w w 379's page

53 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Thanks skizzers. Generally, we have discussion in our group before we come to the boards, so I was posting both perspectives in case it jogs some thought in other people. Thanks for the input.

Hi all,

This FAQ means a Cure is set aside until the power is resolved. In application, that means the cured cards are shuffled in, and if the Cure's check to recharge is successful, the Cure is recharged. That's my group's current understanding.

What happens if Seelah has zero cards in discard, plays Blessing of Iomedae, and reveals Armor of the Pious? Does the Blessing of Iomedae effect resolve first, and the blessing itself is in the discard now before you reveal the armor, or is the blessing set aside and interrupted by the instantaneous reveal effect of the armor - so the armor would see no cards in the discard to heal? Unfortunately, I don't have Armor of the Pious in front of me to quote card text.


Next, let's say Seelah has an ally and another card in her discard pile. She plays Blessing of Iomedae and activates:

□ When you play a blessing that has the Iomedae trait, a character at your location may shuffle an ally in their discard pile into his deck.

At this point, there are two powers triggered by playing the blessing, which means Seelah can pick the order they happen in, right? In play, that'd mean she can guarantee a recharge of both cards by resolving the ally recharge first, and then revealing Armor of the Pious.

Thank you all for the help.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
It isn't defeated until you get to the "resolve the encounter" step (which is after "after you act"). That makes the power a bit problematic perhaps.

This sounds like a positive thing in the case where the character has no cards after "while you act" so the after you act does no damage, the enemy is defeated, and then they the card draw option.

My group had a question come up today while fighting an Arboreal Blight. Seelah has power:

You may discard the top card of your deck to add 1d6 (□+1) to any check by a character at your location. (□ If that character defeats a monster on that check, he may draw a card.)

Since the Fiendish Tree deals damage after you act, is the card defeated when the check is passed or at some other point, such as when you would banish the tree?

Our question determined whether a character with no cards in hand after the check would need to discard a drawn card or keep it.

Thanks all.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
I don't think so. For it to be that way it would jneed to say "When a character at your location is dealt damage..." See this FAQ.

Thank you, Hawk.

Greetings all,

Seelah's Inheritor's Blade role has a power that is:

□ You may be dealt 1 Combat damage to reduce Combat (□ or any type of) damage dealt to a character at your location by 1 (□ 2) (□ 3).

Is it correct to interpret that as a triggered ability, so it is applicable each time a thing happens (character at your location takes X damage)? E.g. someone at her location gets hit by Magic Ray Fusillade ( lade_180.jpeg). Is she able to repeatedly reveal a Paladin's Helm for each instance of 1d4-1?

Thank you all,

Hi all,

Adowyn has a power that says, "At the start of your turn, you may search your deck or your discard pile for a cohort (or a card that has the animal trait) and put it into your hand, then recharge a card.

Can this ability be used as many times per turn as she wishes?

I apologize since I know this has been discussed, but I'm having issues finding the pertinent threads.

Thanks a lot.

Iammars wrote:
Penny sleeves are messy and from my experience with other games, not worth it for any deck you need to shuffle as often as you do with the ACG.

Credentials: I've dealt years of poker games and played a lot of CCGs.

It depends on how you shuffle. Penny sleeves shuffle fine if you halve the deck, hold one half loosely, mate the other half length-wise to the half being beld, then push the cards through. Repeat a few times, alternate with drop shuffling, and you have a respectably randomized stack of cards.

I agree if you try to riffle shuffle, you'll end up with a mess, but that's an inefficient way to shuffle anyway, not to mention revealing the bottom cards to people who sit within something like a 160* arc in front of you.

Penny sleeves cost about $8.00 per 1000. They work fine if the cards are manipulated properly, which takes about 30 seconds to learn. How much do the opaque backed sleeves cost?

To the omniscient Hawkmoon
Who awaits and answers the call
A sweet gift like a boon
Bringing knowledge to us all

Mike Selinker wrote:
We're working on it. We know we will do something. We are testing what to do.

Great news, Mike. Thank you.

Frencois wrote:

Most everything I know about the game, I learned from Hawkmoon.

