skizzerz's page

Alright so essentially the rules from CORE are supposed to be retroactive to all previous sets?

Then the question becomes was that interaction as silly as I think it was using the rules on the cards as presented when they were printed.

EDIT:Just checked that link, mentions only for mixing older cards with CORE, not playing old sets, or even 90% of the Oganized Play adventures.

Bit of a late reply, but even pre-core, no it is not broken. You missed the crucial wording of the power: When you play a spell that has the Arcane trait during an encounter. No looping Locate Object, Detect Magic, and the like because you don't play those during encounters. Pre-core, you can certainly play one, get it back by playing a combat spell in an encounter, and then play it a second time. But no looping.

(Post-core, you cannot because they all go into Recovery)

skizzerz wrote:

1. No.

Rulebook p7 wrote:

If a character power applies when a specific thing happens, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once per check or step.

That power on Zetha's card is not a power that applies when a specific thing happens (such powers always begin with the word "When"), so you can only use it once per check or step.

Jenceslav essentially lays out why they feel the rule (One card per check or step) would allow using her power to both determine the skill used for the check and then to modify the check. You quote the same rule but give no rationale why Jenceslav's reasoning is unsound.

It didn’t need explanation — the question was “can I use the same power twice in a single check” and the rule is very explicit that the answer is “no.”

For an example of something that requires a more nuanced answer: There are two types of steps in the game: steps of a turn and steps of an encounter. Encounters can happen during a step of a turn (but aren’t required to), and checks can happen during a step of an encounter (but again aren’t required to). When inside of multiples of these, the only sensible reading is that the play restrictions apply only to the innermost “check or step” that you are dealing with. This “innermost” rule, despite never being explicitly mentioned in the rulebook, is why you are able to play a weapon power during the first check of a multi-check bane (e.g. Combat 12 THEN Combat 14), and then play the same weapon power again during the second check while exploring, even though both checks happen during the same step of the turn.

1. No.

If a character power applies when a specific thing happens, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once per check or step.

That power on Zetha's card is not a power that applies when a specific thing happens (such powers always begin with the word "When"), so you can only use it once per check or step.

2. No, for the same reason as above. (Note that a Cohort power is not a "character power," so powers on Cohorts or other cards are always restricted to once per check or step -- aka they will never qualify for that special case in the above-quoted rule)

skizzerz wrote:

Treat that header exactly as you would treat the “Powers” header on a bane card—that is, there is no timing implicit in it.

That was the general understanding of it, but then we found the quoted text from the rulebook: "This power is triggered as soon as you

encounter a ship; this occurs before you have the opportunity to evade it" - which is pretty explicit about timing, so that brought up some degree of uncertainty to it.

Thanks again.

EDIT: To clarify, the major argument was that maybe the "Before you act" wording on the ships' powers was in error and not what was intended.

I forgot about that rule :)

In that case allow me to amend my stance thusly: absent explicit timing specified within the power, it occurs during the “apply when encountered effects” step of the encounter. This ship explicitly specified otherwise by mentioning Before Acting, so go with that explicit timing instead (in other words the general rule is that it’s a When Encountered power but specific individual powers may override that)

“When you encounter this ship” isn’t rules/timing text, it’s the Powers box relevant to encountering the ship rather than commanding it. Treat that header exactly as you would treat the “Powers” header on a bane card—that is, there is no timing implicit in it.

The power in question says Before you act, so it happens in that step of the encounter (which is after you apply any evasion effects).

I would play it as option 2 based on the rule that summoned cards cannot cause other cards to be summoned (page 14 of the S&S and Core Set rulebooks). I know that the intent of the FAQ appears to cover sequential summoning, but it just seems cleaner to play it that way.

That is no longer the rule—it is now “a summoned card can’t cause you to summon a copy of itself or of the card that summoned it.” Neither of those cases apply here. Even when that FAQ was in effect, it would mean option 3: henchman is banished and nothing is summoned to replace it, so you’re SOL and can’t close the location that way.

skizzerz wrote:

I play it as option 1: replace the summoned henchmen with ships, and defeating the ship indicates a successful close (or guard).

