Reynard-Miri's page

Organized Play Member. 11 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


Does this contain the cards for all 6 chapters? I would not expect it to, but the description leaves me uncertain.

I must have failed a Will save, because I am enthralled.

sherlock1701 wrote:
Never crossed my mind that you'd need to burn one do down a potion, which is supposed to be self-contained magic.

They explicitly designed Resonance to balance consumable items. Otherwise why buy a wand of Heal level 3 instead of two wands of Heal level 2?

Tholomyes wrote:
I could see changing it if they decide that proficiency increases no longer function as the feat/feature slot.

Weapon proficiencies don't count as class feats for weapon classes, so I don't see why spell proficiencies should for spell classes. It's also a massive pain for "mystic theurge" type builds who want to get a class feat at precisely that level.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MER-c wrote:
The book states that Specifics override general rules, thus the Feat does in fact override the no Heritage Feats beyond level one rule.

Ancestral Paragon let's you gain a level-1 ancestry feat. It does not, however, allow you to gain a level-1 ancestry feat for which you do not meet the prerequisites. Heritage feats have the prerequisite that they are taken at (character) level 1. If Ancestral Paragon overwrote that, then it would also allow you to take a level-1 ancestry feat from another ancestry.

edduardco wrote:
I seriously cannot understand why metamagic feats are not general feats anymore. Metamagic should not be class specific, return metamagic to general feats.

Because they fit the design space that Paizo wants class feats to fill, not general feats. They aren't all that class specific, either. Multiple metamagic feats are shared across several classes.

Honestly, when I first found out about the "+level to everything" aspect, I had unpleasant D&D 4E flashbacks. I haven't seen enough about encounter generation to determine how easily it could be disentangled from the current ruleset, though.

Melkiador wrote:
But it’s been a part of D&D and related properties for so long that it’d be weird to change it now.

It is worth noting that Vancian magic has not been a part of D&D for a little over 10 years.

So here's a weird (related) question: Is the Electricity damage dealt by the Quicksand Bunyip? Several other cards (Shock Toad, Enchanter, Bonecrusher Wizard) explicitly say that they are the ones dealing the damage. Quicksand Bunyip does not. Usually this would not matter, but here it does.

Thank you. :)

I would like to second the request for the Mummy's Mask characters.