Jhofre Vascari

Mistarrel's page

Organized Play Member. 55 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 18 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Messaged Calthaer in case he's organizing things.. but I'll try to check the room after exhibit hall hours close

Liberty's Edge

I will be there all three days.
I am disappointed that there will be no official PACG events (especially was hoping to see the 'playtest' set :( ).

I haven't done Season 4 or 5 yet (Faction's Favor or Tapestry's Tides) if people wanted to do organized play.

Or I'd be fine with just picking up a base set and playing it.

Liberty's Edge

Excellent - I'll have to try to get some PACG in while I'm there!

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Can we please get this updated? It's been a year since the last update now!

Liberty's Edge

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Goblin Pinata Golem would be an awesome card.

Does Tup get to burn the Pinata Golem (which then explodes?)

Liberty's Edge

Is it possible to have the Iconic Heroes set #4 removed from my sidecart?

I forgot I had ordered this, and my FLGS already pulled it for me. I don't really want two of them.


Liberty's Edge

Characters from two different groups

Group #1: Game club - 3 player game
Character Name: Shardra
Role Card: Visionary
Skill Feats: Strength +2, Dexterity +1, Intelligence +1, Wisdom +2, Charisma +1
Power Feats: +1 hand size, Heavy Armor, When you succeed at a knowledge check, you may examine the top 2 cards of your location deck, When you attempt a check to defeat a barrier, you may use your knowledge skill instead of the listed skill
Card Feats: Weapon +1, Spell +1, Armor +1, Blessing +1
Weapons: Rod of the Viper
Spells: Cure x2, Frigid Blast, Dismissal, Life Drain, Paralyze
Armors: Bejeweled Helm, Eagle Knight Dress Uniform
Items: Ring of Forcefangs, Black Robe
Allies: Druid of the Storm, Druid of the Leaf
Blessings: Abraxas, Ascension, Iomedae, Nethys, Shelyn x2
Mythic Path: Mystic Hierophant

Group #2: Game store - 4 player game
Character Name: Arueshalae
Role Card: Redeemed
Skill Feats: Dexterity +3, Constitution +1, Intelligence +1, Charisma +2
Power Feats: +1 hand size, Electricity Fire and Poison damage dealt to you is reduced by 5, When the cohort Aureshalae's Gift is displayed next to a character's deck, add 1d4+1 to his checks that use the marked skill, Instead of your first exploration on a turn, you may reveal a card that has the desna trait or a blessing to choose a character at your location - shuffled 1d4+1 random cards from the discard pile into his deck, then discard the card you revealed
Card Feats: Weapon +1, Item +1, Ally +1, Blessing +1
Weapons: Demonbane light crossbow +1, force shortbow +1, heavy crossbow, javelin of lightning, starbow
Armor: Elven Chain Shirt
Item: Manual of War, Banner of Valor, Scale of Resistance, Swallowtail Bracers
Allies: Droogami, Pegasus, Thylacene
Blessings: Ascension x2, Deskari, Ioemdae, Sarenrae, Shax
Mythic Path: Champion

Liberty's Edge

I have used the original broken token insert, and am currently using the go7gaming artist case insert for WotR.

Because of the issues listed with the fit/lanes with the BT version, I've liked the artist case version a LOT. I think that has more to do with the artist case and the "hard support" as opposed to the more flexible 'box' (rather than an a a BT vs go7 question).

Liberty's Edge

Thank you Sharaya.

Liberty's Edge

Ok - that does confirm that I am missing all the blessings and loot from Deck 3.

Liberty's Edge

Thanks Hawkmoon.

That helped me confirm that I'm missing the blessings and loot from deck 3 (which is what I thought).

Also confirmed that my other decks should be all right (since the variable number of blessings appears to be normal)

Liberty's Edge

Has anyone published a full deck list for Wrath and the various AP decks yet?

I noticed in deck 3, that I received only 101 cards, and don't have any of the Blessing of Starsong. But I can't tell everything that I am missing.

Looking at other decks, other numbers seem off (haven't done a full accounting yet), but I only have 4 Blessing of Nethys from deck 2 - but had 6 Blessing of Deskari in deck 1.

Is that normal?

Liberty's Edge

I can't find a complete list of cards - but I am apparently missing 9 cards from my latest adventure deck as it only held 101 cards.

