TFGenesis's page

This is pretty much the exact opposite of how I play PACG. It's not like I'm the greatest of gamers but I've generally taken the approach that I won't use a card in a way that removes if from my hand until it's absolutely necessary. The definition of absolutely necessary changes based on the situation and is largely dependant on how "permanent" the removal of that card is going to be. I'll use a recharge power without much thought but a power that requires banishing is always the last resort. I will recharge redundant armors but always keep one in hand unless a character desperately needs to get some card drawing going. This approach has generally served me well with all group sizes in all APs to date. Having said all that, I feel the strategy of this article is more for card games like Magic, Netrunner, etc. where speed is most always your ally, running out of cards isn't always death and you're usually starting with a "big" deck of cards to churn through. You could say I favor the tortoise over the hare in PACG.

As for investing in Hand Size, my attitude towards this has changed greatly. When I first started playing PACG I would not put feats into HS unless forced to. (Such as graining a third power feat, pre-role card, and all non-hand size feats are taken) I'm not sure where, when or why this happened but I suddenly gained a new appreciation for characters with large hand sizes and now I'll go out of my way to increase hand size for any character. I think the decision to invest in hand size or not comes down to personal, past experience with PACG. If you've suffered a lot of character deaths with large hand size characters, then I can see having an adversity to making hand sizes even bigger then they already are. This has happened to me plenty of times but I'll still go out of my way to ramp up hand size to seven or eight. If I had to give a recommendation, I would say increasing hand size should be a priority for characters who do not have their primary combat cards as their preferred card type. Such as Ruinlords Seelah who is a melee weapons fighter but has armor as her preferred card type. Just to increase her chances of starting of with, or quickly drawing, a weapon, I will increase her hand size asap.

Personally, Imrijka's outfit reminds me more of a certain, famous vampire-slaying vampire.

TFGenesis wrote:

And let Mike have a Necromancer deck. I know they'd all be wizards or sorcerers or some-such but we'd all know they are really Necros.

That is a really interesting idea which I'm not sure we've considered. What I think you're saying here is that the deck would have a set of boons that would be good for various characters to do a particular thing (in this case: raise an undead army). So the characters wouldn't have to be specifically one class, as long as they could all do that thing quite well. Intriguing thought.

Actually, yes that is pretty much what I had in mind. ^_^ I really didn't think something like this was do-able, but if you can make it work, more power to you Mike. I know I'd like to see this happen.

I'd vote for Gunslinger. I'm a fan of unusual character classes in any rpg, so this one has had the most appeal to me so far. I've never played the actual Pathfinder rpg so my knowledge of character classes is limited to what I've seen in the card game. I'd also pick Gunslinger because I seem to remember one of the developers saying they expected it would be difficult to make this deck.... Not that I'm evil or anything... >.> Actually, add on Swashbuckler. I'm pretty sure they were included in the same post. Still no evil... <.<

And let Mike have a Necromancer deck. I know they'd all be wizards or sorcerers or some-such but we'd all know they are really Necros.

I want the glowing-demonic-mummy cat on the right side of the box. It looks cute. And like it would eat souls. Which is cuter.