I heard that after Hawkmoon speaks, a hawk dispatch glides above and drops a microphone on the ground because Hawkmoon is too classy to inform everyone the conversation is over - which is just fine because everyone already knows it is.

Through 4 scenarios in AD5, we've still yet to build the Maze. It was a conscious group decision (with some luck) to avoid constructing an extra, unknown location...but now I wish we did!

elcoderdude wrote:

The Magic Ray Fusillade has the following checks to defeat:

Check wrote:



and the following powers:

Powers wrote:
If undefeated, a random character at your location is dealt 1d4-1 Fire damage, then 1d4-1 Cold damage, then 1d4-1 Fire damage, then 1d4-1 Force damage, then 1d4-1 Fire damage.
What do people think of this barrier?

Black Robes and Stole of Iomedae :D

Longshot11 wrote:
This seems a little more personal than perhaps called for, but then again I'm sometimes a poor judge of how my post come out for other people. At any rate, those are two completely separate issues to me and if disagreeing with my stance on both makes you see them as a common 'issue' in my perspective, there's no point in convincing you otherwise. Suffice to say, I don't believe my games are lacking 'subtle complexity', but for me this term intersects with 'fun' at a completely different place that it does for you.

Longshot, my apologies for coming across as being attacking. It was an observation, although sarcasm and text-only void of inflection and physical expression does make it hard for you to discern my intent.

Longshot11 wrote:
Finally, I buy the PACG so I can *play* and have fun. That some people think it's OK to rather *not* play (i.e. "wait out" the blessings deck) rather then try to push on to victory with every ounce of strength and every card left (i.e. what a "real" hero would do), and even more the fact that RAW seems to encourage this behavior simply boggles my mind. Different strokes and all that, I guess.

This seems like a matter of perspective. If you adopt your character as yourself in the environment of the game, vulnerability and cognizance of the vulnerability shouldn't be equivalent to no fun unless context is ignored and the initial premise of immersion just isn't for you, which is fine.

Tempo-change is a part of problem solving and adaptation. I fail to see why exiting a hypothetical dungeon, cavern, or tomb makes one a lesser hero. However, Longshot, your perspective is certainly consistent with your MO in the Alain thread (the venting post). Riding around ad infinitum is appealing to you. I like more subtle complexity than that.

As you say, different strokes and all that, I guess.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My group handles this based on the mechanic. Most scenarios have a finite blessings timer. As far as we understood, closed locations are not prohibited from moving to. The first, free exploration is also optional. I don't feel exercising discretion as the better part of valor is against the spirit of the game nor shameful. Instead, it is recognition for your situation and being willing to concede your progress that may have taken a few hours to arrive at.

However, as an example, Khorramzadeh's scenario creates the mechanic that he will always be in the blessings deck, so the blessings deck can't run out. Thematically, the demonic invasion was not foreseen, and he's the rampaging alpha monster that you really didn't want to see. You can't "win" the scenario under the standard method. As the adventurers, all you wanted to do was run.

This was a really well created scenario, that established the tone of WOTR clearly early on. The mechanic is innovative and makes the scenario standout and memorable as the adventurers could have been trampled out under the chaotic, tidal force of a *50 then 50* behemoth. Following this with a scenario that requires you to bury an unknown, dice-based qty of cards creates an aftermath sensation that the obvious danger may have been dodged, but in your pressed escape, you may have left behind some prized possessions.

Without this kind of mechanic, the game would be very incomplete - not quite tantamount to lloosing a number and rolling die to see where the sum falls but approaching that realm. For my group, all of the aforementioned allows us to deeply appreciate the universe Mike, Vic, and the rest of the team crafted. Ultimately, we've only walked from a couple scenarios.

Find what works for you where there's no clear demarcation. Ask the squishy members to seek help or lower aggression at the 50-75% HP range depending on deck and hand size or help them do it. Talk and determine ahead of time what plausible outcomes you all can live with.

Have fun and good luck!

