would necessitate to look into the newest rulebook to reverse engineer the new language to the simple language that already belongs to the products you own. In particular, the old content will still be the majority of the content when the new core set and AP arrive, so making everything exclusively with the new content in mind doesn't strike me as economic either.

The only reasonable solution I can see is either leaving the current CDs with the old wording while publishing new characters (post core set) with the new wording, or making an alternative download of the updated old character sheets. I believe it will be rather easy to convert old stuff to new stuff rather than the other way around.

That being said, many of the old characters were never given an update in terms of new terms like 'invoke' and the like, so there is no precedent to think that they would redo the old sheets.

Also waiting close to 2 years for a character sheet just to save some work later on doesn't strike me as a very customer centric approach either.

I really don't think they are holding back the sheets on purpose.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sorry; I was a bit distracted while writing the post - when I was writing armies, what I actually thought of was the Demonic Horde and Arboreal Blight, everyones favourite barriers:

In my experience, they are most problematic when a caster gets to fight more servitor demons than he has attack spells or is caught without any attack spells. Martial characters have a much easier time with multiple combat checks when they can reveal their weapon and rely on blessings support, so those barriers become much easier for those parties.

Armies are a main reason why it's hard for big parties, I won't deny that.


Irgy wrote:
Doppelschwert wrote:
This is exactly the reason why I think SnS is much harder than WotR and can't understand why the general consensus is the exact opposite.
WotR is harder specifically for parties of size 6 and specifically in the B set. I wouldn't say harder than Best Served Cold necessarily, but hard for more scenarios. Plus there's more that you can do about Best Served Cold because it's deck 5 - which doesn't help the first time through but on subsequent runs it does.

I agree on the bigger parties, but even then it comes down a lot to the actual characters you choose for the parties. The armies and carrion golem are mostly a problem for primary casters, so it's much easier if you play characters based on weapons that can easily make multiple combat checks per round.

I also still think that SnS has way more 'Gotcha!' moments/banes than WotR. Sure, WotR is hard, but at least it's pretty transparent in what it expects from you:
Be good at combat and have ways to reduce damage.

SnS is much harder than WotR without scouting and basically forces you to get high Constitution and Wisdom, which just isn't possible with all kinds of characters.

Most of the non-combat checks are equally hard in the latter half of WotR and SnS, but I think WotR has fewer of them and even prepares you better because of more feats. Consider the Seaweed Siren in SnS AD6; nothing in WotR comes even close to the punishment you'll face with any character that doesn't focus on wisdom (and even if you focus on wisdom you'll need to spend several resources!).

Basically, SnS expects you to play characters with very specific skillsets, or at least to be able to scout so that you can assign the right character to the right job, whereas WotR just focuses a lot on combat, which is accessible to everyone.


IronGiant wrote:

I want to say I've enjoyed this scenario but cannot. Just too random, too much punishment and if you don't get everything exactly just right and get real lucky, forget it. If Lirianne hadn't gotten that Dagger Pistol during the scenario, it would have failed.

I really like this game, but all this randomness kind of kills it for me. The Swashbuckling trait and armor requirements just feel like a punishment, they don't feel like they add anything to the game, like they are saying: You didn't take Oloch and a swashbuckler, shame on you!

This is exactly the reason why I think SnS is much harder than WotR and can't understand why the general consensus is the exact opposite.

@elcoderdude
SnS never feels like you absolutely need the swashbuckling trait. There are cards that reward you for having it and cards that you punish you for it, so you might as well ignore it.


To be quite honest, I'd be more interested in the mini expansions skizzers is describing than another wave of class decks.
By the time all the Ultimate Decks are released, I'll have around 20 character decks, and that's all I'll ever need (I'd actually like to sell some of the older ones, but there's no one around that will buy them).

However, I would like to have more characters to play with all those class decks!
Since they can hardly sell single characters, mini expansions would be an excellent way to make the old class decks more valuable by including new characters while giving you new scenarios to play. That's not to say that I wouldn't buy something like a Jade Regent character deck if I really like the theme, but the ultimate decks already cover almost any class if you don't want to play OP.


Lone Shark is working on the next PACG set, but I think Paizo is making the character sheets (in cooperation with Lone Shark, of course).
It's more likely that the huge amount of work necessary for the Pathfinder RPG 2.0 playtest is getting in the way of updated community ressources; given that it's their core business, that's an understandable priority from their point of view.


Frencois wrote:
We should finish our homemade evil adventure just in time.

Any plans on sharing that? It's no fun if you keep all the good stuff to yourselves, you know ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can read that on the Curse of the Chrimson Throne Product Page.

1 to 50 of 663 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>