I received no Blessings of Starsong, and no Loot items (looks like 5 cards there, so 4 blessings?)

This has made me look back at the other decks and I notice some other oddities -- I have yet to do a full count.

For instance I only have 4 Blessing of Nethys from Deck 2, while I have 6 Blessing of Deskari from deck 1.

Can you please provide a full list of cards including card counts so that I can verify what I am missing or not missing?

Liberty's Edge

This isn't anything tricky or new to the set - just an observation.

Demons are not particularly subtle -- specifically, there are no 'traps' in the standard sense of needing to disable them. Barriers (so far) are all about temptations and decisions or facing hordes.

This seems to be backed up by the fact that none of the WotR characters have Disable as a skill (suggesting there will be no use of that skill in the set).

Liberty's Edge

I got into a discussion with a member of my group about picking characters for WotR - and he liked Shardra for a power that I don't think made sense.

So now I'm wondering who is right on the power.

Shardra's Visionary role wrote:

__ When you (__ or a character at your location) attempt(s) a check to defeat a barrier (__ or close a location), you may use your knowledge skill instead of the listed skill.

He asserted that that meant that if you take the "__ or a character at your location" option, that Shardra takes over the action and Shardra rolls the defeat/close check using her Knowledge.

I had a problem with this as it seems to break the rule that "you cannot take someone else's turn".

The counterpoint he gave is that other similar powers were stated as "When you (or a character at your location)..., THAT character may use THEIR ..." -- and since this was a different phrasing, that the power clearly allows Shardra to make the check rather than the 'active character' (similar to defeating a bane with multiple checks).

We came up with three possible interpretations - and I'd like to know which is correct/intended.

1. This is an editing mistake, and should be phrased as "that character can use their knowledge skill"
2. That Shardra does indeed "make the check" instead of the acting character
3. That the intent is that the "acting character" may use Shardra's knowledge skill (Wisdom + 2) to make the check using the acting character's Wisdom die.

Liberty's Edge

My character from 4-player group (with Lem, Merisiel and Damiel)

Character Name: Feiya
Role Card: Hexer
Skill Feats: Intelligence+4, Wisdom+3
Power Feats: +2 hand size, Recharge to reduce difficulty of a check to aquire a spell or against monster or barrier by 3 plus the card's adventure deck number, Discard any ally to return a spell from discard to hand, Recharge blessing of Pharasma or any blessing on a check to acquire an ally

Card Feats: spell +3, Item +1, Ally +2, Blessing +2
Weapons: --
Spells: Aqueous Orb, Blazing Servant, Dimension Leap, Freezing Sphere x2, Resist Energy, Wall of Fire, World Wave, Quickened Ray
Armors: --
Items: Pearl of Magic, Staff of Weather, Impossible Bottle
Allies: Albatross, Baby Triceratops, Pteranodon, Slip, Alise Grogblud
Blessings: Geryon, Norgorber x3, Pharasma x2

Liberty's Edge

I'm not sure I actually see any ambiguity in the 'before' cases Vic - but there is nothing wrong with trying to be more precise.

The primary issue I see with what you are proposing is that it is now enforcing an order to the encounter which was not present before, as has already been mentioned. Namely that the person who encountered the original card MUST be the last to encounter the card.

Perhaps that is intentional, but it is not part of the 'problem' you describe.

Liberty's Edge

What exactly is the issue/concern with the current phrasing?

One thought I had might be to use something a secondary card for these? Similar to 'loot' but for banes.

Falling Bell:
Each character at this location encounters this barrier. If a character succeeds at a Wisdom or Perception 10 check, the difficulty of her check to defeat the barrier is decreased by 4. If a character defeats the barrier, it deals 1 Combat damage dealt to her; if a character fails to defeat the barrier, it deals 1d4+1 Combat damage dealt to her. Banish this card.

Each character at this location encounters the card 'Bronze Bell'.
Banish this card.

Bronze Bell:
Traits: Trap/Obstacle (or whatever it needs to 'inherit' from the current Falling Bell).

Before you act, succeed at a Wisdom or Perception 10 check to reduce the difficulty to defeat Bronze Bell by 4.
If defeated, you are dealt 1 combat damage.
If undefeated, you are dealt 1d4+1 combat damage.