I also ignore the scenario power to replace henchmen with ships when Mark of Yunnarius instructs you to summon and encounter a Pirate Shade Haunt (aka I rule you encounter the Haunt as normal instead of replacing it with a 2nd ship)

Thanks for the answer. Actually, we just encountered Yunnarius and since we reasoned they probably wouldn't put a power on it that wouldn't see play except in homebrew scenarios (although such text on some cards does exist I believe) - we took that as confirmation that the intent must've been Option 2.

I'm curious as to your rationale though - why do you think you should replace location summons, but then just ignore it for the Yunnarius' Haunt??

Based on this thread where option 1 was presented and not refuted by Tanis. So I viewed that plus her later comment on it being a ship demo derby as being implicit approval for option 1. Ignoring it for the Haunt is because that’s just an obvious oversight in the wording

I play it as option 1: replace the summoned henchmen with ships, and defeating the ship indicates a successful close (or guard).

I also ignore the scenario power to replace henchmen with ships when Mark of Yunnarius instructs you to summon and encounter a Pirate Shade Haunt (aka I rule you encounter the Haunt as normal instead of replacing it with a 2nd ship)

I've noticed that the CS forum disappeared but Website Feedback stayed up. I hope this continues, as I too find the Website Feedback forum valuable for peer interaction with other forum members. This will be echoing a lot of what people said earlier, but I particularly like:

1. Seeing whether or not other people are experiencing the same technical issues I am. Unlike most matters that go to CS, there isn't much in the way of private details to accidentally share here.

2. Offering help to and receiving help from peers for workarounds or alternative solutions to issues. For example, directing someone to the Paizo Campaign Tools browser extension if they have some feature request covered in PCT so that they don't need to wait on the tech team to (maybe) do it officially. Or, assisting someone in clearing their cookies if that fixes some weird lingering issue with the site.

3. Using the "favorite" button on feature requests that I feel are important to me, to provide a low-noise signal of indicating I would like this feature without cluttering or crowding the tech team's inbox.

Random aside: It'd probably be good if the Announcements subforum was moved to the top of the Paizo category instead of the bottom, so that it's the first thing you see when scrolling through the forum list. Right now the position makes it easy to overlook.

When I ran this scenario in play-by-post, I ruled that you only lost plunder at the end of your turn. The alternative is needlessly punitive and makes the scenario extremely un-fun.

I will be away most of December, can you please suspend any shipments to me until January?

WotR is a very difficult set, and the difficulty is exponential with number of characters as you’d noticed due to banes like Arboreal Blight and Demonic Horde (and have yet to notice due to the Armies starting in AD2). My recommendation would be to run with 2 characters for now instead of 4.

Alaine, Adowyn, and Balazar are likely the 3 most powerful characters in the set and it seems like most were in your original party. Any mix of 2 characters with complementary skills and some healing options should suffice imo. I would restart where you left off (first adventure of 2) after rebuilding them with the correct number of feats and decks that contain a handful of B/C and 1 upgrades.

Have to say I'm disappointed that the styling on the spine changed as well; a large part of me ordering the special editions was so that it would look visually appealing on my bookshelf when all the books were lined up next to each other.

Can you go into the reasoning why this change was made?

I've brought this up a year ago but absolutely nothing seems to have happened with this. I'd like to get some addons on roll20 but it isn't being discounted properly on their end because while I own the PDFs here they are apparently for the special edition rather than the regular edition (despite having identical content).

Since it seems neither Paizo nor roll20 seems interested in correcting the syncing issues to check for both regular and special editions, would it be possible for me to be granted the regular edition PDFs in my account so the discount will show properly on roll20's end? At this time, I'd need the GMG, APG, and Bestiaries 2 and 3.

To me, this seems a lot more ambiguous than that? I am not sure that the rules were written to support that degree of parsing. (Especially parsing Core rules/rulebook regarding wording on a pre-Core OA2 card.) I mean, couldn't you reach the opposite conclusion from drawing inferences from p19?

Rulebook, p19 wrote:

Skill Feats: These provide a modifier for a particular skill; you add the modifier to any check you attempt using that skill.

Here, the rulebook's wording of "using that skill" has to encompass the skills both before and after the colon. Because obviously a character who makes a Divine: CHA check gets to add their CHA skill feat bonus.

