Thank you, Vic, for clarification and looking into Blackjack role. As to your proposed option for changing role from DD into Blackjack - what if, for example, someone took a role and checked only the power feat(s) that is(are) already present on the character card and did not check anything from the role card? I did that strange thing with Core_Seelah ;)
It's a normal Combat check, so you can either play a weapon, spell, attack item or whatever you like (key words: for your combat check, ...). Then, after this After Acting phase is over (regardless of result), you have to pass a regular Combat check to defeat the Teddybear. And on that check, you can play a weapon / spell / attack item / whatever again, as it is a different check...
I think the suggested wording for Cogsnap works - it would be maybe odd-looking if the "On a check or step," was in the front (i.e. timing first) as in other post-Core powers.
Regarding the proficiencies - I'd like to remind you that Vic has just retracted the "gain Melee / Ranged proficiency if you gain that skill" rule from conversion FAQ and Core rules. You most probably noticed, but it never hurts to repeat stuff.
It is probable that you can "reveal" a displayed card for its power, but the wording is more than just redundant. If the intention was that the power is active always, Frencois' second variant would be much more probable.
In addition to Frencois' suggestions for the intent, it could be also "may reload / recharge to add 1d10". So it is a great idea to ask developers, as he just did :) "Worst case" is: works-as-intended
Not arguing against the Giant Fly :) That one is a pest. After Acting does not come into play in your examples. Resolve the Encounter step seems to me like a part of the encounter just after After Acting and before Avenging.
Resolve the Encounter wrote:
If you did not succeed at all of the checks required to defeat the bane, it is undefeated; if no local character wishes to avenge your encounter (see below), apply all effects that happen when the bane is undefeated, then shuffle the bane back into its location.
So undefeated bane (including Villains) becomes "undefeated" in this step and Harsk's power can trigger, replacing shuffle into reload. No uncertainties here. However, there is a Check if Villain escapes step of an encounter few bullet points later. That one replaces the "shuffle the bane" with specific instructions. If that is replaced by Harsk's power as well is in question, but I would guess so. Most other powers reloading monsters specify a non-villain monster, probably to prevent confusion such as this.
I believe so - and here is why:
Golden Rules wrote:
If the storybook, cards, or rules are ever in conflict, the storybook overrides the cards, and the cards override the rules.
It depends on "when" you reload the bane - is it during Resolve the Encounter step? Do all other steps after that apply?Definitely the Villain would be reloaded for your second variant - the Villain would be shuffled back in to the same location even if it escaped into the same location, so the Harsk's power and rulebook instructions are in conflict => it gets reloaded instead.
For the first variant, the question is "should I reload it first and then maybe apply all the other steps, including Check if the Villain Escapes"? The "do what the card instructed you to do even if it is not in sight" instruction might or might not pertain to the rulebook. My opinion is to reload the story bane into the location.
Why? Symmetry. If the story bane was just henchman, it is reloaded. Aberration, Dragon, Giant? Reloaded. Villain? Huh, reloaded, I guess, as it should be similar, right?
Pre-Core SoMH was indeed considered on our 6-player tables to be one of the most useless cards ever printed.
:-D And our different experience with this great game reveals itself again. We considered that card to be one of the most useful items, with Seoni using it quite a lot - it depends on how effective is your character in recharging cards from their hands. :)From my experience, SoMH is nowhere near as useless as pre-Core Blast Stone or most Basic armors or most RotR potions (without Alchemist) and so on.
Well, that might be the difference :-D. I almost always play games with 3, or more often, 4 characters. Then there are quite a few draws more. I'd like to think that the strength of each particular card in that number of players (around the middle of the possible range) represents an average strength of that card. The extremes (1;6) will be clearly the most different :)
I do not think that Jenceslav's concern about difficult recharge checks is relevant to the issue here. (For a couple reasons, but most of all WotR Seoni can automatically recharge Attack spells!)
Ups :) I have to read more carefully, I missed that power (and misremembered the way how the power in question replaces a typical Sorcerer power - I though it was instead of auto-recharging and it is instead of turn-anything-into-fireball). I am sorry ;)
I understand that it no longer works that way and I think recovery is a great thing to break such insane combos. I said that as a background story to illustrate why I thought "heal and shuffle the card back" is too powerful in my opinion and why I used the word "unfortunately". With Kyra, it's at least only one card :) and not 1d4. I am very much aware of everything you said, Yewstance ;) but thank you for elaborate description.