CY Lin wrote:

Hi everyone, not sure if this question has been asked before,

if you're exploring a location from an adventure or scenario, let say you've leveled up or acquired a couple of new items/weapons/armors/ally, before you finished exploring that location or defeat the henchman/Villain of that location, and something comes up, and you are forced to quit, or you 've encountered something whether it be a monster or barrier, and you don't feel like fighting it, just wanted to bag your treasures and EXP, and quit in the middle of the session. Can you walk away with all the experience points and treasures you've acquired, and come back later with those advantages? Does it count as cheating?

for example: say I am playing Black Fang's Scenario with a new character, and I know there are no monsters in the temple location, so I went in, and acquired an elite weapon/armor/item/ally after the first one or two turn, and I decided that good enough for me, now I wanted to restart the scenario and go to the temple AGAIN and see if I can get even more goods, and I keep repeating the same process, until I feel that my character is ready to face barriers, monsters, henchman/villain.

Looking forward to hear from you.

Skizzerz, this is super detailed and highly respectable post. Thank you for your analysis.

skizzerz wrote:

Characters in WotR who do not have the Arcane, Acrobatics, or Stealth skills by default:

  • Alain
  • Arueshalae
  • Crowe
  • Imrijka
  • Kyra
  • Seelah
  • Shardra

Ways for those characters to mitigate it:

Temptations and Monkey's Paw can be used to add to your check, with downsides attached. Armor can be used to help soak damage; discard cards normally whenever you roll a 2 and save armors for if you roll a 3 or a 4 (or its the last roll and you can recharge to reduce). Remember that all of the damage is being dealt in a single step of the encounter, meaning that you can normally only play one armor total on this unless your armors say "You may play another armor on this check" (and even with that, you cannot play the same armor twice even on two different damage instances). It's far better to save your armor for when you roll a 3 or 4 rather than using it early and regretting it later.

Alain: Nothing extra; since Alain has at least 3 armors the chance of an armor being in his hand to help mitigate some of the damage seems likely. Go for armors that allow you to reveal or recharge to reduce all damage or Fire damage (since 3/5 damage rolls are Fire).

Arueshalae: She just evades the encounter and lets a better-equipped character handle it. If all characters are ill-equipped to handle it, she's probably the best bet then because her innate DR negates the Fire side of things entirely, meaning she only needs to worry about the Cold and Force damage on failure. An armor will help with mitigating that, even if it's buried to use.

Crowe: Check the power feat "You gain the skill Arcane: Charisma +3" (available on the base card) and then move on with your life. If for some reason you haven't yet obtained this power feat, see if you can grab a Manual of War for that purpose.

Imrijka: A Cold Iron Warden Imrijka can just outright evade it with the requisite power feat. Bonus points if you can shove it to the bottom of the deck to move on and banish it as part of closing due to...

Longshot11 wrote:
philosorapt0r wrote:
And, as Josh has pointed out, this also requires junking up Ranzak's deck with a fair number of boons you wouldn't otherwise want, making late-in-the-scenario Ranzak draws....unexceptional.
I'm not sure I get that part. It's common for our Ranzak to end his turn with 3-4 card above hand size, but then his turn ends and he has to discard all the junk he cleared from a location. Are you implying there's some mechanic that allows him to shuffle/recharge the trash into his deck?

Ranzak seems like 1) a separate issue and 2) a potentially higher degree of an issue. That changes nothing about Alain being a problem.

His is just more visible as the primary melee character in the base set. His low risk of dying also means he bears more liberty to apply the ability as often as he wants.

Our Alain parties with Kyra with 2 Pillars of Life and 1 cure. Our Adowyn carries two cures. Nobody's dying.

Longshot11 wrote:
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
It's not that hard to figure out how to get 4 explores a turn. If you have a weapon and an armor (preferably one that lets you reveal to block combat damage), that's four cards that could be additional explores. If you acquire any cards during your turn, those are also additional explores. Even if you have to discard/recharge a card or two to win fights, you should be able t average 3 additional explores a turn fairly regularly.

But that was jduteau' point - if we're only talking about 2-3 extra explores per turn beyond the 'free' one - that doesn't seem especially overpowered, and it doesn't even begin to rival Ranzak, of whom I remember no such high number of complaints.

And if we're talking about more than that - jduteau was asking for an example turn, because - I'm only assuming- all the claims about Alain's 'super-turns' sound as so much conjecture and exaggeration (I'm not saying they don't happen at all, I'm doubting they happen with anywhere near the frequency that would deserve him being nerfed).

