There are a lot of unforgiving banes in the B set that are making things much harder than they should. Me and my GF, running two characters each, have played 3 scenarios and so far, there has been at least 1 character in each game that had to sit out half the game because they were down to 1 or 2 cards in their deck.
For banes included in the B set, there are way too many that hand out damage like candy.
Its awful for spell casters right now. Especially when its flipped as the first card of the game. Having to use spells right off the bat that doesn't involve explorations can set the whole game back.
I have an order for the Pathfinder Iconic Mini's and I cannot seem to get the order to go through. I had pre-ordered these a while back and now, when I try to use the "Ship this item as soon as possible" option, it takes me through the payment steps, and then it puts the item right back in to the sidecart.
Any help would be appreciated.
Two things I see right off the bat:
- Choose 1 ( 2) spell(s) with that don't have the divine trait. When you cast these spells treat them as a reveal instead of a discard.
When do you choose this? At the beginning of each game?
- When casting a combat spell you may, reveal,recharge,discard,bury, or banish for a d4, d6 ,d8 ,10, or d12 respectively.
What are you revealing, recharging, discarding, or banishing? Another spell from your hand? Another card?
I really don't want to speak about the balance until at least those 2 powers are a little more clear.
And the fact that the adventures are 4 scenarios a piece makes it even worse. That is a whole 8 scenarios with your role card.
"It happens NOW because YOU are there" is the most vague rule/trigger I have ever heard an explanation for in a game. It happens NOW when I start my turn there? It happens NOW when I end my turn there? It happens NOW when I explore? Move there? Encounter a bane? Encounter a boon? Recharge a card? Play a spell?
All of those have very different and significant results that alter strategy. Like Hawkmoon said, without a trigger, anyone could argue that you would have to check for the teleportation every single time you did anything there short of breathing.
Just posting to see if anyone else has had any success with this scenario yet.
Me and the girlfriend run a 4 character party (her with Merisiel and Velendron, me with Kyra and Tontelizi). We have run all of the scenarios in the Card Guild fine with absolutely no problems... then this one came along. We have tried this 3 times now without getting anywhere near beating it.
If anyone has completed this one yet, please post some pointers. We are stumped.
The scenario specifically states "check EACH location deck"... it does not care if its open or closed.
In other words, if you close a location and empty it of cards, you will lose the scenario.
Given that, it also states "when you defeat an Enemy Ship henchman, place it on top of its location deck". So, if you defeat the henchman, you place it on top... unless I am understanding the timing incorrectly, you IMMEDIATELY attempt to close the location, which, if successful, means you empty it of cards and THEN place the Enemy Ship back on top.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Text for those that would like it:
The Free Captains' Regatta:
Shuffle an Enemy Ship henchman into each location deck. If you defeat an Enemy Ship, put it on top of its location deck.
After your move step, you may examine the top card of your location deck; you may shuffle that deck. If the blessings deck is empty, examine the top card of each location deck. You win the scenario only if each is an Enemy Ship
Maybe it would be better to have "Advance the Blessings Deck" as its own out-of-turn procedure. This way, when the next player goes to flip to blessing and there isn't one, then the game immediately ends with no one resetting their hand as it technically is not anyone's turn.
This removes the "unfairness" of singling out the next player, but keeps the danger of a blessing being flipped DURING a players turn (by other effects, of course) and forcing them to reset their hand before the end of the game.
This falls apart with the "undefeated" rule. You can't funnel any of the villains because:
"If the other 2 villains are not in the location deck, it is undefeated".
This means that the location you beat it at does not close, meaning the villain will always be able to escape to the same location you just beat him at. This boils down to scouting/evading the villains to find where they are at, closing all of the non-villain locations... and then continuously fighting the villains until you get lucky and all 3 were shuffled into the same location (all the while losing blessings from the deck instead of the box, since they are "undefeated").
Theryon Stormrune wrote:
I would believe that "taking the reward" is different than "keeping the reward". Once you agree to randomly pull a card from the box, then the reward has been given... whether or not you keep it is a different story. This is how we play it in the base games anyway, so I wouldn't feel it would be any different in OP.
But that's just my take on it. Would be interested to see what the developers intended.
Edge of Dreams wrote:
That's a good point, Edge of Dreams, I had forgotten about that line of text on the Scenario card. Since none of the villains are EVER defeated unless all 3 are together, then they will ALWAYS have 1 open location and that line of text will never come into play.
Unless there is some unwritten rule about being able to temp close the location you encountered a villain, which I have NEVER heard of before...
I'm sure I just be missing something, but surely there's always an open location for the villain to escape to when it's undefeated because there will always at least be the location it was encountered at?
That's exactly what I am thinking as well. With the villain always able to escape to the same location you just encountered it at, it seems like its going to turn into another crap-shoot like Toll of the Bell, where you are hoping against hope that somehow all the villains get shuffled into the right spot with no real way to control it.
The way I see it is, for example, you can scout to your hearts content and, even if you get 2 of the villains to one location and then find the location of the third, when you encounter the third you obviously make sure all others are temp closed or closed (leaving only the one with the other 2 villains open). Then you defeat the third, which means hes undefeated and has a chance to get shuffled right back into the same location, losing a blessing from the stack in the process.
Looking again at the Amulet of Fortitude, it's second power lets you recharge to succeed at your Fortitude check. So it can be used to auto-kill any monster that doesn't have immunities to Attack spells or those like trolls that need fire or acid to kill. Very powerful so yeah, I think you gotta change the power feat on it. The Amulet is so good for her that when I played the fourth scenario and beat it, I passed on giving her the Pearl of Wisdom because she can only keep one item.