Well, I played Damiel in Skull & Shackles. Combine his power with two Potions of Healing and you have insane healing machine. He recharged a Potion of Healing AND then could shuffle it back in with the healed cards. Don't you consider that too powerful? That's why I have a healthy respect for healing cards (pun intended) that get shuffled back into your deck.And in this case, shuffle is really somewhat better than recharge, Yewstance, as you can get to the healing card sooner (on average). I usually do not bother trying to remember the deck order through recharges, so that "advantage" of recharge over shuffling is lost for me :-D
Still miss a second Cure, my Core Seelah could really use two of them ;)
I don't think there is much conflict - the quote is about cards that heal you by discarding it (that means, they should be in the discard pile / discards at that moment) and thus need to be excluded from that list.
page 7 wrote:
For example, if a card says “Recharge this card to recharge a card from your discards,” recharge the card you’re playing before recharging the card from your discards.
so unless the intention was opposite, you first recharge a card and then heal (shuffling the card in the deck, if Kyra healed herself).
Before your combat check, you may discard a card to draw a card that has the Arcane (□ or Magic) trait from your discard pile.
The idea is that spells that she failed to recharge pre-Core would be available for drawing from the discard pile. For example, Disintegrate with huge recharge check difficulty. She has no other reliable way of fighting and cannot auto-recharge spells. Now, it is in the recovery pile during her turn and she cannot do anything with that spell. I never played with her, so I don't know how it would affect gameplay if she wasn't changed. Drawing from the recovery pile, however, has the potential to break things even more.Other characters (IMHO) are slightly, but not crushingly, lowered in power.
Good catch, Yewstance. I always just skimmed through the Harrows, looking at the cool pictures and not reading the text (well, unless it became the hour or we encountered it). I believe that if the "non-story bane monster or barrier" wording is universal, then it calls for FAQ to The Midwife harrow.
Here is what my idea is about Skull&Shackles locations. Sometimes the assignment of "Wild" is governed by the amount of action seen on the card or reflects the weather (if that is an appropriate thing to do). My assignments are completely subjective and as expected, the Aquatic trait dominates. Some islands were not assigned Aquatic if I thought beach is not important for that. I am open to any suggestions / objections :)
Cannibal Isle Wild
Dagon's Jaws Aquatic Wild
Dinosaur Corral Wild
Docks Aquatic Urban
Eye of Serenity Aquatic Wild
Festhall Urban Wild
Fishing Village Aquatic Urban
Floating Shipyard Aquatic Urban
Fog Bank Aquatic
Fort Hazard Underground Urban
Fringes of the Eye Aquatic Wild
Gannet Island Wild
Ghol-Gan Ruins Sacred Wild
Gozreh's Flow Aquatic Wild
Great Stone Bridge Wild
Hall of Champions Sacred Underground
Harbor Aquatic Urban
Hatchery Aquatic Wild
Holy Isle Sacred
House of Stolen Kisses Underground Urban
Chapel Sacred Urban
Jasperleaf Apothecary Urban
Lonely Island Aquatic Wild
Lucrehold Aquatic Underground Urban
Mancatcher Cove Aquatic Wild
Mangrove Swamp Aquatic Wild
Merchant Marina Urban
Murder Hole Underground Urban
Pinnacle Atoll Aquatic
Raker Shoals Aquatic Wild
Riptide Cove Aquatic Wild
Rocky Cliff Wild
Ruined Amphitheater Sacred Urban
Sacred Spring Sacred Aquatic
Safe House Urban
Scar Bay Underground Wild
Sea Caves Aquatic Underground
Sea Fort Aquatic Urban
Seaside Warehouse Urban
Shark Island Aquatic Wild
Sharkskin Reef Aquatic Wild
Shipwreck Graveyard Aquatic
Shrine to Besmara Sacred Urban
Shrine to Norgorber Sacred Underground Urban
Teleportation Chamber Underground
Tempest Cay Aquatic Wild
Tengu Rookery Urban
Theater of Corruption Urban
Tidewater Rock Aquatic Urban
Torture Pit Underground
Widowmaker Isle Aquatic Urban
Windward Isle Aquatic
Wishing Well Sacred Wild
I did not include the bonus for finishing CoCT 7A, as it would complicate things for rexx2264, but you are right that you can get up to #=9 and actual_feat_limit=10 - if the rewards stack.
My opinion is so far very positive. Minor remark: I own only Skull&Shackless (full) + Core + Curse and use sleeved cards exclussively - perfect size.
