Felldales Dragon

Gambit001's page

50 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DNR0D wrote:

Just my opinion:

As a former games store employee and owner, as well as someone who has played rpg's for four decades, this decision is terrible. Before D&D 5E released, Paizo & Pathfinder was riding high as the world's #1 rpg. The 1st edition PAC was terrific. My wife and I enjoyed literally hundreds of hours of gaming with it. Buying into the latest edition was a no-brainer for us. The store I worked at (Ettin Games in Humble TX) sold lots of copies and players were excited. The lack of additional content support caused a fade of excitement, however.

I don't play online games. Period. Ever. Gaming is inherently a social experience. Seventy to ninety percent of communication (social element) is nonverbal and does not pass well through the interwebs. Additionally, my wife and I do not play Pathfinder. In fact, I know of no one who does. My former employer has relegated Pathfinder products to the bottom shelf as sales have plummeted below publishers such as Chaosium and Goodman Games.

Cancelling a solid product, that is unique in its mechanics will just make Paizo that much more irrelevant in the gaming market. I guess I'll see if Wizards will fill the void.

Just my opinion.

It’s a good point, and honestly, this decision is enough that I simply won’t support Paizo at all anymore if they can’t make some changes.

If they were to run a KS for multiple new adventures, I’d support that, and that would make sense as opposed to just giving up.

So... what if you fail against the villain, the 5PS is on top of a closed location, and is not temp closed. I would assume if the villain goes there, the location underneath becomes open once the 5PS is moved elsewhere, but how would you know the villain is there is you out random blessings in with it before seeding it into a random open location?

I assume the location just remains closed?

elcoderdude wrote:

According to Vic in this thread, after the first check, all you have is the result (a number) - no traits at all.

(Which I still think is an unfortunate ruling because it's so unlike one's natural expectations.)

Yeah I am still trying to figure out if that's what he said or not, the response was a bit unclear. In the end it f that's what he meant (and I'd still like him to confirm it clearly as there was some confusion above on if that's what he meant or not) this feels like it makes Chain Lightning far more powerful with the downside being you might run into an enemy that requires magic to defeat and get screwed lol, but could easily defeat an electricity immune enemy and that this result could be used regardless of how you choose to do combat (use a different weaker spell, use melee/strength, use a ranged weapon), it just changes the final number regardless of what is rolled but only gets traits from the newly used method? I guess that could make sense...

So you still have traits, those you choose based on how you choose to do any subsequent combat, you just get the result of your original chain lightning cast? So second battle use a staff, get strength, melee, combat, staff, bludgeoning, magic (if a magic staff), and element of the staff etc., anything added (gecko for fire etc.), but the result can be whatever chain lightning had? Would I roll first, then choose if I want that result or Chain Lightning's? I'm thinking yes.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I hate to reopen this super old thread, but which is it?

Chain Lightning does add electricity, Arcane, magic, attack traits to the subsequent checks after the first or it doesn't? Or does it still count as an intelligence (if that's what your Arcane is under) as well? Or does the check have no traits? Or do you get to pick a skill upon encountering and you simply get the same result using only that skill's traits, say Combat, melee?

Been a few more months now :(

Rick Andrews wrote:
Are you guys ever going to update these? It's been over a year and there are many additional characters.

Agreed, there's so many missing! Came to grab the Hunter Class Deck ones and nothing...

This is exactly what I need to know right now as we are about to face the world wound heart, I mean come on, a suture it supposed to be used to close a wound...

The scenario says "When you would discard an ally, bury that ally instead." I just want to confirm if it should be "for its power" or when taking damage or choosing the discard upon resetting your hand you would bury them as well.

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Will this be playable on the iPhone 6s, or is it iPad only?

This is most important for me, really want to play this, but iPhone 6s Plus is my only option, so make it happen!

I can see that Irgy and that makes sense, but 0 locations from 5-2 to 5-5 are not abyssal so it's a far cry from S&S throwing being anchored once in a while at you. Plus it only gets plus 2 so I'll just keep my 2x composites, 2x stalkers, firebow, and skirmishing spear for now :)

Malcolm_Reynolds wrote:
A few powers allow you to ignore the Abyssal trait, but I haven't found it worth the effort.

Other than Blessing of Pulura (which I assume works as the location is still a card), any specific cards you can reference for this? None of the ranged characters have such a power and looking through the items, none have it either

Planar Crossbow WotR AD5 says "If the bane has the Outsider trait, ignore the bane's immunities."

I find this power to be basically useless as once you beat 5-1, all locations have the abyssal trait, which means there are no bane's for the remainder of AD5 that have the outsider trait...

Being planar I was hoping that it would ignore the abyssal trait and actually make that power work, but it seems rather weak compared to the other ranged weapons from even earlier decks.