Funny, I'm getting the impression all the people complaining about Alain's build, at the end of scenario and rebuilding decks just go "You guys take whatever loot you like, I don't care about anything but mounts. They're all just recharges to me." I'm not saying this isn't a valid way to play, but I usually have my decks pretty specialized, and every card in them matters, and call me weird, but no, in a 2 Barrier location deck, I'm not going to recharge my Masterwork Tools just to get another explore. So maybe that's why I'm not getting the whole 'thing' with the Lancer.

If you've been tracking this thread and can't see it yet, it's unlikely your stance would ever change. I'll just point out 2-3 extra explorations per Alain turn over a 4p game where he starts is 20 cards per game. Just remember the blessings deck. If it still doesn't click, I think there's an impasse.

Alain doesn't concede all cards automatically. We still optimize Alain as best as we can so as to not further self-impose a restriction as we've opted to add "at the beginning of your turn." Alain's optimization is part of how he 99% most combat checks.

Could anyone reliably answer this beyond Paizo development? My Paizo fan answer is that they're a company that pays close attention to the community, and they learn from their past - both on mistakes and hits. Short of a budget issue or a major change in company strategy, I'd guess they would do *something* rather than standing pat, and that the something would be highly positive.

With Paizo's massive leap forward in fun, creativity, and frequently stunning balance (save for Lancer Alain :P)- games coming down to the wire almost as often as not - I'm here to say to Mummy's Mask, "Shut up and take my money!"

SlappyWhite wrote:

So we tested out the once per turn last night, and it really overly gimped Alain. What ended up happening is because you had to go get all your mounts at once it diminished his ability to handle anything but a very basic combat. I am not sure what the solution is but ours was a pretty big failure. We went back to RAW and other than scenario 5-3 we still would crush the scenario pretty good, we did have our enora destroy Baphomet quite handily on all 3 checks with 15 mythic charges and 14 d20 total on the last roll. Poor Baphomet never saw it coming.

Could you share with the boards what weapon Alain is using along with a qualitative description of the # of blessings selected as card feats (as few as possible, a couple, balanced, almost maxed, as many as possible)?

We use the limitation of "at the start of your turn" for Alain's fetch ability. He usually gets 3-4 explorations with 3 mounts in his deck. Hand size 6, Soulshears, Donahan, an armor or whatever else is an armor isn't available, and the 3 mounts. Every member of our 4p team has as many blessings as possible w/ the kicker being Kyra containing 8, one of which is her iconic blessing that allows her to play two blessings in a single check.

Andrew L Klein wrote:
w w 379 wrote:
Andrew L Klein wrote:
Huh, sure enough you're right. I think we all know that clearly isn't how it's supposed to work, and hopefully no one actually decides to play that way, but yes technically you either choose to win or you never put her back into the deck. Kinda funny.
Would that constitute a win, though, if the villain were never defeated? I think by allowing her to remain discarded, you guaranteed yourself a loss as the win condition is gone. I suppose you could close all locations.
No, because the scenario tells you how you win, so closing the locations wouldn't do it.

Ah right, so allowing the villain to be discarded is simply a guaranteed loss.

Andrew L Klein wrote:
Huh, sure enough you're right. I think we all know that clearly isn't how it's supposed to work, and hopefully no one actually decides to play that way, but yes technically you either choose to win or you never put her back into the deck. Kinda funny.

Would that constitute a win, though, if the villain were never defeated? I think by allowing her to remain discarded, you guaranteed yourself a loss as the win condition is gone. I suppose you could close all locations.

Zhayne wrote:

Someone in our group has already purchased WotR, and has suggested starting it after we finish RotR (we have two adventures left to complete). This discussion is making me quite ... uneasy about it.

Our group of 3 has generally found RotR to be a good challenge. A rare steamroll, occasional losses, generally victorious (though the Holy Candle has saved our butts more than once). Obviously, we aren't amazing expert players.

We've chosen characters and built decks for WotR ... we have Imrikija (however you spell that), Harsk, and Enora. How screwed are we?

Harsk should be Adowyn and you're fine.