Regarding the Curse box - you can store the cards in that pretty easily and everything fits, but only if you are using tight-fitting sleeves like perfect size or no sleeves at all (the latter is kind of barbaric, for such a nice game). There was another thread, where I sent a picture proving it ;)
That depends, rexx. You have two options - the reward for Dragon's Demand lists:
DD AP reward wrote:
You may play your character in another Adventure Path starting with adventure 1. Build the Vault with all of its level 0, 1, 2, and 3 cards, and treat # as 3 during adventures 1, 2, and 3.
The second option is in the CoCT introduction:
CoCT storybook, page 3 wrote:
… or bring in characters who have started The Dragon's Demand Adventure Path first. … you should add (choose) one wildcard for every adventure in DD that the players have completed; also, increase # by the # of the last scenario you completed, and treat encountered banes' levels as higher by that same #.
Choose whichever you want. The second option allows you to have up to 9 skill feats eventually instead of 6 (the bonus 7th adventure does not give you hero points) and the same for cards and powers.I don't like that there are two incompatible rules and you can choose which one to follow. Also, there is a slight loophole in CoCT option - you can finish DD and then replay some scenario in adventure 1 to get #:=#+1; in that way, you loose any level 2 or 3 cards while replaying, but it is still a small loophole.
Ad Jirelle, this is the power in question
S&S Jirelle, the dashing Duelist wrote:
□ When you defeat a monster on your turn, and your check to defeat has the Swashbuckling trait, you may discard (□ or recharge) a card to immediately explore.
and the question is, what happens if the monster has several checks to defeat. Do all of them need to be Swashbuckling? Or at least one?
If the latter, then…
Adelita Doloruso, the terrible S&S villain, based on FAQ wrote:
… your turn, and any check to defeat invoked Swashbuckling, …
On Talitha, your suggested splitting looks perfect to me.
CD Talitha wrote:
Brother Tyler, you do a great job with all these changes, guided along with the voice of
S&S Feiya wrote:
You may discard an Animal ally to draw a spell from your discards or, if proficient and that spell alllows a check to recharge, from your recovery pile.
It's not nice, but preserves the original functionality (I hope). We cannot just say "spell that would be discarded", because that happens only when you choose not to take the check-to-recharge or fail it. And we don't know the result at the moment this power is activated. "Automatically banished during recovery" has similar problem, as the banishing is not automatical, you have to check some conditions for the spell not to be banished as we "(rulebook~) banish any cards that remain" at the end of recovery.Proficiency is needed, because originally, non-proficient spells would be banised after playing and never get into the discard pile. If you omit proficiency, you change the functionality, which we are not allowed to do, as you yourself said.
Thank you, Vic, for the clarification. I wasn't sure precisely because they seem so similar in meaning. Would it be possible to make some distinction between "base" (Strength, Dexterity, …, Charisma) and "derived" skills (Diplomacy… ) in these cases? (Insert any better designation instead of base and derived; when teaching the rules, I often call them skills and sub-skills)
Zeroth hour's question would then be easily parsable if it were e.g.:
Changes to what Vic wrote:
When you gain a skill equal to another derived skill, its base skill is not added as a trait to checks using the new skill.
That distinction would make me feel content, but if I just know what is the intent and play that way, that is also completely fine with me.
OK, but I don't see much difference between these two.
Vic, our champion wrote:
When you gain a skill equal to another skill, the original skill is not added as a trait to checks using the new skill.
When Alahazra gains "Arcane: Charisma+2", she does gain a skill equal to another skill (+2), doesn't she? For me it is a shorthand for: "gain Arcane skill equal to your Charisma +2". So I was asking if the proposed rules change can affect such powers or not. If it shouldn't, then for the sake of less-comprehending people like me, the wording might need some tweaking to make it clear. :)
My personal opinion:
My money is on Kasmir #2. Also, the #3 and #4 most probably need the "of your turn" added, as Vic said; otherwise it might imply the first/last explore step of the game and not on the turn. Plus, #3 has the potential problem of not being able to check the conditions forward (also, if there was a power that said "When a character heals a card on their turn, they may explore.", he would be able to explore if he healed himself, right?).
The old Alchemical items that have banish-to-use effects should definitely be revisited for the Conversion Quide, if that is a big problem. If I am not mistaken, most spells and post-Core Alchemical stuff have recharge check difficulty equal to check_to_acquire_difficulty+2, so the easy solution would be to have them have text "DURING RECOVERY: If proficient, you may succeed at a Craft XYZ check to recharge this card." (XYZ = the ?highest? number in the checks to acquire + 2) - if that does not screw many things.