I feel like the actual answer to Erasmus's power is "it's not clear". And to get an understanding of how the card should be played, absent clarity in the rules, perhaps it would be better to try to untangle from another angle, like intention or balance or fun?

Covered by the sidebar in p11 of the rulebook which directly defines a modifier for a skill to include skill feats of any skill it references.

I am 100% confident that "using a skill" only refers to the skill you're actually rolling for a check. "Melee: Strength" isn't a skill. Melee is a skill, and Strength is also a skill. If "Melee: Strength" was a skill then we'd add a "Melee: Strength" trait to the check instead of a "Melee" trait and a "Strength" trait. Basically, a lot of things in the game break down if you try to define "Melee: Strength" as separate to "Melee: Dexterity"

Going to necro this for posterity since the topic came up in the PACS discord and I wanted to contradict my earlier post with updated understanding.

The skill you chose from the list, the skill you’re using, and any skill referenced by that skill, are all added as traits to the check.

First up, we see that the rulebook makes a distinction between the skill you're using and any skill referenced by the skill you're using. For sake of example, if you have Melee: Strength and are using that for a check, the skill you are using is Melee and the skill referenced by that skill is Strength.

There are two powers that are interesting here, emphasis mine:

While displayed, you gain each marked skill and add 1d4 plus the scenario's adventure deck number to your checks using marked skills.

☐ Add 1d4 to another character at your location's checks that use any skill marked on the cohort Spirit Relatives.

Both of these powers solely reference the skill you are using. To use the earlier example, if you are using Melee (regardless of if it is Melee: Strength, Melee: Constitution, or just a plain 1d4 Melee because your character lacks the skill entirely), you will get the bonus 1d4 when Nissa is marked (as Nissa provides the Melee skill).

So my updated answer for the 2018 question by Yewstance is that as long as Erasmus is using Divine and has "Divine: Wisdom" as a marked skill on Spirit Relatives, the bonus 1d4 will apply even if he's using "Divine: Charisma" somehow. In both cases (Divine: Wisdom and Divine: Charisma) the skill being used is Divine. The difference only lies with the traits added based on the skill reference, which is irrelevant for the power on Erasmus and Spirit Relatives.

skizzerz wrote:

...snip...

I believe the first two projects are going to be continuing the Season 7 storyline for adventures 4-6 and making a “Core 2” to extend Core with additional cards to form a stronger base to build future community APs.

...snip...

Oh, finishing up Season 7 would be wonderful! My group was so sad when we learned it was just...ended. We haven't played since we 'finished' it. Would be great to have a proper ending to it.

Just as a fair warning, nothing we're doing is going to be officially sanctioned. So the characters you use in the Season 7 continuation won't be official PACS characters afterwards.

I would love to see updates/finished products posted both here and at the BGG for those of us that aren't on Discord.

We will definitely share the results as widely as possible. Discord lets us collaborate on the design at a much more rapid pace compared to a forum and lowers the barrier for participation (the Paizo forums are terrible for collaboration efforts for a number of reasons; lots of people struggle with formatting, can’t edit posts after an hour, can’t embed images, big posts might just get eaten if you take too long and forget to save the post to your clipboard, …)

I believe the first two projects are going to be continuing the Season 7 storyline for adventures 4-6 and making a “Core 2” to extend Core with additional cards to form a stronger base to build future community APs.

Physical cards will be available on DriveThru; we’ve gotten an ok from both Paizo and DriveThru to create sets of cards on there with the standard PACG card back so you can purchase the entire card bundle for e.g. “Core 2.”

In terms of community help, everyone is welcome even if all you feel qualified to give are suggestions and ideas :)

I applied a voucher to this order and part of it was put into my sidecart. I just wanted to confirm/verify that the remainder of the voucher would apply to the sidecarted item since I know the system can be a bit wonky sometimes...

If your character has the skill Diplomacy: Charisma +X, then all of your Diplomacy checks are also Charisma checks. This means things that impact Charisma checks can also impact Diplomacy checks.

If your character does not have that skill, then Diplomacy checks are not also Charisma checks so the above would not work.

You can show the people at Staples this link where Paizo explicitly grants written permission to print their PDFs.

skizzerz wrote:

The first (reveal) power is used before you roll. The second (recharge) power is used after you roll and can adjust the total. Remember that you can only play one card of each type on a check, so if you use it or another ally beforehand, you can't use this afterwards.