And I think you can make this work how you want with evasion.
i.e. IF you want the person encountering the original card to be able to evade it (so no one faces it), you leave it as I proposed.
If you want each person to have to make their own evasion attempt, than you make the first sentence of Fallen Bell start with "before you act".

I believe it would also allow you to handle the varying 'banish' conditions.
i.e. "always banish the trap" == "Banish this card"
"this card is defeated based only on the encountering player's check" == "Banish this card if you successfully defeat Bronze Bell"
"this card is defeated if ANY character passes the check" == "Banish this card if any character defeats Bronze Bell"

And it also avoids the dual loop I mentioned of the 'original' card is not a summon, which currently causes the encountering player to face the barrier twice (once for the original card, and once for the copy that is 'summoned' the first time another player 'summons' the card).

It might be a bit complicated to add another card type, but it would be similar to how LOOT is also a weapon/spell/item/etc. This new type would also be trap/henchmen/etc.

Liberty's Edge

Frencois wrote:

The rule that summoned cards can't summon other cards has been house ruled long ago as:

Nice house rule that could be better written but a) you get the point and b) if you complain I write it in French wrote:
Summoned cards can't summon another card if a copy of that new card has already been summoned by the same character during this step.
Thus you cannot summon twice the same card in a summon chain, avoiding creating summon loops but enabling "a location close that summons a random barrier, that barrier summons a random monster, that monster is Owlbeartross, and you summon the Grindylow".

Frencois - true.

But in the case of these cards though, that would still mean that the person who encountered the original card would have to defeat the card TWICE.

Once for the original card (which was NOT summoned),
and then once when another character faced a summoned copy, which then summons a copy for the person who drew the original card.

That definitely does not seem to be the intent of these changes.

Liberty's Edge

and as I stated, go7gaming has a similar insert for the Hobby Lobby artist case, which I'm very happy with so far even if I haven't tried putting a full PACG AP into it yet.

Liberty's Edge

I'll echo Hawkmoon's statements for the most part.

I have the BT inserts for both RotR and S&S.
It was fine for RotR, but not only was the spacing a bit off for S&S -- the box size was changed ever so slightly which allowed the insert to bend and warp a little - meaning the dividers had a tendency to slip out of place on it.

For Wrath, I've gone with go7Gaming's insert for the artist case (rather than the PACG specific solution. I really like the construction on this one. It seems a bit sturdier than BT's, and removing the pieces of the insert from the sprews was actually a lot easier/required less finishing/sanding than BT's did.

I've been storing my S&S decks in it that I haven't been needing for where I am in my OP group, and so far I've been liking this solution a lot! Is it better? I won't know until I actually have a full AP in it and have used it some. The artist case certainly is heavier!

Liberty's Edge

Order 3537676, which is the items I requested to be shipped, is still listed as pending after a week.
Could you please let me know why this order is still pending and hasn't shipped yet?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I played Seelah in RotR and never regretted it! She was definitely my favorite character of the group.

The new Seelah is definitely looking strong - esp some of the tricks with the role cards.

i.e. Inheritor's blade with an armor that 'reveals' to reduce damage = "Oh look, the villain does damage to EVERYONE? Reveal..reveal..reveal..reveal. There we go all taken care of."

or for Wardstone Sentry - the d8 against any Demon/Undead (by the time you have a role, most of her weapons should be magic anyway), or the Charisma +2/4 for any before you act check.

This is almost making me want to play Seelah again, even though I had my eyes on some of the new characters. Guess I'll have to wait until I get to see everyone :D

Liberty's Edge

At the moment - shipping the rest of the stuff all together is fine.
If that needs to change, I will let you know.

Thank you for all your help Sharaya.

Liberty's Edge

I'd like to request that the items in my sidecart that are available be shipped (specifically the Strategy and Iconic Heroes sets #1 and #2).

I also have a question about Order #3525485 --
I pre-ordered both the Paladin and Monk Class deck on this order, but only the Paladin deck is showing in my sidecart.
Is this a known issue with the sidecart/Monk Deck, or is something wrong with my order?

Liberty's Edge

Please cancel my PACG Subscription.

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge

MightyJim wrote:
That villain is properly crazy - I really hope he's like Hirgenzosk or the Sandpoint Devil, rather than being a thing you HAVE to defeat to complete the scenario.

