Tracker1's page

After getting a chance to look at her card, i guess i'll have to agree. Oh well, it was great while it lasted.

This is a poorly worded power.
I've just played 7 scenarios thinking that i could use her power before she acts to use her charisma die, and after looking back through the rule book it still does not seem to contradict the way I have been playing it.

I've encountered a boon, and apply any effects that happen before she acts, which in this case the effect is the power on her card which allows her to use her charisma skill for the check.

The rulebook say's to go through this step regardless of whether or not it's written on the card I'm encountering, so Seelah's power should be able trigger during this step even if it's not written on the encountered card.

I'm certainly prepared to be wrong, but I can't see a reason why she should not be able to do this based on what's written.

Also, be aware that revisions to the SotShackles scenarios are in the pipeline, to bring them in line with the tier advancement system in version 2+ of the Guide. This will mostly involve stripping feats off scenario and adventure rewards, though 0-4A's bonus skill feat will remain.

I just bought 0-1 and it looks fantastic.

I was unaware that new versions are in the works. Will I be able to download that for free when it becomes available.
If not, it might be good to let people know that these are not the final versions, and they should wait on the purchase.

That's sort of what I'm talking about. Probably will not get to try any time soon, since I don't have any CDs and am just starting out on WoTR. If I pick up a few CD's i'll give it a try on RotR scenarios since I'm pretty familiar with them.

My main intention is not to create a huge inbalance in the game, but to get a little more involved in the design of the boon decks for the characters playing, and then play it and see how it works out. I'd have to keep an eye on making sure there are still some less desirable boons available, but may actually be important as you pointed out. But if I screw up the design of the boons and find myself SoL on the last scenario, well then I guess I'm SoL.

I'm a fan of deck building type games. So, I kind of look at the class decks as a way to provide more customization available to a player.

Currently, players get to customize a characters starting deck and then after that the progression of their character is dependent on random card draws to determine the rest of how a character progresses, and I'm not suggesting that this format would change, It's pretty annoying to get a scenario reward of drawing a random weapon only to get a quarterstaff, when you specialize in ranged weapons.

I'm not saying to eliminate the poor luck factor all together, but it would be nice to tilt the odds in favor of a characters progression, so if there are 3 quaterstaffs in the deck take out 2 and replace with cards that relate to the character I'm playing.

These types of decisions allow for a bit more pre-game thought into how to build the boon decks before starting a campaign, and this for me would probably provide more re-playability in the types of character combinations that could be made.

That's one way how I can see class decks being interesting for an at home solo player, and would make me considering investing in a few of them, basically allowing for more options. Just shuffling more cards into the deck without some type of pre-campaign planning just basically adds more cards to the stack. With 3 or more class decks introduce this way, the boon decks would probably remain in a much more diluted state than they were before.

I can see how my approach might unbalance the game. There's a chance that a player would become more successful in acquiring boons allowing more cards to be added to their hand while playing, which might be reshuffled into their deck, allowing for more health etc.

Anyway, it would take some experimentation and good judgment to make sure the odds are not stacked to much in the characters favor, but I think it would allow for a lot more creative pre-campaign decision making that to me adds one more dimension to the game.

Thanks for the replies.

I like the idea of adding the cards to the box and playing as normal.

I realize it's my game, and I can do what I like, but what do others think about removing cards not related to the class, and replacing them with ones that are.

For instance, let's say I'm gong to play 3 new classes that are not in the base sets for a 3 player game. If I add all 3 of their class deck cards, the associated decks could get pretty large and even more diluted, not to mention that they will not fit well in the box any more, when new APs are added.

Does swapping out core set cards with class deck cards seem reasonable, or do you think that will unbalance the game by making nearly every boon something that one of the characters might be interested in?

Is there any standard list for the number of boons that should be included in the box decks for each type (weapon, spell, item etc.)?

I've never counted to find out if there is any consistency base set boxes, but if there is a base line number, players could swap out cards for the class deck cards while maintaining the same numbers of the original set.

Thoughts?

I'm considering picking up a class deck. But, i'm unclear how to use it. i play at home solo,

So, can someone describe how a solo player can benefit from a class deck, what rules might be associated with using the cards and building a characters deck after a scenario in this format of play.

Also, is there a class deck subscription, and/or a sub for the organized play scenarios?

I've read about them in a few places, but can't seem to locate them on the site.