Which means the wording is simply off. Powers that work in the way you mention usually begin with "After your roll..."

It would be nice to get an official ruling on this one since there are a few similar new wordings on cards. I'm thinking of the Warehouse/Canny Jackal problem.

Your check can’t have a result until you’ve finished rolling it so there’s nothing wrong that I can see here. Please give an argument for why you believe this power to work differently. If you can’t, then no wording adjustments or official rulings are needed because there’s always only one way that power can be interpreted (the one I gave 4 years ago).

Paizo is definitely aware of using image extraction utilities on their PDFs and while the link I gave doesn't explicitly give permission to do it, it's solid evidence that Paizo thinks it's ok to do it for the purpose you posited (uploading the images for a VTT). I don't see anything in the community guidelines that would explicitly forbid sharing such a tool on these forums. However, I flagged this to be moved to Website Feedback so Paizo staff can chime in if they wish.

The words “that location” depends on you having executed the first part of the power successfully. If there was no other location to shuffle Boggart into, then “that location” is undefined, and therefore the second half of the power is also impossible to follow. So, yes, you skip ending your turn as well.

What I'm trying to figure out is what performance spec you're trying to describe. Right now, you've created an engineering spec that tells the IT folks to rewrite the code for a specific part of the site so that it is toggled to 'on' for the entire site

Request: Make the "Gender / Class / Race" Profile Bar Forum-Global

The problem I think you're trying to solve is that the site locks in all avatar names after 10 posts. Because of that, there is no way to edit your name, or to add any personal description to your postings. The current work around is to create a new alias that includes the descriptive wording.

The UX I think you're asking for is a permanently editable text field that displays near the profile name/alias that is visible across the whole site for each name/alias.

Here’s the story I think KC is after:

“As a user who posts on the Paizo forums, I would like my preferred pronouns to be displayed prominently in my posts so that other users interacting with me use the correct pronouns.”

KC suggested what appears to be a straightforward way of accomplishing this given the forum’s glacial page of development. It’s not an optimal way, but it in theory may be easier for the tech team to do than roll out a dedicated feature for that purpose.

Then there was a second story in the request specific to recruitment threads:

“As a play-by-post GM, I would like the race/ancestry, class, and gender of characters applying in the Recruitment thread displayed as part of their posts so that I don’t need to click into their alias profile to view that information while evaluating the applications.”

This story seems like something else that would fall out of doing the requested tech change above rather than the main focus of this thread, however.

(Side note, I support the main ask of making preferred pronouns exposed in some way/shape/form. I would also echo that it be optional so that those not comfortable providing that information need not do so)

For Core cards, Good OT Condensed.

Pre-Core, the primary font on cards was Dax (the other fonts on the list in the linked post were used for things such as the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game logo, set indicators, etc.)

If the parchment background isn't available in the Community Use Package, then unfortunately we can't legally share it. That said, it shouldn't be too hard to find your own similar-looking parchment background.

There is no way to redeem cards included in HV2. This seems like an oversight (given the inclusion of an otherwise-useless redemption card) but was never officially addressed.

Version 2.2 of the shared tracker sheet has been released.

- New State sheet to track board state between BR updates, based on Zalarian's work.
- Mark party cards as used on the State sheet, and they will be crossed off on the Hands sheet. No more double-spending a blessing!
- Choose how the Loot sheet is sorted: by the scenario it was unlocked in, by card type and level, or by the card name
- Add new Credits sheet with Community Use disclaimer and names of people who have contributed the sheets this tracker was based on.

Thank you everyone who has suggested improvements for this! If you find something you think the sheet could use, please let me know (shoot me a PM on the paizo forums or message me on discord).

There's been discussion on Discord, and this was the general consensus (including input from Keith Richmond):

- In Wandering Way #6 (siege scenario), the remaining cards in the locations are added to the upgrade pool.

- This REPLACES the standard WW reward of each player adding a new type of card to the upgrade pool.

I'm not sure how official this is, as these changes would need to be made to the Dragon's Demand sanctioning document.

Also note there's still the separate issue that the Dragon's Demand playbook is missing the statement in WW#6 that the remaining cards are added to the upgrade pool in the standard (non-OP) campaign. This is actual DD errata.