I slightly disagree with Frencois. If there is a boon in the hourglass, you may not close or guard with that boon unless it is a blessing, because you are not acquiring it at all (the power states blessing). They way I understand this closing requirements, you have to find the top blessing, not check if the top card is a blessing.
The only part of the rulebook that comes close to my understanding of 2 (and which I could find) is:
Rulebook, p. 13 wrote:
You are not technically examining (I think), so any Trigger cards that somehow got into the hourglass should not trigger (pun intended).
Hmmm, Brother Tyler, there is one error in your last post. The discussion to the "At the start of the first explore step of your turn" relates to a different character and not to Kasmir (who cares about the end of the old-style exploration phase, i.e. the last explore step), but has the same result: there are many explore steps.
Slacker, that was one of my crazy ideas, although it might be hard to control it. "OK, at the end of my last explore step, I heal myself. OH, full 5 cards? Hmmmmm, then I will discard this ally to explore some more." Other player: "you can't do that". Kasmir's player: "Well, it was the last explore step at that time, right?" Other player: "Ugh"
EmpTyger - my several suggestions in that regard were sparked by WeBeHeroes? Siathorn Treemugger - first power. It is definitely not suitable everywhere, but sometimes it might be useful for long lists.
My opinion is:
Emptyger & ordering of cards - when proposing such changes, I was not motivated by attempts to put it alphabetically, but more to get rid of so many "or" - or combinations "A or B ( or C or D) ( or E or F)" Brrrr. I don't think we need to bend ourselves into Pretzels trying to make each trait list alphabetical :)
Brother Tyler, I understood your point about ", or" - personally I don't care if there is or isn't a comma. Meaning is important to me and that is clear with or without the comma. My suggestion (optional, as suggestions do) was to get rid of the awkward A or B or C or D.
I agree that punctuation should probably break the sequence, but that's not the point. The point is, if you have some brackets divided by ".", "," or ";", many people might be confused about the sequence, so it is better to avoid that whenever possible. In one occasion, the "." thematically did NOT break the sequence in the original text, so better avoid any ambiguity. :)
Some clarification are needed (well, fox already correctly identified the intent of my several comments; thank you and congratulations in understanding my twisted and jumpy mind).
Trait reordering is to get rid of excessive "or"s to make a more nicely looking list: A, B, C, D or E. And I don't really care about if you do or don't include comma before "or", that's just minor correction and I don't adhere to that Oxford comma rule (also because in my native language we never put comma before and/or in a list).
Imrijka - I wrote the first part, then the second part of the sentence and the way I planned to say it changed without me noticing. Of course I meant: if they should be in sequence, do it "( … .) ( … .)", otherwise try to find a better solution.
Ahmotep - my attempt to limit any confusion about sequence of powers. I did not notice that it lost "you may". Sorry :)
Estra - Huh, I did not notice that you rearranged things a lot. In this case, I strongly second the suggestion of moving the "ignore trigger effects" BEFORE the encounter. It needs a little clarification, but I think Estra should a) ignore Trigger on Undead cards only, b) encounter only an Undead card, c) shuffle only if Undead was examined (not 100% sure about this, but OK).
Mavaro (Magic Item) - I wasn't sure about the intent, so I asked. Indefinite articles are missing in many places in the original powers, so I mostly ignore that. E.g. sometimes it is "a weapon, an armor(,) or an ally", sometimes "a weapon, armor or ally". :)
Thank you very much, Vic, for the direction about proficiency (include / don't include) we should take. I was aware of this change, and that is why I pointed out the characters that might be affected by gaining Melee / Ranged skill => proficiency.
S&S Merisiel possibly wrote:
On your check that invokes Finesse, gain the skill Melee: Dexterity +1. During that check, you are proficient with Melee.
S&S Merisiel alternatively wrote:
Proficiency:  Weapon Finesse
Could you please tell me if either of the suggestions has any problem from developers' perspective? Thanks
Ugh, this took longer than I expected, but here are some suggestions for WotR and MM - the remaining powers are usually clear, precise or very cleverly translated into Post-Core by Brother Tyler.
Murder, she wrote:
The way I see it with the proficiencies, they are better spelled out, because post-Core, Arcane skill and Arcane proficiency are different thing. And if powers pre-Core grant Arcane, they should be explicitly stated so to prevent confusion. That's if I understood your last paragraph correctly :)
Based on a new update to Conversion Guide here, the powers that temporarily grant Melee or Ranged also give you proficiency. Huh, OK.
