Gotcha. This was my intuition, but couldn't articulate it. Thanks much for the clarification!
Search Posts
Apologies for bringing back and old thread, but I was looking for some advice regarding Cogsnap's Bloodbomber role, which can essentially allow you to use two items on a check, as long as the first one is Alchemical. Does that mean you could potentially use the Acid Flask and then power it up with Masterwork Tools? Or am I interpreting that power incorrectly? I'm asking because I'm playing with someone who thinks this power means he can use two attack items on his combat check, e.g. Acid Flask and Liquid Ice. But this doesn't seem right to me. What would another use for this power be?
No, it is not a closing check. A summoned card is a different encounter. A closing check is something quite specific. Compare it to a card like the barrier Pirate Hunting, in which you summon a random ship. Any check you make to defeat the ship is a check against the ship, and not a check against the barrier.
Lamashtu. You bury to add 2 dice to defeat a monster. So, the recharge instead of discard ONLY work on the discard to explore power for that one. And of course the "Discard to add 1 die to any check" power. /nitpickI still have times where I expect to recharge a Corrupted blessing because it matches. Usually you can't. They work much differently. So those need to be read carefully as well.
Yes. There is nothing that restricts it from being used on exploring. Since all the powers require you to discard, the final power applies to any time you would play it and discard it.
Interestingly for comparison, on that same website and from the page on staves: Physical Description: A typical staff measures anywhere from 4 feet to 7 feet long and is 2 inches to 3 inches thick, weighing about 5 pounds. Most staves are wood, but an exotic few are bone, metal, or even glass. ... A typical staff is like a walking stick, quarterstaff, or cudgel. So length is an important distinction. And going purely by the illustration on the card, that would be a pretty small viper head if it were only 2-3 feet long! Difficult to say though. I think it could go either way.
Ah cool. Thanks for the link!
This isn't an incredibly important question, but ... Rod of the Viper is a mace? It sure looks more like a staff. I'm only asking because a friend of mine has made a homebrew character with a power related to staffs (staves?), so in normal gameplay not a big deal, I think. But I was just wondering if there is any reason, maybe from the RPG or something, why it should have the Mace trait instead of the Staff trait? I suppose it depends on how you would wield it...
I loved playing Meliski. If I ever play an OP game I would choose him as my character. I will have to try him out in Wrath.
Gotcha. So my friend was right. (he will be happy to hear that)
Thank you Steve and skizzerz. That part of the rule book is what I was looking for. That is exactly what my friend is saying. Ignore the rest of the card. I would compare it to a card like the monster Gargoyle, which says: "If you evade the Gargoyle, put it on top of its location deck." Here it specifically mentions evading, but the Mythic Glyph does not. Also there's the point that most monsters' powers that list If defeated / If undefeated do so in different paragraphs, and in the Mythic Glyph it's in the same sentence. Hence the confusion.
Hello smart people. We have just started Wrath deck 4 and we are confused by this new barrier. The exact wording is: "If undefeated, discard a number of cards from your deck equal to your hand size; otherwise, discard a number of cards from your deck equal to half your hand size, rounded down." At first I was confused because I thought that both sides of the semi colon applied to it being undefeated. That would be silly, so I assume that the second half applies to it being anything other than undefeated. My friend says that if he evades the barrier he gets to ignore all powers on the card.
Added Collapsed Ceiling and Avalanche. The FAQ says no class deck characters care about the Task trait, but in fact Siwar will care about this very much if you're playing her in RotR. ("Be a gentleman and dig me out, would you?")
Fantastic! Thanks Steve, that's amazing. I look forward to playing with it when I get a chance :)
Okay, the Eustoyriax thing. I was slightly wrong, thanks to posting without the cards in front of me. The card I was thinking of was the Gauntlet of Ruin scenario card, where his name is spelled "Eustoryiax" twice in the During This Scenario section. Apologies. Now that I look at the Eustoyriax villain card, however, I found another typo. In his powers, in the last paragraph, his name is spelled "Eustoryriax". (Which, again, doesn't help with pronunciation!) (I feel like I should also say that part of my job consists of being a proofreader / copy editor, so I do this kind of stuff all the time.)
Thought I would just add to an old thread instead of creating a new one for a tiny thing that doesn't affect gameplay .... On the villain Eustoyriax, his name is spelled differently twice in his powers. It is spelled Eustoryiax both times. (Doesn't help with the pronunciation unfortunately.)
Still crossing my fingers for a Bestiary deck of just monsters that you can shuffle into any AP. Seeing as the banes are getting curiouser and curiouser with every new set, it would be cool to throw some into RotR for a different flavor.While I'm not necessarily against this idea, I'd be cautious about unbalancing the monster traits in a set - some characters' and boons' utility is determined by the proportion of monster traits in an AP. Undead, Giant, and Goblin in RotR, or Aquatic and Pirate in S&S, for example. If you mess with those proportions you change the value of those things. This is an interesting point, but I'm not sure that it is necessarily a bad thing. You also have to consider that there are certain boons like that in class decks already: for example Dehydrating Touch in the Wizard deck is not really a useful spell outside of S&S. If anything, adding more Aquatic monsters (for example) would make the value of boons like that go up.