(I'm reposting the decision here, as the general player base only has access to rules decisions in the Paizo forums - not on Discord. If my summary is incorrect, feel free to correct or comment.)

This is official for the Online region only at this time; VOs in other regions may decide to adopt this as well, but I hope we get an FAQ for the DD storybook and errata the sanctioning doc to make it official for everyone. That’s more of a Vic thing however.

Per Hawkmoon on Discord: “The Org Play Online ACS VOs have discussed this. For our region, we are ruling that you can keep the remaining boons to use as the upgrade pool. If we feel that people are abusing this scenario option, we will revisit that.”

I REALLY wish I had caught this earlier in the process. That said, I couldn't rest easy if I didn't say something.

Vic, in the "Changes coming in Guide 6.2" thread, said wrote:

To build the vault for a scenario in one of those adventures, start by adding all of the cards from the listed products to the vault, then remove all Basic and Elite banes whose level is at least three lower than the # of the adventure, and you may remove any non-blessing boons that fit that criteria.

This should be changed to "non-veteran". We just played an earlier Tier 3 adventure, and the B banes we were facing were ridiculously overmatched. The idea that we'll still be facing those through tier 6?

(It was also disappointing to be drawing B boons, but that's secondary to the feeling that we weren't being challenged.

That is largely a non-change from how purging worked pre-Core (actually purges Elites sooner rather than later), and only applies to pre-Core sets. In any case, it’s off topic here, this thread is mostly only for settled questions and this suggestion needs more time in development. I understand what you’re going for, but the suggestion you made is non-workable for pre-Core sets. Purging using Core rules will cause you to be short on cards in various boxes to build locations with.

I can confirm that I'm able to highlight on the latest version of Adobe Acrobat as well without needing the edit password to unlock the PDF (tested on Ancestry Guide).

I refute Zapp's statement that you shouldn't install security updates. You absolutely should; PDF is a complicated file format, and if you are running unpatched software and open a malicious PDF, it can take over your computer (installing malware or ransomware, joining you to a botnet, etc.). If you don't like what Adobe has done with recent editions of their Reader, use a different PDF solution such as the PDF reader built into your web browser or another program such as Foxit suggested above instead of running unpatched old versions.

You choose the ordering since they are both happening when you assemble your dice, so I'd recommend choosing Embiggen before choosing the Mythic path replacement. Doing it in that ordering lets you roll 2d20.

After quite a bit of work, I'm pleased to release a modification of the Shared Hand Tracker spreadsheet for others to use. The Shared Tracker works in conjunction with Yewstance's Deck Handlers to bring data about the entire party on the same screen. Version 2.1 of the tracker supports the following features:

LINKS
Shared Tracker Index containing links to all versions of the sheet (right now there's only one).
Version 2.1 of the sheet (current version as of this post)

Features

• Track up to 6 characters, with buttons to hide the 5th and 6th characters to tidy up the view for smaller tables.
  
• View the hands, displayed cards, marked scourges, notes, and more of each character all on the same screen.
  
• Alternate character support, for if a player is bouncing between two characters (e.g. 4-P1 or 4-P2 rewards)
  
• Scenario tracker: check off which scenarios you've completed in the AP.
  
• Loot sheet automatically populated based on which scenarios are marked as completed -- No more typing out loot cards!
  
• Custom highlighting for cards in hand to better show available support at a glance. Blessings, healing, combat support, and non-combat support are highlighted by default, with 2 additional highlight colors for you to use for whatever purpose you wish.

Using the sheet
1. Head to the Shared Tracker Index and follow the link to the latest version of the sheet.
2. Select File -> Make a Copy to create a copy of the tracker that you can edit
3. Head to the Setup tab and add your player's deck handler URLs. If they are using a recent version of Yewstance's sheet (v4.5 or later), everything will work without any additional configuration. Otherwise, you can tweak the various ranges to match the deck handler's layout by expanding the advanced settings.
4. On the Setup tab, choose the AP you are playing to populate the scenario tracker and loot lists.
5. Share the link with your players, and put it in your campaign header for easy reference![/list]

Future improvements
I plan on adding automation for other things such as Supporters, Ships, and Traders. If you have any suggestions for improvements, please let me know!