Vic Wertz wrote:

The card says "While displayed, the difficulty of checks to defeat that monster is decreased by your Arcane or Divine skill + 1d6." Adjustments to difficulty happen during the "Determine the Difficulty" action of the check, so that's when you roll. And the rules say "If a card calls for a die roll that affects multiple characters or situations... roll separately for each." So you'll roll the d6 during that action in each check.

Ok so roll arcane skill die plus d6 then do check # 1 then repeat before check #2 got it.

Follow up question in order of operations, if you play transmogrify on a monster with two checks, I know you roll once for each reduction but do you roll them both right when you play the spell or would you roll one, complete the first check, then roll the other before doing the second check? This has impact especially if two people are there and one is better equipped than another to attempt a higher check. It seems to be that "finish one thing before you do another" would state to roll both reduction amounts first, but I wanted to get some clarification.

Probably should have just checked there first lol. Thanks!

Maybe this was answered elsewhere but this seems like a typo, Poison Spiked Pit Trap says ".. Then each character is dealt 1d4 poison damage..." This seems incorrect, I can't see how this trap could affect all locations and characters. Does it mean that each character at this location takes that damage since the beginning of the sentence says "If undefeated, each character at this location is dealt 1d4 Combat damage, then each character is dealt 1d4 poison damage,..."

Is it still set for May?

Still not 100% convinced on Nethys, but 98.5% convinced haha.

Yeah, as stated I figured that was the intention, and overall that method's benefits far outweigh the potential benefits of doing it the other way around anyway. Cheers!

1) Haha well that's all my bad, should learn to read. So this is a non-issue.

2) I only asked this one based on the rule book. It says "... rebuild you character deck... Put all other cards back in the box." It says this after the scenario rewards are to be obtained per the rule book. However after telling you to do this the next paragraph says "If you've successfully completed all of the scenarios on the adventure card, you earn the reward on the adventure card." If doing things in order per the book, I've already put all the cards back in the box before obtaining that reward. I doubt this was the intention, but again, this is what we discuss in our group.

3) Well I am sad to hear that, I was hoping that semicolon would allow us to still use it without examining.

** And thanks for advising me that I was putting a P instead of a D, just a plain old typo and duly noted. :)

Ok so the reward for AP3 is a role and a power feat, awesome. The reward for the scenario Wintersun is a power feat, also awesome.

1) Since you can do AP3 in any order, if you do Wintersun last you get both power feats at once, does this mean you could use both on a role card feat? Or does the one from Wintersun have to be used before you actually get the role? This matters particularly for characters whose only remaining feats pre-role are hand size that they may not like to take.

2) Also for AP1 and B, the reward is a card feat, so after completing the last scenario of AP1 (or B), would you first reset you deck to its proper size and number of cards and the return everything to the box before you get the AP reward? Therefore making it so you have to choose the card to fill you new card slot from the box and not from the extra cards left after beating the scenario?

These questions probably have little change in the end result of feats or deck configuration but these are the things we end up discussing while playing in our group lol.

3) Oh and one more question, can I use a blessing of Nethys to explore the chasm of shadows and just skip its ability to examine? Or would it simply not be playable there?

Thanks! Won't need it yet of course as we're only on 2 but I'll get it in the box and ready. Gonna need those bonuses I think. Played 2-1 today as Imrijka in a 4 player group and ran into a Demonic Horde, and lo and behold I get randomly selected to take on all 4 lol!

Yeah, I just noticed the Champions of Mendev doesn't have a downloadable printout yet. We are just starting so it's not needed yet, but would be nice in the near future.

So I know Barbarian got delayed a month, but are both Barbarian and Oracles still planned for early February? Same day?

Personally, I'm a #3 kinda guy for the home game, but even then we came to the conclusion it would add too many cards, so we opted for #4. No reason to water down the game more than need be with extra quarterstaves etc IMHO. We recently started a S&S run where we let each player pick a class deck (and not necessarily the deck for that person's character's class) and choose up to 20 cards from it in total to add to the game, just to add some flavor. I can't really imagine this being an advantage of any kind since you are limited and it still make the chances of encountering any of the already included boons less. It does, however, add some additional options and I actually had a difficult time finding 20 cards without putting a lot of thought into what others might need.

I see that this and the Barbarian class deck are listed as early February; are they both coming out at the same time?

Not to revive a dead thread for no reason, I wanted to get a clarification.

Does this mean that banes that affect all characters at all locations would have their difficulty determined by where each character is and not by where the bane came from?

Example 1:

At this location: The difficulty to defeat banes is increased by 3.
All other location have no banes altering powers.