The good thing is that the Amulet has to be recharged, and the character herself has no reliable way to cycle or pull cards from the bottom of her deck.
I like the uniqueness of her rolling her Fort skill as a spell... and it makes sense, thematically, being a Geomancer. Might I suggest either adding a stipulation to the power that says "You may not use items on this check" or dropping the Items she can have in her deck to 0? That is how Seelah was in RotRL and she didn't suffer very much from it.
Ya, I think maybe changing her (recharge) power feat to a d6 (or d8 or maybe even 2d4) would be better, like this:
For your combat check, you may discard a card to roll you Fortitude Skill + 1d4 (d6) with the attack and magic traits. This counts as playing a spell.
And then, for the fourth power feat on her base card make it:
At the start of your turn, you may display a blessing. Add +2 (+3) to your check to close a location...
The only problem here is that he doesn't even start with this power... you have to wait until your first power feat to unlock it. This, coupled with his extraordinarily horrible itemization (2 weapons and 2 armors... no way to specialize in either) and he has easily been the biggest disappointment for me in all of the class decks.
I would actually read this more as:
If you are by yourself you play with a Lonely Island AND a Shark Island, as both locations are included for the 1 player situation... then you would add Shark Islands to fill in for additional players.
Maybe drop her WIS to a d10 and bump her STR to a d6... still having 2 d10's is pretty good.
Also, non gameplay related, you have a couple of grammatical errors on her first role card's flavor text.
I thought all of the sorcerers had an ability to discard a card to "cast a spell", much like Seoni... and even for her, its her Arcane skill (d12+2) plus a d6.
I do agree with the 3 separate d4's... that is very painful.
That is an impossible situation you are referencing. For the scenario, The Black Flag, your ship is not anchored anywhere, which means, the ship is always present at the location of the current turns player. Even if your ship is wrecked, it is still present and being commanded by the current-turns player, its just that other people can not choose to move along with them.
In other words, whenever you encounter an Enemy Ship henchman in this scenario, you will be fighting a random enemy ship.
I see right off the bat that she has no secondary skills what so ever (such as Fortitude, Arcane, etc..). Is this intentional?
Andrew K wrote:
On reducing characters per deck -- there is a hell of lot more customization in one character between skills, card feats, and all the powers, than 3 cards will ever get you.
The point isn't removing the characters cards and having 3 additional slots for deck-cards.
For example: If Tarlin was removed from the Cleric class deck, then they wouldn't have needed to worry so much about having Aristocrat/Hireling allies, and they could have lowered the amount of Armor's in the deck by a lot. That would give them much more room to support Heggal, Kyra, and Zarlova. (I am in no way saying that Tarlin is bad, just using it as an example).
Ya, you were playing it wrong, but, mistakes happen, haha.
From the RotRL rule book(I put the important part in quotes):
Make a stack of cards starting with the villain(s), then add henchmen, working from the top of the list down, until your stack has as many cards as you have locations. "Use multiple copies of the henchman at the bottom of the list as needed".
Ya, you did it the opposite way. You use one of each henchman starting from the TOP of the list, working down. The last henchman in the list is the one that is used to fill in remaining locations.
I like this suggestion a lot... if the deck amount has to stay at 110, drop the amount of characters to 3. This would give the deck A LOT more room to cater to each character individually.
Other related questions would be "Why are there no Arcane specific spells in the Cleric deck?" (for Zarlova) and "Why does a character that has ally specific powers only have a max of 2 ally slots?" (for Tarlin). I was very excited to get the Cleric deck, but when I busted it open and started reviewing a lot of what was included, I found myself scratching my head quite a few times.
I mean, it would make perfect sense since it comes specifically with cards not available anywhere else.
RotRL Lem could get up to 6 spells and also had the ability to trade cards from his hand and discard pile at the start of his turn (and end of the turn with a role power). This made him a very effective healer, as he would rarely want to recharge his Cure spells and just swap it for something else in his hand. The additional spells allowed him much more versatility in which spells to carry as well (couple of Cures, couple of cloud spells, find traps, Haste, Swipe, etc.).
One thing that sticks out for me is the Melee: Dexterity + 3
Ya, Deck 3 was pushed back to November due to all of the recent delays. If you check the stickies at the top of the customer service forum, you can see the Deck 4 was pushed to December with no PACG products at all being released in October, so more than likely the whole AP is going to be running a month behind.
I would assume that you "finish one thing before you start another". Meaning, Ambush went undefeated forcing you to go through the deck and fight the first monster, which was the henchmen. The henchman was defeated, which reads "if defeated, you may immediately attempt to close this location"... this, to me, seems like an effect that is still nested within the result of NOT defeating the barrier.
All that being said, I would assume that you could then close the location. Once all of that is done, you go back to the original effect of the location "if undefeated, each character at this location randomly chooses a location and moves to it". I don't think closing the location nullifies this since you still failed to defeat the Ambush originally.
Of course, we could just wait for someone else to come along and prove all of this wrong, haha.
Andrew K wrote:
Our Oloch took a handsize increase with his first power feat simply because a handsize of 4 sucks no matter what your other powers are... but returning his weapons/blessings to his hand is 100% his next investment.
In our group of 6 that has played all 10 of the available scenarios so far, Oloch has pulled as much weight as everyone else in the group. His ability to display Weapons and Blessings to add to other checks has been pretty helpful, as has his built in ability to heal. He isn't afraid to explore with all of his weapons displayed (leaving nothing in his hand), as a natural d12 Strength with +2 melee is nothing to scoff at when someone else throws him a blessing... which isn't hard with 5 other people.