Search Posts
I don't know if this is against the rules of this messageboard, if so I apologize and I'm open to suggestions of how to proceed instead. I have 17 Pathfinder Tales novels, but lately I've been getting them on my tablet instead, and we're trying to downsize in our home. So I'm looking for someone who would be interested in adopting all of them as a single set. I might ask for this person to pay for shipping but I'm not looking to make money off of the transaction. I just want to get them into the hands of someone who will enjoy them as I did. If you're interested, you can PM me. First come, first served. Here's the list of novels: Prince of Wolves
Hi, everyone - My understanding (as well as that of the store manager at my FLGS) is that U.S. stores who are running organized PACG play would get a copy of the base set. We've been play OP there monthly since November and I've been using my box, but the group has grown beyond what a single base set can manage (7 people showed up to play last night). Are we mistaken, or should the store have received the Skull & Shackles Base Set? We are definitely getting the scenarios so I think the store did what it needed to in order to get 'registered' as an OP store. Any help in clarifying what we can do to get the Base Set (if we were supposed to get one, of course) would be greatly appreciated so we can support two tables simultaneously as well as run scenarios when I can't be there with my personal copy. Thanks!
Soloing Merisiel through Rise of the Runelords. The following scenarios took more than one attempt: Brigandoom! (2), Attack on Sandpoint (2), Local Heroes (2), The Fort in Peril (2), Here Comes the Flood (4!). Character Name: Merisiel
Just to clarify my own understanding, if you fail to close a location after defeating a henchman, then empty the location, and fail to close again, can you continue to make checks to attempt to close that location (once per character per turn)? This is how I've been playing, rather than treating it as permanently open, but after reading this thread it occurred me to double-check. Given how long I've been playing, I should really know this!
Thanks, all - I think we are going to go ahead and get an extra set. We've played non-organized play twice with six players, mostly new or people who have played once. The first time, it took us roughly 2 hours, the second time it was more like 3. If playing with 4 increases the chance we can get in 2 scenarios in an evening, I think that's worth it, not to mention the ability to easily accommodate 8 and even go up to 12 with walk-ins if needed.
In the Guide it states in bold letters: We strongly recommend making 4 players your standard table size. Clearly Paizo wants to emphasize this, but what is the reasoning? Is it because larger tables tend to run long on time (because of increased decision-making discussion length), or that with 6 there are fewer turns per player? We have a single box for my FLGS and we are trying to decide whether to chip in for a 2nd one so we can run 2 tables simultaneously. Insights into the reasoning behind suggesting 4 as the table size would help us decide. Thanks!
I wanted to point out something that might be confusing in the new version of the Guide, under "Filling Out a Chronicle Sheet": Check off the appropriate box if you succeeded at the scenario, if this was a replay of this scenario for your character, and if your character is gaining the scenario rewards. This sentence seems to imply that there are check boxes for each of these things on the chronicle sheets, but there is no check box currently to indicate whether it was a replay or not. In a future version it might be clearer to either add such a check box or move that middle bit to its own sentence (if you didn't want to add anything new to the chronicle sheet, you could say something like "If this was a replay of this scenario for your character, use the Notes: line at the bottom to indicate this.")
Theryon, my intention with the alternate box-purge rules was to get rid of cards at least two lower than the current adventure. So when you add AD 4, remove the appropriate B, C, and 1 cards, and leave 2 and 3 in there. The next version of the Guide will clarify this.Math teacher spidey-sense tingling -- ah, there it is! It sounds like you want us to get rid of cards that are MORE THAN 2 lower than the current adventure -- AT LEAST 2 lower includes cards that are just 2 lower. Having said that, I think the 'at least' wording is better, so perhaps you should say you want us to get rid of any cards that are at least 3 lower than the current adventure. I agree that this is how it would be strictly interpreted (e.g., take out B/C/1/2 after adding AD 4, which doesn't fit with Tanis' intention (e.g., take out B/C/1 after adding AD 4). Unfortunately, the new version of the Guide seems not to have changed the language to bring it in line with the intention: To make things more interesting and to help you remove the right cards faster, when you add a new Adventure Deck to your game box after adventure 3, remove all cards with the Basic and Elite traits with adventure deck numbers at least two lower than the adventure deck you just added. (Treat the set indicators B, C, and P as zero for this purpose.)