Special Thanks
I did not originally come up with the design of this spreadsheet, although I'm having a difficult time figuring out who did originally make it. Either way, I'd like to thank them for their efforts! (if it's you, feel free to post to let us know and I can get a more proper thanks section in next time I post an update)

My copy of the guide 6.1 says:

(left column, 3rd para up from the bottom)
"A player may display any of the eligible products to
receive the following accessory perk for the session: once per
scenario, on your check, you may reroll 1 die."

Are you referring to something else?

Huh, no, I was referring to exactly that. I just can't read :)

Yes. The OGL applies to everything in the book, including descriptive text. The Product Identity statement then specifies things that are not OGL (e.g. the name “Red Mantis”). However, those bits of Golarion setting stuff are covered by the CUP, so if you’re using both you can reproduce it in full (provided you meet all requirements of using the CUP).

If you were OGL-only, you’d need to “file off the serial numbers” of anything mentioned as PI (such as replacing “Red Mantis” with “Assassin’s Guild” or just omitting it entirely, depending on what makes more sense in context).

Hope it's not too late to sneak in one more thing! Vic mentioned something that should've been added to Guide 6.1 in this thread but never ended up actually being added. Getting it into the next guide version would be good.

I think RAW, "When you fail a check" happens before suffering damage as a result of a failed check.

Roll the Dice. Roll the dice and add up their value, adding or subtracting any modifiers that apply to the check. If a card is vulnerable to any number of traits that are used on the check, add 4. If a card is resistant to any number of traits used, subtract 4. No matter how many penalties are applied to a roll of the dice, the result cannot be reduced below 0.

Powers that allow or require you to reroll dice happen now; each such power can reroll dice no more than once per check. You may spend a hero point to reroll the dice once, on your own check only. If a power tells you to reroll dice without specifying which ones, reroll them all. You must take the new result unless the power says otherwise.

If the result is greater than or equal to the difficulty of the check, you succeed. If the result is lower than the difficulty, you fail.

Suffer Damage, If Necessary. If you fail a check to defeat a monster, you suffer an amount of damage equal to the difference between the difficulty and the result. Unless the card specifies otherwise, this damage is Combat damage. For example, if the difficulty to defeat a monster is 10 and the result of your check is 8, you suffer 2 Combat damage (see Suffering Damage on page 13). (Remember that collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon during a check, so if someone already played a spell on the check, a spell can’t be played to reduce damage.)

The text I made blue and bold "If the result is greater than or equal to the difficulty of the check, you succeed. If the result is lower than the difficulty, you fail." is the point in time you actually succeed or fail at a check. This is when "When you succeed at a check" or "When you fail a check" powers occur. Note this happens before Suffer Damage, If Necessary.

This also means that "when you fail a check" is not the same timing as "after a check" -- after a check would be after you're done processing everything about the check, including suffering damage if necessary. Suffering damage as part of failing a check against a monster does not have the same timing as suffering damage as a consequence of failing e.g. a before acting check.

Yeah that's a lot clearer. And I'm not expecting any of the old characters to get reprinted, but it'd be a nice surprise if they were :)

Unfortunately, that doesn't provide the Divine skill when casting, which is a huge change from the original intent. Going from a Divine of 1d10+2 to 1d4+2 when casting is harsh. (Her CHA is a d10, and as her Arcane stat, probably has a skill feat or two by the time she gets her role card, making it even worse!)

Good point! So it seems we need this feat to pull a double duty somehow: needs to apply while casting the spell and also during recovery for that spell, all while only recharging one blessing. All while still fitting onto the card; being able to shorten all of the "adventure deck number" stuff to "level" buys us a few more words, but not enough for a completely new sentence.

Maybe something like this? But I think the wording may be a bit confusing. It's not completely clear that the "and" in "while playing and during recovery for" means you recharge one blessing to get both, because Cards Don't Have Memories.

☐ While you attempt a check to acquire (☐ or while playing and during recovery for) a card whose level is at most #-2, you may recharge a blessing to gain proficiency in Divine and the skill Divine: Charisma +2.

Bit worse than that, getting Divine proficiency and the Divine skill at the time you banish the card doesn't actually mean you have either when it comes time to recover it.