Thanks

Here are my questions regarding the scenario

After encountering a Ulkreth henchman the scenario card instructs to close it's location.
1. Does that mean the location is automatically closed skipping the when closing section of the location card, and just triggering the when permanently closed step?

2.Does the location close just based on encountering the henchman, meaning you don't have to defeat the henchman in order for it to close?

When Khorramzeadeh is revealed from the blessings deck, a random open or closed location is determined, if characters are there they move are dealt fire damage.
3.Is this the correct interpretation?

Thanks

Also, DriveThruCards has a set of cards that can be used with the Season of the Shackles scenarios. The scenarios used some substitute cards for the OP storyline.

Thanks,

I checked out the cards. How many cards does it come with for $10.

I guess its sold for 6 players. Anyone have a list of the cards? It might be cheaper for me to just purchase them for 3 players.

Thanks

Yoshua wrote:

Solo Play/Home Play

They say that you can get chronicle boons for the Pathfinder Society RPG play from these rounds. How does this work with home play scenarios? Can you only get these boons at organized events? What if there are no events available in your area? Do you miss out on these boons?

We haven't nailed down all the details for that yet. Work in progress!

Very late to this conversation.

I'm trying to get a handle on OP in a solo/home experience.
There is no gaming community or FLGS near by unfortunately.

So, from what I gather is that there are new scenarios each month to play through, which is cool because it offers more game with the same cards, so I'm kind of looking at this an expansion of what I have.

1. Is it necessary to invest in class decks?

2. Are there cards that would be available at events through OP that I can't access if just purchasing the scenarios online?

3. What does registering a character have to do with this for a solo player?

4. Do the scenarios tell a linked story with a theme, or is just a bunch of one offs?

5. Is this worth getting for solo play, or will it be like trying to fit a square peg into round hole?

Thanks

Thanks Hawkmoon. My interest has just resurfaced. Believe it or not I kind of burnt out on playing early this year, and never finished RoTR. Had big dreams of running through teams of different adventurers, oh well..

Currently, i am playing through RotR with 3 characters solo, and am loving it. Now without the 2 month wait between adventure packs i can really get immersed in the story without delay. I also playtested S&S and ran through the whole thing in about 2 weeks, which also lead to burning out on the game. Now that the rules have tightened up, and the releases are monthly i am quite excited to get back into a game that i truly enjoy, and will probably be in for the long haul. Hence looking into reestablishing my subscription.

On another note thanks for all your efforts on keeping the BGG community informed, and providing some rules clarifications etc. In doing some searches their I find your name in just about every thread. Keep it up!

Hey all, I'm resubscribing after canceling my sub subscription a few months ago. I picked up the S&S base set at game store, and want to start with Adv deck 2.

My check out total is something like $63 dollars for 1 adv pack. Why so much? Does that include the base set?

I figured I'd be paying around $20 dollars to start with Adv 2. What's up?

Also if I am starting with Adv. 2 any way to get the promos I missed?

Just because Magga has 13 cards doesn't mean it has 13 allies... But to lose 3 cards per turn is painful! You really need to get some locations closed and hope that the snake goes after an empty location *sometimes*!

Augury's obviously really important here too.

Woops, I missed the part about Allies! Which I just realized. duh.

Am I playing this right?

Two player game, 4 locations in play, and there are ten allies available.
I have gone through 5 rounds and Black Magga already has 13 cards.

I've already lost? I hope this one is doable.

@Tracker1 - I don't think the location card and monster card are in conflict. You just do everything on the monster card and then banish it instead of shuffling it back into the Woods' location deck.

That's the way I played it.

I have 2 characters at woods location. The first character does not have Fire trait, so Muck Graul is undefeated. Will the woods location text banish the graul before the other character has to encounter it?

Seems like locations overrule other cards correct? So, Muck Gruel's ability does not come work in the wood. Right?

The crown is played at a time when cards no longer add their traits to a check, so it will not work. In order for it to have worked it would've needed to be played during the determining which die you are using, but unfortunately the crown can only be played during the play cards/powers that affect the check step.

My Seoni has 3 Acolytes, and it works really well for cycling through your deck since she can recharge the acolyte and attack spells. You will pretty much always have one acolyte in hand for a combat check.

Acolyte can be used for Arcane or Divine combat checks. I find the Acolyte to be useful to Seoni for that purpose.