I don't think the unaffected characters need any additions, so just ignore the Melee proficiency gain, as it would just add unnecessary text. The three affected characters should gain proficiency temporarily (~ S&S Merisiel).
S&S Alahazra: Proficiency with Attack spells opens up the ability to use Divine Attack spells, so we should make it proficiency with Arcane Attack spells.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Alahazra already have proficiency with that? :-D I played quite a few Fireblades with Alahazra. Not to mention her power that adds static bonus to Attack spells. Of course we can limit her added proficiency to Arcane Attack spells, but one overlap does not hurt anybody, right?
Well, there is more coming once I get some spare time and get through it.
Lini Wild Warden might be indeed reworded to include "you". My feeble attempt on wording is not perfect, I just wanted to put the Divine in the conditions.
Ad After recovery / At the end of the turn: my "feel" is that those recharge powers are something the character has to actively do rather than it being automatic. That's why end-your-turn effects from banes should stop it (I think).
Alahazra - I propose only changing the proficiency, not removing Charisma+2. Skill and proficiency are now separate. Something like (another feeble attempt): "□ When you play an Attack spell and on your check to recharge it, gain the skill Arcane: Charisma +2 (for that check). You are proficient with Attack spells." See my intent? Giving her proficiency with Arcane allows Arcane non-attack spells, items and other crazy stuff.
Lem Freebooter - hmmm, maybe I should have written it "On YOUR check against a …", which I intended. Thank you for pointing out my mistake in writing.
Seltiyel Marauder - I know it "changes" the power, but to me it seems wrong. He can just recharge any blessing regardless of its original word? Similar to Sarenrae recharging (WotR Kyra), but here it really affects many powerful blessings. I don't think that was intended, that's why I am pointing that out.
Legacy character's powers affecting recovery pile in general are very dangerous, possibly allowing many ugly things like I mentioned above. That's why I am against such changes (which need approval from developers) even if that makes the character slightly less powerful.
Vic Wertz wrote:
We did a deep dive on character power optionality when adding the Active and Optional Powers sidebar, and issued FAQ entries for everything we felt needed adjustment. Anything that still doesn't say "you may" should not have it added.
Thank you for clarification, Vic - I have one question to that: was there FAQ made for promo characters, specifically Ranzak?
Ranzak Kleptomaniac wrote:
□ Discard a card from the blessings deck to explore your location.
If this one did not have "you may", then he has to do it if there cards in his location, right? Probably not something anyone would ever pick.
Ranzak Wrecker wrote:
□ Recharge a card to add 2d4 to your check to defeat a barrier or a henchman, then discard the top 1d4 cards from your deck.
Similarly, this power forces him to recharge a card and discard cards from his deck every time he makes a check against a barrier or henchman.Both powers have the template: "do something to get some bonus", and if this were MtG, they would be written as activated power, i.e.:
Do something:get some bonus
(which doesn't have to be activated).
So are we safe to assume that both these powers should be "you may" and Ranzak doesn't fail the scenario for the entire party if there is a bane in his location that gets always shuffled in - or doesn't kill himself by running into several barriers and/or henchmen in sequence? Zombie Nest says hello!
It took me some time to go through RotR and S&S characters, but here are my subjective suggestions for these characters.
Reload / recharge into - focus on magical weapons and Symbol of <XYZ> barriers. Maybe some spells do that as well. Definitely some monsters get reloaded when you don't defeat them.
Ad Kasmir - well, if it is not needed for that function, then it might be omitted to conserve space, even though it deviates from other templates.
Hayato - I am OK with any of the two versions being used, as long as they are consistent in both mirrored powers. :)
Rivani 4 - I get the intent, but as Vic said in the discussion about Quinn, "for" at the start of the power strongly suggests that it will be the "power to determine the sklil you are using". Apart from Quinn, also one goblin features this weird thing "For …, you may use XYZ instead of YXZ" that does not follow template given in the rulebook.
Rulebook, p. 11 wrote:
Other powers allow you to use one skill instead of another. These powers say things like “when you attempt a Perception check, you may use Knowledge” or “use Strength instead of Diplomacy.”
And I can testify that I have at least 4 shades of colour in one card type - with all / almost all cards for a given level in Core having different colour than the other levels both in the front and in the back, Curse cards having yet another colour. As it is pretty mixed up within types and Core/Curse, there is almost no problem in that. Well, apart from a big red splotch on Short Sword's back and small one on Lightning Touch.