SlappyWhite wrote:

Alain takes very little risk when doing his explores, he is a boss a combat, and his recharge for mounts works as a heal/ablative armor. I always recharge for full mounts before an explore obviously there are things in the game the create problems for him but they are far enough and few enough I can't say i fell concerned. We haven't played Radillo, I assume he is a class deck character.

Vic and Mike one of the things we are discussing in our group is to make his mount retrieval once per turn for as many as you would like. Something along the lines of Once per turn recharge as many cards as would would like and retrieve up to that many cards with the mount characteristic from your discard or deck.

Slappy, we thought about "once per turn per card." However, we thought there was a conflict between that and cards not having memory.They cards don't know they've been pulled or not. They're just cards.

Joshua Birk 898 wrote:

Which mythic path do you use?

edit: Nevermind, just saw it. Still not sure how you beat non-demon, non-undead since you can't roll d20s against them. But maybe you just get a ton of help from your team mates.

Well, looks like I just learned something. Time to pick up the sword of iomedae :PP

Everyone is maxed on blessings though. Many Shaxes and Baphomets.

elcoderdude wrote:
w w 379 wrote:
Between my powers, one big damage spell, one check difficulty reducer, 4 heals, a solid weapon, 8 total blessings, 3 allies, rolling 5-10 d20s per game, and, most importantly, my teammates' help, I average 3-4 explorations per turn, not failing virtually any checks...

Kyra is playing the game with ONE damage spell? How does she fight the non-demon/non-undead monsters after she's used her damage spell -- with her weapon? Seems like that would require a fair number of blessings.

In OP my WotR Kyra has 3 damage spells, and still sometimes I have to hold back on an explore, or exploring the fight-non-demon/undead-to-close locations, because I'm not ready for a fight.

Self bless and roll d20s or use a weapon with teammates getting me over humps. Since my goal is to expend my hand each turn, I don't mind making a conscious decision to simply lose an encounter either if it only means losing a couple of cards. All the cards come back eventually so the jeopardy is very small.

edit: I also carry a Boom Crown.

nomadicc wrote:
I want to continue, but the game so far is sucking away my motivation. Am I doing it wrong?

First and foremost, the basic set is difficult. It makes thematic sense given that the world opened up and demons started pouring through. In the storyline, the heroes were only trying to escape with their lives intact. Things calm down once you get away from the fray.

Could you describe how your group plays? In order to know if you're doing things "wrong," we'd have to understand what you do first.

Does your group communicate with each other? Are explorations conducted methodically according to character strength at a location, and are villain chases coordinated? Are you all good at utilizing your resources? Do you run probability calculations on your rolls? What about tracking what's been played out of your deck to have a better idea of what might be coming up? Is your team aware of the blessings deck's status and the ramifications at different stages?

If you are doing those things, kudos and things will get better. If you're not, give those things a shot. The game isn't that hard, but it's also not mindless. Your Adowyn needs to pick up the power feat to evade summons ASAP if the blight and horde are troubling you so much.

My group bombed a few of the scenarios in the basic path. To us, it was just more gameplay time :D. AD3 and AD4 almost felt like the money's worth wasn't there. AD1, 2, and 5 were all superb.

I think the evolution of your character is clearly the best part of the game. I don't know your experience with previous PACG sets, and you may realize this already but just in case you didn't, it takes a while for your character to shape and for you to figure out how to manipulate that shape before setting into the roles.

Don't get locked into any single paradigm either. My Kyra is quite fierce with 5 Blessings of Ascensions in her deck and the Hierophant mythic path. My goal is to expend all cards on every turn cycle (except armor). Between my powers, one big damage spell, one check difficulty reducer, 4 heals, a solid weapon, 8 total blessings, 3 allies, rolling 5-10 d20s per game, and, most importantly, my teammates' help, I average 3-4 explorations per turn, not failing virtually any checks (except on a bad beat but that happens), and maintaining a 0 card discard pile most of the time. It is a blast to play, and it's rewarding because I sat through entire adventures being not much more than a blessing bot.

Give the game a chance, try new things, and I think you'll enjoy your experience a lot more pretty soon. Best of luck. Cheers.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Keith Richmond wrote:
I'm guessing the Enora in question was an Occularium Scholar, using her Knowledge to conquer everything (or, at least, barriers).