If i am already a PACG subscriber will this product be included or will i need to start a new subscription?

Thanks

What are some of your highest rolls to defeat a monster?

I have got Valeros paired up with Lem, and almost all of their rolls are above 20,a nd usually in the 30's to defeat monsters.

My new record was just set by Valeroes on Xanesha for 60.

Valeroes Discarded Great Sword and Blessing of gorum, lem discarded Blessing Of Lamashtu and contributed d4 +2 with his power.
Val, also has +2 strength and +3 melee.

That's 6d10 + 2d6 + 1d4 + 7 for 60 on the roll!

What are some of your top rolls? How does it scale with the number of players? With 6 players, and a bunch of blessings things could probably get out of hand.

I really liked all the Skinsaw scenarios and I did like the how Foul Misgivings did change it up a bit. Looking forward to the other ones Vic mentioned. It looks like down the line we will see a few scenarios in each pack. Cool.

Looking forward to running my other characters through Skinsaw. I hope the make it.

Kyra and Seoni just completed the 5 scenarios, and i guess i had a part in it too.

I was keeping an eye out for which scenario had a different win condition other than corner the Villain, but it was not really recognizable to me.

The third scenario, Foul Misgivings, seemed to have a slight twist to it, so I assume that was the one.

Any thoughts?

I think the answer is when summoned monsters are evaded they go back to the box, but just want to make sure that this is the case with Enfeeble, which says to put the monster on top of the location deck. I could not find an answer in the FAQ.

I was surprised to see that if you play this scenario with 2 characters or less the whole mechanic of the Zombi Minion henchmen being sent to another location does not trigger since there is one Villain and 3 other named henchmen before a Zombi minion even makes it into a location deck.

The Villain summons a Zombi Minion but the scenario text only triggers when the zombi is encountered from the location deck, so these Zombi Minions are not added either.

So, i really did not get the sense that undead were rising everywhere. With more players it Seems like shuffling the zombi minion into another location deck just makes the scenario easier, since a player will know have more of an opportunity to close a location by encountering a Henchmen sooner. Maybe this mechanic works with more players.

Wow, i guess the cards really do tell you what to do!

This is probably the most versatile blessing you could get, since you could play it on any type of check that a spell was used on.

This one really restructures how I have been playing the game. I am now afraid to find out what else i am missing.

Yes, you can. The only time it would not be permited is when another player has encountered a card from a location deck and is attempting a check.

Drunkenping wrote:

I think like all other blessing the dice are added to a check. So for spells that would be all the Attack spells. The ones that say, "for your combat check..." and also Seoni's blast power.

So if I am playing Lini, bear up and got Melee on something, if I cast Aid on myself to help the roll, I can't use BoP? It's my check. It's my spell. What in the text on that Blessing says I can't use it? The blessing only mentions a spell being played. It doesn't say, "When playing a spell to set the check"

And again....why are combat spells any more important that modifier spells? They are both spells no matter what.

I have always assumed that the dice added by BoP were intended to be directed towards spells that set your base die during the determining what die you are using step, so that's pretty much any type of attack spell that sets the dice for a combat check.

But, i can see that the wording is not so clear and can be interperted the way you are, and there is nothing in the way that the cards are worded to say you are incorrect.

I guess it will come down to the developers saying that they intended it to be played the way I have beem playing it, since what the cards say as written support your interpertation.

For now, i'll continue playing it the way i have been playing it, since that's what feels right, even if it is not correct.

Vic Wertz wrote:

Yeah—expect immunity to become more a universal concept than it is. That is, it needs to work uniformly, and in places other than just "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" and "Assemble Your Dice".

Immunity has been pulled out of "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" and "Assemble Your Dice", and now lives in "Encountering a Card": "If the card you're encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the check, or roll dice with that trait during the encounter."

So, this is still not clear to me.

If a monster is immune to a trait, can a character play cards during the play cads /powers that affect the check?

I think the answer is no these cards can not be played, but it is confusing now that the explicit statement has been pulled to the other section, and now what is said in this action window is " do not add traits from the cards to the check"

Maybe it is clearer than I think, but something seems a little off on how this section is working. Since, this action window no longer allows us to add traits to the check, it seems like they would by pass the immunity.

Unless i should interpret immunity as; if i have a card in hand with a trait that a monster is immune to, I can not play that card, and trying to play that card during the play cards/powers action window does not remove the trait and allow the card to be played.