Not familiar with the AP, but my guess is that he will be recurring throughout the AP. Probably will be the 'big bad' at the end of AP 6 which you do have to face.

Earlier might be more like the sea serpent (forgetting the name) from the Flood scenario in RotR where he just sits around and causes something to happen in a scenario - but that defeating the scenario does not involve direct conflict with him.

Liberty's Edge

I don't disagree at all Hawkmoon.

As I said - I just have an issue with the 'shorthand' because I think it does leave some room for questions that the longer phrasing of "succeed at a check to defeat" makes absolutely clear.

(i.e. that the check DOES happen, that if multiple checks are required - it only succeeds at ONE of the checks, etc).

And it's only 5 additional words - it's not like it takes a paragraph to explain it.

Liberty's Edge

That's if you read it that Thieves Tools would be played at the point, Hawkmoon.

Again playing devil's advocate here -
it could be interpreted that it's not 'attempt the check', but you play it in an earlier step (i.e. 'before you act' step) - in which case a check is never actually made -- which would mean that the power would not activate.

Again - Vic has stated it is synonymous and therefore I agree with your interpretation that yes Damiel would get to examine the top card.

I just think that there are enough real situations in the game that a question could come up, that it wouldn't hurt to put it in the official FAQ.

Liberty's Edge

Nod Orbis - and I see where Vic is coming from.

I'm just not sure I agree with the idea of 'shorthand'. I understand there is limited space on the card, but from a pure linguistic standpoint -- there are differences here.

i.e. Suppose it's a character that has an ability of "when you succeed at a [SKILL] check, draw a card" and the barrier has a check to defeat of type [SKILL]

Does the power trigger or not?

For the "succeed at your check to defeat" - the answer is obviously Yes.

For the first though, an argument could be made that the card was defeated without a check -- it was defeated by the played boon. In which case the power isn't triggered.

Just to be clear - I'm not meaning to dispute Vic's statement that it IS shorthand. Rather just his conclusion that this isn't worth clarifying in the FAQ/Errata.

Liberty's Edge

Theryon - That's not the only distinction to be made in those phrasings.

While we have not encountered one yet - there is every possibility of Paizo eventually creating a barrier (a Villain Barrier??) which would require multiple checks to defeat.

In which case - the "Reveal this card to defeat a barrier" would effectively handle BOTH checks, while the second phrasing would only help/handle one of the checks.

Liberty's Edge

I'm pretty sure you are allowed to use multiple powers in the same step.
You just can't use the SAME power multiple times (i.e. Lem can't recharge multiple cards for multiple d4's on a check).

From P10 of S&S Rule book under encountering a card: wrote:

During each of these steps, you and the other players may perfrom only the specified actions.

Players may only play cards or use powers that relate to each step (or relate to cards played or powers used in that step).
Each player may play no more than 1 card of each type during each step;
Each player may activate any power no more than once each step.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hawkmoon269 wrote:

Hmmm...Maybe. So if your power replaces the action you are using for the card, it doesn't change that you did the original action for the power of the card.

The only related discussion I can think of is Lini at the Farmhouse.

Not sure how relevant that discussion is since that talks more about the possible conflict between Lini and Location, than the possible synergy of two powers on a single card.

Golden Rule clearly wouldn't apply here - because both effects are from the character card.

Nearest thing to a related discussion I can find is probably here. But I don't see any dev answer in that thread, just a lot of speculation there as well.

Liberty's Edge

My apologies - I wasn't looking at the "Order Total" at the top of the page.

I was looking at the Detailed Shipments section, which was showing the card at $0.00, but the shipping as $3.39.
That is what had me confused.

Sorry about being an alarmist :(

Liberty's Edge

I just received notification that the card has been processed - but I'm concerned about the shipping cost listed.
It's listing over $3 in shipping for a single card?
And this is for a replacement for a card I didn't even receive, so it's in effect charging me for asking for a complete product????

This does not seem appropriate to me (and excessive even if it is).

If shipping has to be charged, then I would rather have the replacement put into my sidecart and just added when Wrath comes out.

Liberty's Edge

I don't see why it would need to replace the existing cards Tanis.
Even something like one sheet of paper folded in quarters and put into the box.