Then, if you have any cards in a recovery pile, do whatever they say to do during recovery. While you do this, you may play cards or use powers only if they affect things that happen during recovery. (It’s possible to play cards during recovery that go into the recovery pile themselves.) After you’ve dealt with them all, banish any that remain.

So, you'd banish it after having "dealt with it" (meaning you looked at its power and determined you do not have Divine proficiency). So you can't make a check to recover, and recharging a blessing at the time it gets banished for real doesn't help because you've already lost your chance to recover it. As such, the original wording as well as Brother Tyler's re-wording above do not function as intended.

A better wording is as follows (slightly modified from what I posted on the PACS discord earlier):

☐ While you attempt a check to acquire (☐ or during recovery for) a card whose level is at most #-2, you may recharge a blessing to gain proficiency in Divine and the skill Divine: Charisma +2.

skizzerz wrote:

That's everything I can think of offhand. There's other issues in the Guide related to certain rewards being impossible to earn if you play in scenarios above your Tier, but that has not been officially clarified as far as I'm aware and therefore falls out of scope of your OP.

If you give me a link to the issue, I will see if it can be squeezed in.

Here ya go. It was originally brought up in Discord in the private BR channel for the 7-3A reward; I made this thread to bring up the actually-impossible ones from earlier seasons. Recent seasons no longer use these reward types (because they sucked. a lot. literally everyone I've ever played with hated them), so it only impacts recent rewards by accident (as was the 7-3A case).

There's two issues with the rewards in older seasons that had you draw random cards, so I'm starting this thread to shed some light on them and hopefully get a good resolution.

First issue: certain rewards are impossible to obtain if you play in scenarios above your tier. The Guide has the following rule:

If you are rewarded with a card from the vault, instead take a random card of the same type that is not already part of your deck from your Class Deck box. The card’s level cannot be higher than your character’s tier. For example, if your character is Tier 2, and a reward gives you an item from the vault, you’ll take a random item from your Class Deck box that has a level no higher than 2.

This impacts the following rewards that all have you draw a card from the vault (and therefore your CD box):

If you earn the above rewards while at a tier lower than the scenario/adventure, as-written the reward has no effect (you aren't allowed to draw random cards of that level). This issue is further compounded by the fact you earn rewards before having the opportunity to increase your tier. Given these rewards are impossible to earn by lower-tier characters, it's unclear how to actually handle them.

The second issue is that these types of rewards just plain aren't fun for anyone. 80%+ of the time they will be completely useless, especially in later adventures when the reward doesn't specify to draw something on-tier (which is most of them in Season 0/1).

In my opinion a good fix would be to eliminate the quoted rule from the Guide entirely, and treat these rewards as drawing additional cards for the upgrade pool. We'll then need fixes in the scenario PDFs or a general Guide rule to specify that these types of rewards also give a bonus deck upgrade (for those that don't state such, which again is most of them).

Removing this rule would also remove ambiguity for recent seasons as well. 7-3A's reward begins with "Each character chooses a type of boon then draws a random level 3 boon of that type from the vault" -- this would also trigger the rule in the Guide, but it was confirmed by Keith Richmond that the 7-3A reward was intended to add a card to the acquired card pool instead of a random draw from the CD box.

tl;dr if we keep the above quoted rule in the Guide, the above-mentioned rewards need to get fixed so they aren't impossible to earn by people of lower tiers, and 7-3A's reward needs to get fixed to match the actual intent of it. A better option is to kill the rule entirely and just say all of these draws go into the acquired card pool for additional deck upgrade options.

Tall Knife works by itself because of the following rule:

If a power allows you to automatically defeat or acquire a card, you may use it instead of attempting the check. Doing so counts as succeeding at all checks and requirements to defeat or acquire the card.

Because Tall Knife says "it is defeated" that short-circuits all of the checks and requirements to defeat. Per the above-quoted rule, you succeeded at the check to defeat Troll and that successful check had the Acid and/or Fire traits.

Kyra cannot play Heat Metal nor use her character power in conjunction with playing Tall Knife because Kyra is never making any checks when a card is automatically defeated.

Or they have to purchase a second Core set just to able to do this.

This is the only avenue for doing this. Proxies aren't allowed in PACS. If you're running in a game store, the game store can get a free copy of Core/Curse to run the actual games from if they ask Paizo (haven't confirmed this is still the case but I'd be shocked if that program was discontinued), so the organizer shouldn't need to purchase two copies of it.