2) Her evading boons is similar to Seelah's power (placing a boon on the bottom of the deck). Thematically, it represents a character who just wants to storm through a location and get straight to the bad guys. So evading a boon (if it is rubbish or not appropriate for her and someone else might want to acquire) means she gets to encounter another card, giving her more chance of finding that henchman or villain. This was how I interpreted this power too. Also keep in mind that if the party is running low on time (blessings in the blessings deck), being able to skip over a card could be really handy. I'm not worrying at all about whether Wu Shen might be underpowered and am excited to start playing her based on theme alone (by sheer luck she's very similar my favorite PFS organized play (RPG) character, a ninja named Xiu Ying).
D'oh! Which were you thinking of? I haven't gone through the whole document carefully, but it appears that this one and this one haven't made it into the new version.
People have probably seen that v1.1 of the Organized Play has been released (the email I got said to go here. Seems some of the corrections that had been planned based on Vic's comments in this thread didn't make it in, so perhaps there will be a v1.2 coming?
If you didn't get a shipping email back on the 7th or 8th, then they may have missed identified you in that group. That seems to have happened, based on my call to customer service. It hasn't gone out yet. The current status in general seems to be that the warehouse staff expects to get through the rest of the S&S base sets by tomorrow at the latest, and perhaps even by the beginning of tomorrow or the end of the day today, and by that point everyone should receive a shipping e-mail ("within about the next 30 hours" the customer service rep said.). As always, Paizo customer service was very friendly and helpful, and I got a live person right away.
If you didn't get a shipping email back on the 7th or 8th, then they may have missed identified you in that group. I got an e-mail on the 8th, but I don't think it was a shipping e-mail, as it is still listed as Pending in that message. I got another on the 12th when the class deck I ordered was put back in the side-cart. Looks like I should get in touch with customer service again.
I'm guessing no one has been able to track their package yet? I received the two emails yesterday, one of which led me to think that the Base Set shipped last Friday for me ("Since we already printed the label for your package, we have already charged your payment method for the Character Add-On deck... ...The other items that were in the original order with your Add-On deck have already been shipped as of Friday, August 22nd."). But the order is still listed as pending. So I guess it will be a pleasant surprise when it shows up on my doorstep!
For me, I'm subscribing partly to support Paizo and partly to have things come to me automatically without having to make a trip to the FLGS or remember to order it online elsewhere. Since I have Amazon Prime it's definitely costing me more, the timing of when it arrives seems to be a wash, and while the promo cards are nice, for me personally they're not essential and thus are not really a part of the equation. As others have said, whether the subscription makes sense comes down to what is most important to you.
It's interesting that I'm preparing one of my fall college courses today while I've been following these threads, and one of the readings I've chosen is about shipping warehouse work. Despite our disappointment about all of the issues we've had the last few weeks, I do feel good as a subscriber that Paizo probably treats their warehouse staff better than this:
The problem only arises if all B cards are darker than all 1 cards. So long as the issue is "some B cards are darker than some other B cards" and "some 1 cards are darker than other 1 cards" but "some B cards are the same as some 1 cards, while other B cards are the same as other 1 cards" then it shouldn't be something that accidentally provides you with game spoiling information. That happened to me with my ROTR Adventure Deck 6. The backs of the cards were noticeably lighter in color than all the other cards in the box. If it were the fronts it would've been no big deal, but with the backs, I knew too much about the likelihood of where villains and henchmen were. It was really hard to check myself from using that information I wasn't supposed to have!
It's not one person! We collect playtest reports on every session, and what we mean is that for every scenario/character combination, at least one of our playtesters succeeded in soloing that scenario with that character.I remember someone saying somewhere they had soloed each of the eleven characters.Wow, someone doesn't have a job (or did, but doesn't any more!). If s/he played Perils to pick up that extra skill feat, that's 33 x 11 = 363 scenario plays, assuming no failures/repeats. I mean, I've played the game a fair number of times, but wow! :) That makes much more sense. ;) I've gotten through the first six scenarios so far with Merisiel (the first three being Perils), and it's tough. I've had to replay three scenarios of the six to succeed. I can keep her from dying, but I find it hard for her to obtain boons since her Int, Wis, and Cha skills are low-to-average.