Sorry for dragging you through my thought process on this, but just wanting to make sure i understand this correctly.

Also, the latest revision look great, other than my confusion about the above.
Thanks

From Vic's post:.

Some thoughts on the taking damage section:
it could be made clearer that if, for instance, you played an item earlier in the check you cannot play an item to reduce damage. With what's written it almost sounds like I will have the option to play the same card types again. A reminder in this section could close up questions about this in the future.

I called this out earler, and I think h4ppy's wording above does clarify this. This one scentence he wrote will make a hugh difference in clearing this up:

"and remember that each player cannot re-use card types or powers that they already used during this check when reducing damage"

If it is not clear to a few people that have been following these rules discussions closely, then it probably is worth the extra wording to make sure the rule is 100% clear.

Tracker1 wrote:

From Vic's post::

If your character doesn’t have any of the skills listed for a check, you can still attempt the check (unless you’re trying to recharge a card; see Recharge on page 15), but your die is a d4. You may use a skill that isn’t listed on your character card only if another card gives your character that skill.

Me:
This seems to have not changed, but i know there have been some threads about the contradictory nature of these sentences. Specifically, your saying that I can use a skill that is not listed on my character card, but then the rule says i can only use a skill that is not listed on my card if another card gives my character the skill.

I understand how it works, but it is phrased in a way that makes me read it over a few times, and it is still puzzeling. Any better way to say it?

Could you say for the last scentence:
You may also use a skill that isn’t listed on your character card when another card gives your character that skill. In this case your die is still a d4.

I don't think this is the intention... Mike has posted that you can ALWAYS use 1d4 (even if you have no cards that 'give' or 'boost' that skill. Would be nice to get this clarified once and for all....

I was just referring to the last sentence. The entire rewording would be:

If your character doesn’t have any of the skills listed for a check, you can still attempt the check (unless you’re trying to recharge a card; see Recharge on page 15), but your die is a d4. You may also use a skill that isn’t listed on your character card when another card gives your character that skill. In this case your die is still a d4.

Tracker1 wrote:

From Vic's post:

" If the character who encountered the bane is not able to attempt at least one of these checks, the bane is undefeated and other players do not need to attempt checks against it."

Me:
I know this is in the original rule book, but it has never come up. So, this means if i encountered a monster that just had an acrobatics check, and my character does not have the skill. It would just be shuffled back into the deck?

I don't think that's right... you can always attempt an Acrobatics check, you just roll 1d4. There might be some game effects we haven't seen yet that paralyse or otherwise prevent you from doing anything else on your turn but I think you usually have to attempt a check even if you're very bad at it.

Then i am very puzzled as to why this is in the rulebook. If you can always attempt the check even if the skill is not listed on your character card, then when will you ever be in a situation where you cannot not attempt the check. Maybe it will occur with the reason you have stated.

From Vic's post:
" If the character who encountered the bane is not able to attempt at least one of these checks, the bane is undefeated and other players do not need to attempt checks against it."

Me:
I know this is in the original rule book, but it has never come up. So, this means if i encountered a monster that just had an acrobatics check, and my character does not have the skill. It would just be shuffled back into the deck?

From Vic's post:
If your character doesn’t have any of the skills listed for a check, you can still attempt the check (unless you’re trying to recharge a card; see Recharge on page 15), but your die is a d4. You may use a skill that isn’t listed on your character card only if another card gives your character that skill.

Me:
This seems to have not changed, but i know there have been some threads about the contradictory nature of these sentences. Specifically, your saying that I can use a skill that is not listed on my character card, but then the rule says i can only use a skill that is not listed on my card if another card gives my character the skill.

I understand how it works, but it is phrased in a way that makes me read it over a few times, and it is still puzzeling. Any better way to say it?
Could you say for the last scentence:
You may also use a skill that isn’t listed on your character card when another card gives your character that skill. In this case your die is still a d4.

Some thoughts on the taking damage section:
it could be made clearer that if, for instance, you played an item earlier in the check you cannot play an item to reduce damage. With what's written it almost sounds like I will have the option to play the same card types again. A reminder in this section could close up questions about this in the future.

Thanks for all the clarifications to make a great game even better.

The first 5 will be gone as soon as i get a chance.
I've never used any of them.