It might mean it would need the box to be a little wider, and that probably has some cost, but I wouldn't think a 'card list' would need to replace existing cards.

But the PDF list is fine - as I said, I just looked at the date from October, and thought it wasn't being updated. That's why I wanted it in the box.

Liberty's Edge

My group recently reached Deck 6 - and it was discovered that the deck I received was missing a Blessing of Geryon.

Can I please get a replacement card sent out?

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Mistarrel wrote:
Hmm.. any chance of perhaps creating a "checklist card" that gets included with each deck that would make it easier to verify this.
Check the card lists here.

Thanks Hawkmoon.

I knew of those resources, but hadn't looked at them since their initial release because the page said they hadn't been updated since 10/30/14.

So I didn't think they had the new deck lists in them.

But still - would it be that hard/expensive to include this in the decks (like one oversized card in the box that listed it all?)

Liberty's Edge

It happens Tanis - no problem there.
I just wasn't certain what should be in the deck or not - but it seemed odd to only have four.

Hmm.. any chance of perhaps creating a "checklist card" that gets included with each deck that would make it easier to verify this.

I caught the blessing because it's so "standard" to have 5 of anything other than Gods. But it would be kind of impossible to know if I should have 1 or 2 copies of a given spell for instance.

Liberty's Edge

My group just reached Deck 6 last week, and when putting the new cards in the box I noticed that there were only 4 Blessings of Geryon, instead of the usual 5.

Is this normal, or am I missing a card?
I haven't seen an updated inventory that states how many there should be.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My thought would be to use the "standard" rules for adding cards to your deck when you don't have enough cards to rebuild your deck -- namely that you can pull cards from two decks lower.

i.e. so if you add someone in Deck 1, they can only pull "basic" cards still
Adding someone at deck two though they can use ANY card in the base set - not just basic cards.

I think that way the player is still "behind the curve" for where your group probably would be, but if you add someone at a later deck (ie deck 4 or 5 when you've probably banished a good deal of basic cards) there is adequate equipment to make a starting deck, and to have the character not be completely overwhelmed.

Liberty's Edge

My character from a 4 (originally 5) player group

Character Name: Feiya
Role Card: Hexer
Skill Feats: Intelligence+3, Wisdom+1
Power Feats: +1 hand size, Recharge for deck number +3 vs Monster or Barrier
Card Feats: Spell +1, Ally +1, Blessing +1
Spells: Aqueous Orb x2, Charm Animal, Freezing Sphere, Geyser, Safe Harbor, Wall of Fire
Items: Besmara's Tricorne, Sapphire of Intelligence
Allies: Coral Capuchin, Dwarf Caiman, Monkey, Snow Leopard
Blessings: Abadar, Achekek, Kelizandri, Pharasma x2
Current Party Ship: Kraken

Liberty's Edge

Vic Wertz wrote:

I should also note that this means that when *you* build decks, at the very least, you have access to the cards that we assigned to the characters that you're not using. So one of the easiest ways to build your own starting deck that's better than the ones in the rulebook is this: Build all of the active characters' decks using the suggested deck lists, then go through the other Basic B cards from the box, one card type at a time, looking for improvements.

That's exactly what my group did with S&S after I realized the way the deck lists were developed. In fact, I had pulled EVERY characters deck list (except for BoGs, and Ranzak) so people could have the basic deck ready and see what they wanted to improve.

It worked well for us (probably better than doing the "here's the X deck, grab whatever you want" and passing the deck around.)

Liberty's Edge

Thanks for the link Orbis- I looked for similar questions but hadn't found that thread.

So it basically is what I thought for scenario 1.

Scenario 2 was where I was less certain - where the weapon only allows a reroll of a single die similar to Jirelle's own power.

It's sort of a question of what does "must take the second result" mean.

Does it mean the result of the check, or the result of the die?

Based on Vic's comment - it's for the check not the die (which was NOT my original interpretation, but it was something I considered).

Liberty's Edge

I have my own opinion on this, but I don't know if it is the CORRECT opinion or not, so I wanted to see what other people are thinking.

The question is how does Jirelle's reroll ability interact (if at all) with a weapon that also allows a reroll?