I remember someone saying somewhere they had soloed each of the eleven characters. Wow, someone doesn't have a job (or did, but doesn't any more!). If s/he played Perils to pick up that extra skill feat, that's 33 x 11 = 363 scenario plays, assuming no failures/repeats. I mean, I've played the game a fair number of times, but wow! :)
I looked through the "Conquering Heroes" sticky post and noticed not a single solo "team". I had a strong team of Lini and Amiri go all the way through the AP and lose pretty badly in the final scenario, so I'm wondering if this final scenario against Karzoug is harder for smaller teams. And that last one is sort of like the Game of Thrones ("...you win or you die."). So, my question is, has anyone beaten it solo, either because they played all the way through with a single character, or they were down to a single character by the end of the AP? I'm retrying with just Merisiel, but I'm wondering about her chances, even if I try to optimize her to prepare for that last battle.
OK, I think that makes sense, but I would suggest that a wording change might help clarify that the cards except for the character, role, and token card still need to come from your Class Deck (and therefore, by extension, this exception does not allow you to play without a Class Deck).It does say that all the cards has to come from the class deck, with the exception of character/role/token. And it also says you are required a Class Deck to play. Yes, I think a careful reading (more careful than my initial reading!) would perhaps clear it up, but I do think a sentence reminding readers that the content of the deck still must come from the class deck would help with clarity.
Finally (for now!), there are two paragraphs in Appendix II which seem very similar and I'm not sure how to interpret them if they indeed refer to different things: ...if you gained a deck upgrade as part of a scenario reward, check off a box and fill in the boon type and adventure deck number of the reward. If your character gains an upgrade as a result of the deck upgrade process, check off a box under Deck Upgrades and note the type and adventure deck number of the upgrade in the adjacent blank.
As I understand it, this means that when you add Adventure Deck 3, you go through and take out all the Basic and Elite cards from sets "B," "C," "P," and "1" from the box, but I guess the answer to your question depends upon what they mean by "from the game" - is this just the box, or also all Basics and Elites that qualify from the players' decks who are participating.
And one more from me. On page 8, there is an example of upgrading your deck: Pat uses the set B weapon he got to add the set 1 weapon Main-Gauche from his Ranger Class Deck box to his character deck But on the previous page, it says:
Wouldn't Pat need to choose a set B weapon from the Class Deck? In other words, isn't "1" considered higher than "B"?
OK, I think that makes sense, but I would suggest that a wording change might help clarify that the cards except for the character, role, and token card still need to come from your Class Deck (and therefore, by extension, this exception does not allow you to play without a Class Deck). I'm guessing two reasons why someone would do this are (a) to play a pregen as described under the 'Higher Level Characters" section, or possibly (b) because they just prefer to play the iconic rather than any of the four characters included in the Class Deck?
Hi, all - I thought it might be helpful to have a single thread where we can ask any clarification questions we have regarding the just-released guide (which you can find here). For now, I have two: (1) In "Building Your Character" it says: All of the cards must come from your Class Deck, with one exception: You may substitute any character of the appropriate class (along with a matching role and token card) from a base set or Character Add-On Deck. For example, if you’re using the Fighter Class Deck, you may use the fighter Valeros from the Rise of the Runelords base set or from the Skull & Shackles base set. From this I assume (but would like to check this assumptions) that : - This is essentially using a pregen character instead of one of the four characters from your class deck
Is any of this wrong? (2) Under "Higher Level Characters" it starts off by saying "If you're coming late to the Adventure Card Guild and want to play with an established group or event, you have three options." I think this means that if you come in when a group has already progressed a ways through the adventure decks? The wording "come late..." could be initially misconstrued to mean 'if you come late on a game night, here's how you could jump in.' That was the first thing that came to mind for me before reading further.
Thanks, Sharaya - I did get that confirmation e-mail!
I was also in the group that didn't get my class deck (Order 3179469) folded into my subscription order (Order 3222438). They are still listed as two separate orders, with the subscription now listed as complete but the class deck listed as pending. I'm hoping that it is still possible to fix this and get them shipped together. Thanks!
Thanks, Hawkmoon, I sent them an e-mail. I wasn't sure if other subscribers who had preordered 1+ class decks were in the same holding pattern with them. From your suggestion, it sounds like it might just be an issue with my order, though.
I had already decided to play Wu Shen first when I get started with organized play, so it was super cool to see this. :) Related question - my S&S base set and add-on deck have apparently been processed and are ready to ship, but the class deck (Rogue) that I put in the side cart is still listed as pending. Is this as it should be, that is, that I will likely get the base box and add-on deck before I get the class deck? Thanks!