My subscription cart, which has been setup since about 5 or 6 weeks ago, now has decks 2 and 3 consolidated into a single shipment in december.

Just a few days ago it has a message that deck 2 was shipping "tomorrow"... the system is toying with me!

Paizo Evil Shipping Demon wrote:

Payment method authorized: December 5

Should ship by: December 18

1x Pathfinder Adventure Card Game: The Skinsaw Murders Adventure Deck (Rise of the Runelords Adventure Deck 2), $15.99 (in sidecart)
1x Pathfinder Adventure Card Game—Promo Card: Blessing of Zarongel~
1x Pathfinder Adventure Card Game—Promo Card: Dance with Squealy Nord~
1x Pathfinder Adventure Card Game—Promo Card: Birdcruncher Crown~
1x Pathfinder Adventure Card Game: The Hook Mountain Massacre Adventure Deck (Rise of the Runelords Adventure Deck 3), $15.99

This is what mine says too!

I hope this is an error, since I heard they were going to be shipping this week.

My subscription was set up last February as soon as it was available.
So, i don't think it is related to when your subscription was set up.

It would be a big disapointment if I need to waitthat long.

Just closing this thread up with an official answer to these 2 spells in case someone searches in the future.

From the FAQ:

If I've already played a spell on a check, can I play Arcane Armor or Mirror Image to reduce damage?
Generally, you can't play a second spell on a check unless it says so. However, damage-reduction spells (and only spells, for the most part) should usually say so.

Resolution: On the spell Arcane Armor, add the following at the end of the first power: "You may play this card even if you have played another spell on this check."

On the spell Mirror Image, change the first power to the following:
"If a monster deals damage to you, you may display this card, even if you have played another spell on this check. Roll 1d4; on a result other than 1, reduce the damage to 0. Do this each time a monster deals damage to you. Discard this card at the end of the turn."

Great points.

There are a few potions like the potion of healing that are very useful. But, the majority of them are not so great. They do add extra hp, when shuffled back into you deck, but that can sometimes clog up your hand when you draw them later on, but Characters that rely on discard or bury powers can benefit from them like you said.

In terms not rolling for the card, what i mean is that sometimes a character will have no chance of acquiring a card with the skill selected.

So potion of gracefulness needs craft or intelligence 6 to acquire.
If i am Seelah, my unmodified intelligence is d4 and untrained craft is d4.
If I'm not interested in the card, and don't plan on using powers/cards to help the check, why bother rolling the d4 if I need to get a six.

There are lots of times this happens in the game especially playing solo or with another character. Some cards will not be of use and can not be acquired with the base die, so they just go back to the box.

But, if i have a chance to roll then I will go for it, but I'm still not sure it is mandatory

Recently i read it is not for recharge attmepts..

I have really liked playing Seelah. She is one of 4 characters that I was able to take through all 8 scenarios by herself. The others were, Merisiel, Seoni, and Kyra. All female characters no less.

Her abillities are pretty good. Discarding a card for the d6 is very useful on any check. I used her power feat to include recharging of spells along with blessings, and her card feat went to another spell, so she has a pretty good chance to recharge her cards when she uses the power She has one cure spell and Poog of Zargonel incase something gets discarded that she really needs.

Her other ability is really useful, and was the reason I won a few of the scenarios, where other characters failed. The most notable reason for why this ability is so strong has to do with the Shrine to Lamashtu location. Other characters would get torn up by damage when blessings were revealed, escpecially if they had no way to heal, and usually this is the last location where the Villain was.

With Seelah, handling this location was easy, since she could always move a boon to the bottom of the deck at the beginning of her turn, and that got alot of those belssings out of the way. So, she could race through the location deck to get to the villain for the victory.

As for any problems with armor, I did not have too many. Yes it is rough not starting with a weapon sometimes, but at least i would have an armor to take the damage on an early monster encounter.

Here is what her deck looked like at the end of BO.
Longsowrd +1
Shortsword+1
Greatsword
Cure
Aid
Saber-toothed Tiger
Poog of Zargonel
Magic Shield
Shield of Fire Resistance
Chainmail
Blessings:
Gods
Iomedae
Sarenrae
Lamashtu
Irori
Pharasma

I also used 2 skill feats to strength.

Maybe the reason she was successful and fun to play was because she managed to aquire some really good cards.

Not many damage before encounter are counterable by armour. That is a true problem.

Really?