Should a Skeletal Horde come up (where everyone at an open location must summon and encounter the bane) in the location where bane difficulty is +3, would only characters at the +3 location have an increased difficulty?

Example 2:

What about Treasure Hunt in S&S? It says "Each character may attempt at a check to defeat this barrier."

If it was encountered at Fringes of the Eye ("All barriers +3 difficulty" at this location power), would only those actually at the fringes have a +3 difficulty?

Just want to make sure we aren't messing up check calculations.

Love Damiel, by far the most fun I've had with a character as of yet, but I had a couple questions:

Potion of Flying states "The character may move; if it's that character's turn, he may explore his location."


1) Can I play this on myself in response to another character encountering a card at my location on their turn? Such as to avoid damage or avoid having to encounter said card if it has a power that states all characters at that location encounter it or all characters at that location take x damage? I'm leaning towards yes because "if a card doesn't say when it can be played, it can be played anytime. But also towards no since it doesn't "directly affect a check".

(I saw this posted in another thread from August but that thread had died with no definitive answer given by the dev team.)


2) Since the 2nd part of the 1st sentence says "if it's that character's turn, he may explore his location", this means even if on my turn I choose not to move, I can still explore again correct? I assume this is true since it says I may move, but doesn't say that I have to move in order to use the explore.

elcoderdude wrote:
Gambit001 wrote:
1) That character (character B) MAY choose to act by using a power or card to assist the player who encountered the bane. Since cards don't have memories we can't wait until they DO act to decide if they may, therefore, I'm of the opinion that it is just as much player B's "before you act timeframe" as it is player A's.

I don't understand this claim. Any assistance I can think of (playing blessings, playing spells, Lem/Valeros/Harsk/etc assistance) takes place during steps other than the BYA step.

Gambit001 wrote:
2) If "before you act, succeed at x check or you may not plays spells or weapons" types of bane powers affect all players, such as someone using Illuminate to add to another character's check has to beat that check to assist, then this should count as a before you act to all players as well.

The spell-restriction BYA power is universal because such limitations apply to all players, not because all players experience the before you act step.

I think the debate hinges on whether the "you" in "before you act" is significant. If the step were "Before the encountering player acts" and the Ring of Forcefangs said "When you are dealt damage before the encountering player acts", I'd raise no objection.

For #1: I guess what I was trying to say is that because any assistance happens on a different step, we have to assume that such assistance could occur and therefore every character has a before you act step regardless of who encountered the card.

For #2: The way I see it, if one before you act power counts as a before you act power, they all do, whether you have to make a check (which would allow you to use cards/powers) or if you have to resolve an effect (in this case taking damage).

Again this is just my viewpoint, and one of the guys I play with and I get into debates about cards and rules all the time, which is why I love this forum so much!

In the end I agree it comes down to the significance of the "you" on the card, but it just seems to me that "before you act" damage would be universal.

Well this is a fun debate! I'm actually with Longshot on this one. From a logic standpoint, you haven't attempted to close the location until you actually make the attempy; and the henchman wouldn't be displayed until after you make that attempt. I can see how it might be viewed a different way, but from an IF/THEN perspective, the way it reads the attempt must actually occur before the displaying does.

Just my $0.02:

I can think of 2 reasons why I believe that "before you act" effects would be universal to all characters, not just the encountering one (meaning the ring can be used by the non-encountering character):

1) That character (character B) MAY choose to act by using a power or card to assist the player who encountered the bane. Since cards don't have memories we can't wait until they DO act to decide if they may, therefore, I'm of the opinion that it is just as much player B's "before you act timeframe" as it is player A's.

2) If "before you act, succeed at x check or you may not plays spells or weapons" types of bane powers affect all players, such as someone using Illuminate to add to another character's check has to beat that check to assist, then this should count as a before you act to all players as well.

So, is there an official street date yet?

new question, should the captain have the pirate trait?

I appreciate the input everyone. Guardian may be a good choice. I guess I'll have to wait and see what the rest of my group goes with. I really was leaning towards Hierophant originally for the wisdom and since Cold iron Warden will allow me to recharge blessings on combat anyway, strength may not be quite as needed; plus I know WotR has a lot of knowledge related checks, which is under wisdom for Imrijka

What are each of your (or any new posters') thoughts on Hierophant?

Now if only using her power to add divine against monsters actually made the check wisdom as well, oh well. :(

Since I can't get a wisdom/strength path (which irks me a bit, this is a demon campaign, it's all about strength and faith lol), I'd like to get suggestions from the rest of you. Thinking of going Cold iron Warden if that matters.

Thanks in advance!

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Gambit001 wrote:

So, deck 5 shows as out for sale, not a pre-order, but every non-paizo site I see shows it as not available until 10/28, is this listed as available incorrectly? Or is it just available a month early here on this site?