I have played that she can move as normal (after the optional give a card step) and use that power to move at the end of her turn. I don't see anything that would restrict her from doing both in one turn. If I'm reading it right, it can be very handy for locations like the one you mention. I think Garrison is like that, where, if you start your turn there, you have to summon a Bandit henchman before continuing with your turn. I've had Amiri start elsewhere, move to the Garrison (it's no longer the start of her turn, since she already advanced the Blessings Deck), explore etc., then move back away from the Garrison at the end of her turn. She could normally handle the Bandit no problem, but why take the risk and/or expend resources? (A side point, but the one good thing about the Bandit is it would allow you to recharge a card that was not helping you, which could then hopefully be replaced by a more useful card during the reset phase of your turn.) That said, if I've got all that wrong, I'm sure Hawkmoon will be by to clear things up for us! EDIT: It's not the Garrison like I thought, but the Guard Tower that has this "At This Location" ability.
One of the other unique aspects of PACG is the sequential nature where current play is influenced by previous game sessions; obviously, this has a lot to do with its RPG roots, but I think it also is informed by legacy games (like Rob Daviau's Risk Legacy) which seemed to be one of the first tabletop games outside of RPGs to feature sequential play sessions.
We've played this duo through including Perils of the Lost Coast, and only had to replay one scenario twice (Here Comes the Flood). No deaths with these two: Character Name: Amiri
Character Name: Lini
Out of curiousity, where in NY was this? I'm in Rochester, and I don't think there's any OP here. Closest I've found is Syracuse. I grew up in the East, but I spent most of my adult life in the West, so I guess I'm conflicted. Plus I am lazy. :-) My first reaction is "Syracuse? Too far." OTOH... :-) We're in the Hudson Valley (New Paltz, across the Hudson from Poughkeepsie). So not local to you, sadly. ;) If you do make it out to Syracuse, I think that Chris Donnangelo is running out that way at Comix Zone, and I've been at a table he ran in the Albany area once, and he's a good GM and good guy. I believe Syracuse is now part of what was the "Capital Region NY" Lodge (now "Upstate NY PFS Lodge").
Heh. Westerners: Never too far. Easterners: "If it's more than five miles, I ain't going." :-) We're not lazy, we're conserving fossil fuels. :) Seriously, it's probably true in general, but I have had folks travel an hour to our PFS games, and my neighbor's Pathfinder group in NY state at one point had people coming from Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Massachusetts (and not western MA either - he was on Cape Cod) to play once a month.
Dungeon World +1 for Dungeon World! The GM never rolls dice, and the players mostly roll 2d6 plus a stat modifier. A 10+ means success, a 7-9 means success but with trouble/complications, and 6 or less means something bad happens (but on a 6 or less, you also get XP!). Everything is set up to keep the action moving forward. Combats are much more cinematic and not a long drawn out series of rolls that you see in rules-heavy RPGs (many of which end up being misses or failures).
I'm confused about how things come together with my character's claw attack. He's a 3rd level small (halfling-sized) tiefling bloodrager with the abyssal bloodline. When raging, Herolab lists his claw attack as: Claws x2
But with the following stats while raging... - Small size
It doesn't seem correct to me. The attack is: BAB + Str modifier + size modifier
Shouldn't damage be 1d4 not 1d3 based on the bloodline power listing ("These attacks deal 1d6 points of damage each (1d4 if you are small) plus your Strength modifier")? And shouldn't the damage modifier be +5, not +2? Please let me know what I'm missing! Thanks!
I'm aware of this rule, but for some reason I can't find it in the rulebook (at least using the Find feature on Adobe Reader with the PDF). Can anyone point out where in the rulebook this rule is, for future reference? Thanks!
Hi, Just finished AP#2 which means I got to crack open the Hook Mtn. Massacre deck. Regarding the Giant Badger:
With the bolded text, I am guessing that this only applies for that particular power? Although you can't explore while already in the middle of an encounter so I guess it wouldn't be inconsistent with the second. I guess I'm just confirming that it doesn't get in the way of using it for Lini's powers, mostly because revealing or discarding a card to activate a power isn't the same as playing that card (playing a card means activating one of its own powers, I believe) That's a bit of a ramble, isn't it? But does it seem as though I have the right idea? |