WotR Kyra at the Cemetery? And Darago! Handy before he gets his "any monster" feat.
Still crossing my fingers for a Bestiary deck of just monsters that you can shuffle into any AP. Seeing as the banes are getting curiouser and curiouser with every new set, it would be cool to throw some into RotR for a different flavor.
Thanks for the update, Steve. I love the Card Creator and really appreciate the work you are putting into it! May I make a tiny suggestion and ask if it is possible to increase the limit of the number of traits from 5 to 6? Would be very handy for some weapons :)
Whenever I introduce this game to friends, I emphasize that it's a cooperative game. I find that if you do that, things go much more smoothly. I had one friend who, instead of flipping the top card of the location deck, picked up the top card and brought it to him so he could read it and no one else could. Kind of annoying. We were like, "Uh, care to share?"
I suppose talking about, say, the Madonna is quite different than talking about Madonna. ;-)
Ah, I stand corrected. It's been a while since I've seen the exact wording. Thanks.
Noted. My bad!
I'm with skizzerz that the Death Zone cares about what's on the dice face, though I'm pretty sure somewhere in the rulebook it mentions that any one die cannot be reduced to less than zero. I had to check because I had a similar situation when I was Ambushed by a Warlord, and had to subtract 2 from each die. So if I were in your situation I would have rolled: 1,2,3,3,5 + 7 and Death Zone makes that become: 0,0,3,3,5 + 7 and because you were Ambushed: 0,0,2,2,4 + 7 = 15
I see. So that's immunity then, which is different than the question posed with the Ghalcor. I had another analogy but while typing it out I figured out why it wouldn't work. I don't think there are many cards that allow you to auto-succeed at a check to defeat a bane, but it's been hinted there might be more in the future.
This is an interesting question. It makes sense to me to add the traits to the check, because that is the card you are using for the check, only that you're not rolling any dice. But I cannot back that up with any rulebook logic. Let's say there was a hypothetical monster that had the Aquatic trait, but for some reason was immune to the Alchemical trait. Could you then not throw Potion of the Ocean at it?
Ah, well I hadn't even thought about spells like Sagacity. The question came up for us the other day because we were playing this scenario for the first time, and I don't remember seeing the word "bonus" on any other cards. Luckily we beat the scenario today (after the 4th attempt!) without ever failing a check to defeat that villain. At this point (sc. 2 of adv. 2), there has been only one skill feat reward so far, so I'm not sure what the difficulty bump should be. However, to be fair, defeating this villain summons another villain, whom you then have to defeat and corner in order to win the scenario. So maybe it's not supposed to be *too* much of a punishment.
Hi guys, I was wondering if you could help me with this. Can't seem to find it mentioned on this forum or in the rule book … The villain Nulkineth in Wrath deck 2 says, "The damage death by Nulkineth is increased by your Divine bonus." What exactly is a Divine bonus? Does it include skill feat modifiers? For example, if im playing Adowyn, who has Divine: Wisdom +1, and I have the first box ticked in her Wisdom, and I take damage from Nulkineth … is that damage increased by 1 or 2? I don't mean to be pedantic, but I know sometimes specific words have specific meanings in pathfinder, so I'm wondering if I'm missing something. The rule book mentions modifiers on page 7, but I can't see anything about bonuses (boni?) Thanks!
Ditto Feiya. I've recently started Qualzar in WotR because I wanted a bit of a challenge with all the Mental-resistant banes, and also our team needed Arcane and I wanted Knowledge. Turns out he's all right. Still in the base adventure, but nothing terrible yet. Keeping Create Pit in my deck just in case, though. I've been lukewarm towards Seelah as well, but after reading the comments here, I think I will try her out next.
Thanks for the link. They look really cool, and the wood looks really nice. I'm such a noob; I had never heard of them! I should probably consider getting one, seeing as I tend to roll the dice off the table at least once per scenario. (Just looked at the prices ... maybe I'll put it on my wish list...) For the record, this is the kind of dice tower I was thinking of ;-)
Someone mentioned a dice tower, and I don't think I'm RPG enough to know eactly what that is. But the first thing that came to mind was the literal tower of dice that people build when it's not their turn and they're slightly bored because someone else it taking a long time with their turn. At least one person in every single one of my groups does it. It's usually something like: d4 (top)
Awesome vids! I can't wait. And as someone who has very little experience with the RPG, i will also add: Hooray for extra story!