Anyway, that's a bit off-topic for this thread, let's carry further discussion elsewhere if desired :)

skizzerz wrote:

It would be good to include the actual card lists for the Adventurer's Packs inside of the new guide, in addition to the rules for using them.

One possible reason for not listing the AP cards in the Guide is that, when additional sets are released, those new cards might be added to the Adventure Packs.*

In which case it might be better to list the packs in a separate document and post the url in the Guide?

Or you could include the AP card lists the Guide, and simply update the Guide after the new sets are released, I suppose. Probably the better option.

*New sets are eventually being released, right? Pretty please? :)

The blog page about the packs includes a lot of other text and images that detract from being able to see and compare all of the cards lists at a glance. Having the packs listed somewhere without the extraneous stuff would be beneficial. Plus since the new guide will presumably have the rules for using the packs, and there is no guarantee those rules match the playtest rules in the blog/comments, that’s another reason for reproducing the pack lists locally in the guide. It’d probably go into an appendix.

The sanctioning document for the Wandering Way scenario (3C) includes the following sentence: "Characters may earn the reward for this scenario any number of times."

This doesn't seem to explicitly override the portions of the Guide that restrict you from earning XP and Hero Points:
"If you won a scenario your character has not won before, your character also gets an experience point"
"If you won a scenario your character has not won before, your character gets a hero point"

I believe to make it clear that XP and HP are intended to be earned each time the scenario is completed, the sanctioning document should be adjusted to read something akin to "Characters may earn the reward, hero point, and experience point for this scenario any number of times."

The Guide being modified is the 6.1 printing of the guide. So, anything missing from that.

Probably already on your radar then, but everything in this thread that Vic has mentioned.

That's everything I can think of offhand. There's other issues in the Guide related to certain rewards being impossible to earn if you play in scenarios above your Tier, but that has not been officially clarified as far as I'm aware and therefore falls out of scope of your OP.

(I think my comment in my previous post related to the Wandering Way scenario in Dragon's Demand is best addressed on the DD Sanctioning Document and not Guide 6.2, so I'll open a new thread for that)

Off the top of my head

- Making the Guide sync up with the Dragon's Demand Sanctioning Document regarding repeated rewards for the scenario 3C Wandering Way. This was clarified on Discord by the Online VC, not on the forums, but link is here. The sanctioning doc for the scenario says "Characters may earn the reward for this scenario any number of times." but does not mention earning XP or Hero Points for these scenarios multiple times. The Guide mentions that XP or Hero Points are only earned for the first time a scenario is completed. (Not sure where the change should be made, but it should be made explicit that XP and Hero Points are earned alongside the scenario rewards each time)

- It would be good to include the actual card lists for the Adventurer's Packs inside of the new guide, in addition to the rules for using them.

Do you have a draft version of the guide available to peruse somewhere? It's hard to say there's stuff missing from it if we can't actually review the current wording.

Bringing my Adowyn in for this; she's already completed the first adventure of Rotting Ruin (on Normal difficulty) but I don't mind replaying it for a shot at completing the rest of the AP. Right now I'm using just the Hunter class deck, haven't added any Ultimate decks or Adventurers Packs. Once I see what the rest of the party looks like, that may shape what I decide to roll with. There's a decent chance I'll just keep her CD-only, for an extra challenge.

Some of the games for this character were played in person, the others were on TTS. I can furnish my chronicle sheets to you upon request.

For the Heroic wildcards, I'm down with whatever the rest of the table decides, whether that means rolling for them randomly or choosing some each time to suit the scenario.

I'm in Mountain time.

@Gimry: play whomever you like best or think would be most interesting! I think either would be good picks. I'll note that Ramexes does have some overlap with Adowyn in that they're both Divine spellcasters (although that isn't necessarily a bad thing, mind)

Thanks. Yes, playing a home game.

Ezren did eventually beat 2B solo on the 10th (!) try, allowing for upgrades from the winnings pile.

Congrats! When you repeatedly run into a roadblock like that in a home game, that’s when I’d look into bending some rules in order to make actual progress. There’s no shame in doing so, the rulebook even says Play It Your Way :)