It seems like many armors can be banished or buried to reduce all damage, so they work great for countering before encounter damage.

Am I missing something?

When I am exploring a location, i am usually pretty disappointed to encounter a potion. I usually don't even attempt the check and just put it back in the box. Even if I attempt it and acquire it, it will probably go to my discard pile anyway. I have only used potions twice in the many, many games I have played.

So, why do I find potions not useful?
1) Many are too situational, and in a small hand size they waste space. The type of encounter that they are useful on may not occur.
2) there are many other items that can be acquired that help on specific checks that do not need to be banished after using.
3) craft has no meaning to any character in the game at this point.

The role card for Sajan Drunken Master, looks to take advantage of potions. Very curious to see how that works out, but at this point, I'll be choosing Zen Archer for him, since building a strategy around potions seems really weak.

i'd enjoy hearing how potions are working in other players games. Maybe I am missing something.

The best use of armor in my games has been for before encounter damage. There have been a few times when this damage would have wiped out my hand making attempting the check impossible. I have found the armors more useful them the shields since they can usually be buried or discarded to reduce all damage.

I have also found them useful with Kyra and Seelah, since there melee rolls sometimes lose a combat check, so the armors and shields that can be revealed/recharged save a few cards occasionally.

I don't mind armors, i think they have there place in the game and will become more useful, and I suspect that many monsters in the future will deal damage before the encounter.

The non-basic armors/shields are by far superior to the basic, and I like that many of them allow you to recharge them when reseting your hand.

Of all the types of damage you described above, the revel/recharge ability will only work for the scout, since it is ranged combat damage. All the other types of damage are specific type of damage that can only be reduced with cards that say they reduce all damage or damage.

I would give him a light crossbow over the quaterstaff.

I tried sajan and ezren for a few games. I thought it would be a good pair, because one has lots of blessings and the other has none. It actually did not work out well at all. When I play Sajan I really don't want to lose blessings since that's what makes him tick, so I was always reluctant to help Ezren out since it would mean losing a blessing and starting Sajan's turn with one less card, down a blessing no less.

That was my experience, but give it a try to se what you think.

If you do use ezren, I gave him six basic attack spells, and the amulet of life. I don't remember the other cards, but i always had to try qnd make sure he had one attqck spell in hand.

I actually paired him with Amiri, simce i liked having the strongest and most intelligent characters together. They did pretty good,.

I paired Sajan with Seelah, and they cruised through all the scenarios. Probably since they both have a lot of blessings to work with.

Or, Mike: Are you ok with this kind of thing, where a player can repeatedly fail checks but still get to keep going against the same cards, effectively creating the possibility for an infinite loop?

Wouldn't the character run out of cards in their hand after being defeated a few times?

I don't understand why people give Lini the Snake. It's an animal, but it's almost useless for her since she almost never uses MELEE... I'd rather have the Crow!

.

The Crow is very good. i suppose if your going for a Lini build that is going for a weapon card feat, or have been given or acquired one on a scenario then the Snake could play a part in that type of deck if you really want to get the most out of that d4.

Q1 its an new exploration, so if you encounter a monster you would get a free explore after.

Q2 you keep getting free explorations until you encounter an item, armor, weapon.

That's the way i have been playing it, and it's what the location card says to do.
Cards don't have memory as Mike says. So each exploration is new.

Your not supposed to be encountering the Burnt Offerings cards in the 1st three scenarios, so technically you should remove them, and i would especially if i am introducing the game to other players.

But what I have been doing for solo is just keeping all the cards together, and when I encounter a card with a 1 in the top right corner of the card I just draw a random card from the box, and repeat until i get a B or C. This works fine, and I don't mind it in solo, but I think it would be a bit disruptive to game play with a group.

Mikes reply to this type of question from
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q3sp?Noncombat-Wisdom-Check#8

A card that says it helps you with a Wisdom check would also help a Divine check, because you're rolling your Wisdom die.
A card that says it helps you with a Divine check would not help with any other Wisdom check.

Mike

I think this applies to the same question, if you replace Mike's phrase with the current question it would read:
A card that helps with a dexterity check will help an acrobatics check.

I don't recall seeing a change to this ruling anywhere.

I know i have asked this before, and am 99.9% certain that skills like acrobatics for Mersiel will benifit form cards that add to dexterity the base skill.

I'll try and find where i got a reply, but there seems to be no problem with this.