I could be wrong, but I think that recharging a card at the Safe House lets you look at the top card of the Safe House, not any location.
Powers:
Added to FAQ. Thanks Vic, that makes sense! Hawkmoon: I would think that the steps that are necessary still exist, but only for those necessary steps. E.g., if someone plays Aid on my check but I die from failing the check anyway, that character can still attempt to recharge Aid. It wouldn't make sense otherwise. (And interestingly could play a Blessing of Desna, for example, on the check to recharge.) Also, instructions that pertained to the end of a turn would still happen: you would still banish Potion of Heroism, you would still attempt to recharge Incendiary Cloud, etc. I think the point of the FAQ is that no one is allowed to play other cards once the character dies - as if the "end your turn" step is the immediate next step to happen once the encounter is resolved. Resolving meaning recharging Aid, and watching as the villain as it laughs mencaingly back into the location deck.
I think dying during an encounter is quite rare anyway;) Oh no, did I just jinx myself? 0_0
Okay, that all makes sense. I think dying during an encounter is quite rare anyway (see: that horrible Carrion Golem) but as long as there's no rule against it, I think it's doable. Thanks guys!
Just theorizing here... (apologies in advance if this opens a can of worms!) When a character dies during an encounter, does that end the encounter? Say you died because of a monster's "before you act" power, could someone cast Raise Dead immediately so you could revive and attempt to defeat the monster? My guess is no, since you're not really playing a card that affects the encounter. But then is the monster undefeated? Or just "not defeated", (i.e. evaded)? For that matter, if you die before you end your turn, do you immediately end your turn? From the rulebook: "Bury your deck, hand, and discard pile. You cannot take turns, play cards, move, or do anything else for the rest of this scenario." (emphasis mine) So does that mean your turn is over? Or, using math terms, your turn immediately becomes { } And Raise Dead says, "Discard this card and choose a dead character. His player shuffles 10 of his buried cards at random into his character deck and draws a new hand. The character is no longer dead." It doesn't specify when you can play it, so (again, just theorizing), say I die before the end of my turn, and someone casts Raise Dead on me. Could I then play a card or continue exploring? Just wondering whether any of you have come across a situation like this, and how you played it?
Yes, sorry, I realize that. But I'm not discussing the rules; I'm discussing this FAQ. I probably could have worded my question better. Redo: Should the spell Paralyze be added to this FAQ? The same spell has already been FAQ'ed in the wizard class deck.
Just cracked open deck 2. Should the spell Paralyze have the Attack trait? The Class Deck (Wizard) FAQ lists is but not this one.
I don't think I've ever bookmarked a page so quickly before :)
The cover art on the box looks awesome. Who is that man in the back with the fiery hands and a staff of sorts?he looks like Ezren ^^ Oh of course, duh. Well ... maybe. The staff is definitely Ezren-y. But this guy looks a bit too nimble to be Ezren. Maybe that's just me. Also ... Where's
Sounds fantastic. Would have loved to come but sooooooo far away ...
The cover art on the box looks awesome. Who is that man in the back with the fiery hands and a staff of sorts?
I'm glad someone else on here thinks of things in math terms. This is certainly a game that makes you assess risk and probabilities. Oooh that website is nice. My nerd brain is tingling. I will definitely be using it next time I play. I use a slightly different process for my mental math but I get the same outcome as you. I add each dice individually by: (max value / 2) + .5 + modifiers, and if the total of all the dice isn't more than what I need to roll to succeed at a check, I ask around for blessings.
PAIZOCON IS OVER GET BACK TO WORK Jk. Seriously though, didn't mean to be rude, sorry. I love all the hard work you guys put into this awesome game :) I only asked because it had been a while and I often miss things!
Was this ever resolved? We finally reached deck 6 of S&S and another player saw the card and had the exact same question. I can understand both arguments: 1. You can play it on yourself because it says "choose a character" and not "another character" which means you can choose yourself, thereby implicitly allowing you to break the "no more than one type of card per check" rule. 2. You cannot play it on yourself because you are breaking said rule and the card does not explicitly say you can break the rule, in the same way that shields and other similar cards say you can. Anything else? Probably depends on what the intention is. As I think more on it, it probably does need an FAQ either way.
I'm playing a 4-player S&S game, we are on deck 6 finally (it is hard!) and three of us still have a Captain. Agree 100% with Ring of Regeneration. The only frustrating bit is when you draw it in your opening hand...
I'm glad someone else on here thinks of things in math terms. This is certainly a game that makes you assess risk and probabilities. There is (usually) a 1 in 10 chance to encounter the henchman as the top card of a location deck. Doing that twice in a scenario? 1 in 100. Ever done it three times in one scenario? I have once. 1 in 1000. (I've actually done that twice, but the other time it happened, we realized after the third henchman that no one actually shuffled the decks after setup. Oops.)
|