Streen date is September 30th. I can't tell you why other sites are padding that date. Perhaps just to be cautious. But not ever site is saying 10/28. CSI has it as September.. Miniature Market has it as September as well. And Amazon has it as 10/15/15. I've often seen Amazon give a street date, then notify pre-orders that the product is available early.

Where are you seeing it as 10/28?

It was from a separate distributor, probably just padding the date they gave me. I probably shouldn't have said "every non-Paizo site" since I was aware of the Sept (no specific date) showing on CSI & MM. Thanks for the clarification Hawkmoon. Do subscribers get it a little earlier than the street date? And do you know the street date for deck 6?

So, deck 5 shows as out for sale, not a pre-order, but every non-paizo site I see shows it as not available until 10/28, is this listed as available incorrectly? Or is it just available a month early here on this site?

So, this shows as out for sale, not a pre-order, but every non-paizo site I see shows it as not available until 10/28, is this listed as available incorrectly? Or is it just available a month early here on this site?

Not sure if this was somehow leaked like another post I saw on here where this may have happened before, but I have not heard anything about this card and just happened to see it while searching ebay. Is this the promo that's set to come with Wrath Deck 5?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Improvised-Dinosaur-Pathfinder-Adventure-Card-Game- Promo-Weapon-/321870402045?hash=item4af0f891fd

So just for additional clarification... the Battles Iconic Heroes sets come with cards owned by each miniature (or the companion's associated character), correct? If the owners of two of the cards in set #5 are to be Kess and Zadim, my understanding is that only they can start with them, and only characters of the same class can even keep/use them in PACG, right? Since there are no Brawlers or Slayers in any of the add-ons, base sets, or class decks, what would the ruling be on the use of these? I guess that would go for Hakon, the Skald in set 4 as well.

Would I be right to assume that in OP (as Hawkmoon already advised in non-OP they can be used by anyone) those cards simply cannot not be used at all since no classes will match?

Yeah, you're right, it likely won't make much of a difference. Onto my other question, I don't know a ton of background on Pathfinder lore, but does anyone know who the redheaded woman at the top of the original pathfinder mockup image is?

Great, thanks for the clarification, that's what I thought. Well at least it keeps that power useful in WotR. :)

I was looking through the FAQ and some of the resolutions reference "Basic Blessings"(such as for Amaryllis: Can Amaryllis use her role powers that depend on Blessing of the Gods in a set without any such blessings?

Yes. Let's open that up to all Basic blessings.

Resolution: On both sides of Amaryllis's role card, change "When you play Blessing of the Gods" to "When you play a Basic blessing".)

Are there other blessings in other sets that are Basic and have that trait? I have, as of now, only completed RotR, so I just wanted to confirm if there are others or if the FAQ is really referencing "B" "C" "P" blessings that you start any of the adventure paths with. Thanks!

While I am sad that there will be less character choice from this point forward with the change to 3 per class deck, I hope that it does show a considerable change in the way the characters are played. I don't play OP, just home games, but I never found an issue with any of the class deck characters really. Yes, some powers seemed to be less useful that hoped for, but far from making them weak. My biggest concern really is the diversity of character options and play styles(and I really want to know who that red-headed paladin from the paladin class deck mock up box is and if there is any chance I will get to use them).

I get that those cards being split between 3 instead of 4 characters can help in OP, but what other advantage does it have, say, to the home game?

So, I happen to be this friend he spoke of. I tend to run into those once in an adventure kind of scenarios.. well, more than once an adventure. I'd also like to be sure we were doing this correctly, and based on the above response I would be able to complete the closing attempt first (which would mean our other friend, playing Lem, would be able to add his 1d4+1 to assist me in doing so) and then deal with the entire Iesha encounter, correct?

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. I never meant to imply that she is a worse character overall, simply that her version of sneak attack is less versatile.

I guess the end result is simply that Wu Shen's power is just plain worse than Merisel's... kinda sad about that.

Thanks for the confirmation. Seems to me that when you choose to add an element to an existing power that did not originally have it by way of a power feat, that is when it is optional, but if it is part of the original power it has to remain?

The only thing that seems strange to me about this is that the RotR original Merisel's (as well as the CD Merisel's) power allows her to recharge for the additional 1d6, but Wu Shen's, while seemingly the same (as it requires the same scenario of being alone and has the same cost of recharging a card), requires the addition of poison, making Wu Shen's power worse in a large number of cases due to many monsters having poison immunity.

Sorry to revive the thread, and I'm glad to see my Kyra's fire is optional, but as a newer player I was just curious if this ruling would also apply to Wu Shen's Power to add 1d6 and the poison trait. Is the poison optional? Or because it is not a checkmarked power upgrade, is it always there?