Our Occularium Scholar closed this one out.

It was a crazy good game for us. It was a roller coaster since we were thrashed by the villain once, but we picked up wo pillars of life (which saved us from wiping), an elemental bombardment, a touch of death, some item that reveals to add to strength or melee checks, but we missed some absurd AD5 staff on a 90% roll.

In an effort to recover from the villain loss, my Kyra blessed herself twice (using iconic blessing) in an automatic blessing acquisition to pick up two extra die, turned all 3 die into d20s, then used the hierophant mythic ability to shuffle back two blessings of ascension and a pillar of life. The pillar was redrawn on reset to be dropped and it healed for about 15 points on the group.

Great job, Paizo!

Has anyone else played this scenario yet? I played ROTR and WOTR, and I think this is the best scenario ever made. It's incredibly deceptive.

Any groups have deaths? The scenario is inescapable, and a 60 difficulty villain deals 1d10 to every character if undefeated. The kicker is you can't choose who fights her.

I could see groups getting caught up in farming, only to realize the villain recycles, and the group can't get out.

We fought her twice. The game ending fight happened with about 5 cards left in the blessings deck.

Alliteration - I also want to point out that it's wrong to assume there are 20 more cards. That's only true if you play to run down every single deck. If you position yourselves, scout for the villain, and temporarily close, you have a number of extra players equal to the number of extra locations to be able to cover the temporary closing.

Alliteration - The presence of more blessings/bows/healers/support in general combined with each player taking less turns means that every player can play their turn more aggressively to explore more locations. It's a fallacy to believe that more locations is more difficulty. Solo is likely harder than 4p.

Longshot - "Outside of a blight, horde, or army, the difficulty isnt compounded by additional players." I get it, but those are problems with the blight, horde, and army - if it's even a problem. In my group, Adowyn hands out evades to people who can't handle the blight. 3/4 of the group can handle being selected twice, sometimes even three times with the horde. Armies are gone. Beyond that, there are so many barriers in the barrier deck aside from blight and horde. But sure, these banes are challenging and part of the fun of the game. Farming might help. We farmed a couple of times while we were waiting for the next adventure path to show up.

Joshua - If I'm reading you correctly, I think I agree whole-heartedly. Alain's recursion ability remains recursive even in the presence of those barriers. If the recursion is strong enough, a round of hand dump is still not going to matter in the totality of a game. The game will still be boring as Alain rides around.

I wish we had two more players to try out the 6p format. Without disparaging people I don't know, I think the biggest problem with a big group is the increased probability of having weak players. Each player receives less turns, but the team as a whole gets just as many turns. Outside of a blight, horde, or army, the difficulty isnt compounded by additional players. There are more blessings to throw to offset the extra cards. The reduced total turns per player means each player can play more aggressivsly. However, I haven't done 6p so this is just a thought exercise.

I also want to point out coming down to the wire isn't immediately correlated with jeopardy. Sometimes we isolate the villain, scout it to see the mechanic, and farm out the scenario while tracking the blessings deck to make sure people's hands are prepped and a designated villain slayer makes final engagement at 99%+. It's a longer but lower variance strategy.

I'm not going to beat a dead horse (Alain might whip out his Soulshears and have words) and rehash what has already been said, particularly when Mike says they've seen enough. Assume your Alain doesn't fail combat checks, judicious usage of blessings and mythic charges to overcome barriers and tricky mechanics, and holds one good armor to save a bad beat - then work out the math with blessings and how many explorations Alain needs to trivialize the blessings.

Vic asked about gameplay xp. Our handicapped Alain still makes 4 explorations per turn.

Our 4p (Alain, Adowyn, Enora, Kyra) cleared AD3 and AD4 with Alain handicapped by making his ability match Adowyn's. AD5 scenario 1 was interesting since some scenario mechanics made it harder for Alain to perform his recursion. Without that limitation, scenario 2 was very easy again.

Zenarius wrote:
You still using the "at start of turn" house rule Alain? Working well/balanced?

The thing I also observed and find questionable is the ability makes hand management irrelevant. Keep one big weapon, maybe an armor, and the rest of the cards that aren't blessings don't really matter.