Scenario 1:
Jirelle is using a whip in combat. I can't recall if the whip has swashbuckling on its own but it's easy for the check to have it anyway (either through an ally or eye patch) -- so Jirelle's reroll ability is available.
You roll the dice and fail.
Jirelle allows you to reroll one die, but you must take the result.
The whip allows you to reroll the check, but you must take the result.

Are both of these powers usable, or does one prohibit the other from being used?

If Jirelle uses her ability to reroll just one die, and still fails -
Can she still discard the whip to reroll the entire check?
If so, does she reroll ALL the dice (as the whip would normally do), or must she keep the one that she rerolled using her ability (since she must take that result)?
Or because she can no longer reroll ALL of the dice, can she no longer use the whip's discard ability?

Similarly if she uses the whip ability first to reroll all the dice, can she still use her ability on that reroll - or are the dice 'frozen'?

Scenario 2:
Jirelle uses Brine's Sting in combat - which allows the same one die reroll as her own ability.

How do these interact?
Can she reroll the same die twice?
Must both rerolls be done at the same time? Or can she reroll one die using one power, and if she still fails reroll a DIFFERENT die with the other ability?

Liberty's Edge

I can't speak to the designers intent on this mlvanbie.

What I will say is that I certainly saw this as one of the key purposes (besides cures) for his ability. I immediately thought of things like using Aid to get past Arcane barriers for instance.

Liberty's Edge

Actually the majority of companies will send an email when the shipping label is printed (as part of an automated process). It is not uncommon for this to happen late in a day, and to not have it actually picked up/leave the warehouse until the next day or two.

This is why you'll often get tracking information, but when you try to use it you'll get "tracking number does not exist" for the first day or two.

I agree the "within a week" is a bit unusual - but I dare say almost no company generates is email based on it physically leaving the warehouse.

Liberty's Edge

Personally, I'd like to see different heroes reprinted, if any.

But I'm sure they'll still have a character option for the 'core' classes (i.e. a "Fighter", a "Rogue", a "Healer", an "Arcane" etc).

I'd like to see them pull some of the characters from the class decks into the main sets - although I don't know if that counts as a "reprint" when they've not been in the main sets yet.

Liberty's Edge

isaic16 wrote:
Mistarrel wrote:
Orbis Orboros wrote:


Rat wrote:



Bury this card when you would banish a boon due to failing to acquire it to shuffle it into your deck instead.

Discard this card to explore your location.

This feels closer, but seems a bit too powerful (i.e. can you really picture a rat dragging around a set of plate mail to bring it back to you? or pulling an ally and guiding him back to you?).

Especially since this last one doesn't list that it is only effective at your location, it seems way too strong.

Perhaps limit this to just items (since they tend to be smaller/lighter objects) rather than to any boon?

True on plate mail, but you could say the same about a crow, and they still give you a d6 to get that armor. Perhaps bury the rat to bury the boon to balance it more? (the Rat stashes the boon, and you can only get it back from them afterwards.)

Another potential use for a rat card would be to defeat barriers, as they have a reputation for chewing on sensitive parts, and escaping from just about anything. Stealth checks might also work as a buff.

But the crow doesn't get the item on its own - it adds to the character making a check (i.e. the crow sees the item and points it out to the character) - not like it picks it up and carries it back from another location.

I do like the idea of the barrier check help though -- i.e. trapped chest, no problem it gnaws through; some kind of blade/explosive trap and it chews through a trigger or other important part, etc.

Liberty's Edge

Orbis Orboros wrote:

Mistarrel wrote:

Orbis Orboros wrote:


Rat wrote:



Bury this card when you would banish a boon due to failing to acquire it to shuffle it into your deck instead.

Discard this card to explore your location.

This feels closer, but seems a bit too powerful (i.e. can you really picture a rat dragging around a set of plate mail to bring it back to you? or pulling an ally and guiding him back to you?).

Especially since this last one doesn't list that it is only effective at your location, it seems way too strong.

Perhaps limit this to just items (since they tend to be smaller/lighter objects) rather than to any boon?

The second one is limited to just you. It's more restrictive than at your location.

I missed that entirely! I was still thinking about the idea of doing this against any check by another player.

I think I still have an issue with the idea of a rat grabbing a heavy suit of armor, or an ally though. I still think a restricted boon type of Item, but usable on any check would make more sense.

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>