Gamer1066's page

Snicker, you might want to try two house rules I developed and play with. When played together I found these two rules make the game very fun, very interesting, and certainly more challenging...!
The two house rules are:

-Amend all blessing cards to work only on the hero's current location (i.e. Blessing of The Gods would read "Discard this card to add 1 die to a check at your location".)

-Difficulty of all banes (monsters, barriers, henchmen, and villains) encountered is modified by the number of heroes at a given location:
1 hero @ location: No modifier
2 heroes @ location: +1D4-2 Difficulty
3-4 heroes @ location: +1D4 Difficulty
5-6 heroes @ location: +1D6 Difficulty
*In your games you can roll the difficulty modifier before your check, or for even greater challenge, at the same time you roll your check.

I think these two house rules played together add interesting aspects/considertions to movement and costs/benefits of fighting together/sharing items/playing to your hero's strengths, etc. You have to think more about the costs/benefits of fighting together or sepately. Also, I've found it makes other cards besides blessings more important while necessitating being at the same location to utilize those critical blessing cards. Of course, being at the same location comes at a cost because any banes you enounter might be extra nasty....!

I'm also really curious to hear what others think if they try out these two house rules played together in their scenarios.

Thanks for sharing your experiences. Just curious, if you play with the house rule "Only one of each type of boon may be played on a single check (replaces text in original rules)" do you think your heroes would take more damage more frequently?

If you did take damage more frequently, do you think this would make armor more important for your heroes?

Ok Csouth, I'll call a truce. This is for you guys who have been playing a while.

I just want to play fun, challenging, thematically based card game. I'd like to play with the collective knowledge of the best rules from the very start. Since this game is cumulative, I'd hate to get 30 scenarios in and realize I've been playing with rules that are 1) too easy and/or 2) lose the thematic feel of the game (which some people are posting....)
For example, since the paladins favored card is armor.....seems like that should mean something in game play....
plus there are options to add armor proficiencies on several character cards, seems like those are worthless in the game from what people are saying.
I think it would be a shame to play in a fantasy game system where armor is "useless"....

After writing a few posts, I've heard from several people that they are consistently not taking damage in their games. If this is the case for your group, I think the PACG gaming system is breaking down on you. Let me give you my two cents on why.

PACG is an incredibly innovative card game that tries to emulate certain aspects of hack and slash RPGs without a GM. I've been attempting something similar for a couple years and Mike's innovations are simply superb. One of his key innovations was using power cards that are discarded as a sort of hp counter. Fantastic....genius. It allows for this great trade off of powers/choices and consequences and hits/damage.

However, if you are in a game where you or other heroes don't/can't take damage, your games will quickly go out of balance. This is because not only will you not take hp damage, but you'll also have more power available than you should have under "normal" conditions. Since there is no GM, the game designers have to set things up to assume some "normal" damage (I.e. Card losses). They do this to keep the game from being too hard or too easy.

If you are not taking any card losses (which would be assumed in the design of the game) your game will feel broken. This effect becomes cumulative....the more you win, the harder it will be for you to lose. And the harder it is to lose, the more you'll think certain cards don't matter.

So what to do? Since there is no GM, you'll need to regulate your own games. I'd say you need to introduce radical rule changes to correct the balance (for example, between scenarios a mad man attacks your party and takes every heroes 2 favorite cards......!)

OR

Start over. The game is meant to be played over and over. Don't you want a game that is more challenging? I just played Ezren solo through scenario 1 last night.....I barely made it by the skin of my teeth....awesome! When you are weak, getting a healing potion is like the greatest thing ever!

If you want more incentive on how fun it is to barely win...watch the Crit hit review and the Grey elephant review of the game....you'll see they trying so hard to stay alive....truly perilous!

From your comments, seems like the problem is pretty obvious----too many blessings.

I have 2 suggestions:

Each player may use only their own blessings.

Or

Players can only add dice via blessings if they are at the same location.

One other suggestion:

the rule book says for solo play, if a particular card is too difficult to defeat repeatedly, you can replace the card with another (example of a barrier).

I would say the converse is true too. If you have played many, many games and you are sure you are playing ALL the rules correctly and your games are still too easy---see if you can identify the character or power that is throwing the game off balance. Then simply remove that character or power and let us know if it makes your games more challenging.

I think we all want a challenging game system. If there is an element that is making it too easy.....I say take that out before you add other rules.

Please see my house rule for Armor Proficiency and Armor cards. I think this will certainly make the game more challenging. Please let me know what you think if you try it out.

Hi all,

I'm proposing the following house rule variant and I'd like to get others thoughts. If you test it out, let me know how it works for you. It comes from an observation that heros without certain armor proficiencies (i.e. wizard, monk, and sorcerer, especially, but also rogue, bard, ranger, and Druid without heavy armor proficiency) can use heavy armor (like half-plate) that they find during a scenario without too many restrictions. Some of these heros can also receive armor from others in their party between scenarios. I think some further restrictions on the armor cards could make the game more interesting (and a bit harder).

With input I received so far on this board and BGG, here is my proposed House Rule that would apply to all armor cards:

For Light Armor and Shield cards: If you are not proficient with light armor, when you reveal or recharge this card, the maximum Combat damage you can reduce is 1. If the card has an option to banish, when you banish this card the maximum damage you can reduce is 2.

For Heavy Armor cards: If you are not proficient with heavy armor, when you reveal or recharge this card, the maximum Combat damage you can reduce is 1. When you banish this card, the maximum damage you can reduce is 2.

This would make light armor or heavy armor proficiency much more meaningful in the game. It would make gaining certain armor proficiencies more important. I think this house rule would make make things more interesting and challenging for spellcasters (the armor and other defensive spells become more imporant, perhaps) and those heros with only light armor proficiency. I've also seen some others complaining about PACG being too easy. Perhaps these armor restrictions would be a helpful addition and could make the game a bit harder (and require more fun trade offs!)

I'm open for input on the utility or usefulness of this House Rule variant for the armor cards.

Hi all,

I posted comments on BGG, but I thought I'd summarize my points and bring them over here too to expand the discussion:

PACG is a great game, I'm really enjoying it.

One vexing question I have is why can those heros without proficiency (i.e. wizards and druids especially) use armor (like half-plate) that they find during a scenario without much restriction? I know they can't keep armor between scenarios, but it seems this weakens armor proficiency quite a bit.

I thought Mike provided an excellant explaination for fighters acquiring and using spells during a scenario (they are like one use scrolls, etc.). And the cards for spells nicely restrict how useful the cards are for non-spell casters. Same goes for weapons. I think some further restrictions on the armor cards could make the game more interesting (and a bit harder).

With input I received so far on BGG, my proposed House Rule would amend armor cards along the following lines (no need to change any rules, just cards.)

I'll provide half-plate as an example:

Half-plate
Traits
 Heavy armor
 Elite
 Check to acquire: Constitution/Fortitude 4
Powers
 If you are proficient with heavy armor, recharge this card to reduce Combat damage dealt to you by 3. Otherwise, recharge this card to reduce Combat damage dealt to you by 1.
 If you are proficient with heavy armors, bury this card to reduce all damage dealt to you to 0. Otherwise, banish this card to reduce all damage dealt to you by 2.

Similar amendments would be made to light armor, shields and other heavy armor cards (if Mike and others think this is a good idea). This would make light armor or heavy armor proficiency much more meaningful in the game. I'm open for input on the utility or usefulness of these changes to the armor cards.

I think this house rule would make make things more interesting for spellcasters (the armor and other defensive spells becomes more imporant, perhaps). I've also seen some others complaining about PACG being too easy. Perhaps some type of armor restriction for all those spellcasters (like the penalities for using weapons when you aren't proficient) would be a helpful addition and could make the game a bit harder.