There's precedence for this, though. Adowyn has been able to do it by bouncing Leryn. Speaking of Adowyn, the "at the start of your turn" just makes it functionally similar to a few of Adowyn's abilities.

Our poor Adowyn was beside herself when it finally struck for her that she hasn't been fetching nearly enough. A funny thing to witness her excitement in AD4 over finding a Bat.

Back to the topic at hand. Without a self-cap, it's a single check mark: trivialization of the blessings deck, combat, and - a new addition(?) - hand management. Alain's check mark to be able to recharge items and Allies is covered if Alain's deck has one mount with exploration.

Vic, your way of explaining things leaves no wiggle room or doubt. I say this. Thank you for jumping in to speak to those of us who care.

Vic Wertz wrote:
w w 379 wrote:
Mike,if you're using "straw man" in terms of the fallacy, I can speak only for myself to say that I'm not asking for intent only to be able strike down your answer. I asked for intent because I genuinely enjoy your game, and I want to know what your vision was when you guys wrote it because you guys have vision.

We generally avoid talking about intent here for a number of reasons. If you look in the Pathfinder RPG rules forums, you will see many many MANY arguments about "RAW" (rules as written) vs. "RAI" (rules as intended), and a lot of them are horrific firefights that I personally wish didn't exist. Intent can be important, but sometimes intent needs to evolve or to be discarded.

When Mike and I are hashing out solutions to a problem, "intent" does come up now and then, but is usually a pretty minor factor. In the PACG, if the intent for a card is inconsistent with other cards in a way that can't easily be explained, intent goes out the window. If the intent is something we can't communicate clearly in the limited space we have, it goes. If it just plain breaks the game, it goes. And there are other reasons too.

We know full well that if we communicate intent before we have a finished ruling, there will be people who latch on to the intent and never let go, and then we'll have RAW vs. RAI threads here too.

(Also, sometimes, when we consider intent, nobody can even remember what the actual intent was, usually because the card evolved enough during the design process to be sufficiently separated from the intent.)

Mike,if you're using "straw man" in terms of the fallacy, I can speak only for myself to say that I'm not asking for intent only to be able strike down your answer. I asked for intent because I genuinely enjoy your game, and I want to know what your vision was when you guys wrote it because you guys have vision. I adore the world you guys created, and that's the only reason why I'm spending all this time typing away on the forums in only this particular thread. E-peen or whatever other garbage reasons you may perceive there to be aren't it.

**Alain's recursive recall ability has broken the game for those that want to play the game as they believe the creators of the game wanted the game to be played when they created the game.**

Thank you for your participation in the forums, and for your consideration in adjusting what is broken. In the process of your participation, I kindly request that your team not be so dismissive in tone. We're here because we are your fans. Since you've personally come out and said you're considering modifications, I'll stop asking for intent because I can read between the lines and tell that the Lancer's recursive ability was a mistake.

Thanks again Mike. Yall seriously do great work.

Mike Selinker wrote:
I'm going to say this so that the straw man of design intent can leave the room: It doesn't matter what we intended, because we intend many things over the course of developing a character. What matters is what's happening in play. We're reading this thread closely and considering whether a modification of any kind is needed.

Elcoderdude - You're absolutely right. I acknowledged that they're busy, and they've stated they're at PAX. I respect that the devs have limited time and have commitments beyond my concerns.

Zenarius asked a long time ago in this thread whether this was intent. Without knowing if it is or isn't intent, to people like my group who love the game, it's important to repeatedly hammer the point to make sure that this issue is viewed as a problem, because even that much isn't clear.

They might be busy, but I think Zenarius, myself, and probably others out there simply want a statement that says, "This is broken, and we're looking at fixing it." If it is intent, it's easy for them to just say, "This is what we wanted." That doesn't take much time, and they should know what they had in mind when they made the ability.

I'm not a dev, and I can imagine it is very hard work. But educate me on what I am missing, because I am always eager to learn.

Is this what the devs wanted? Because if it is, I'm going to keep trying to convince the devs they should change their opinion.

elcoderdude wrote:
w w 379 wrote:
I think it's not only unreasonable but lazy if anyone on the dev team begins to attempt to ask the players to self-impose limitations.

Problems take time to resolve. I think it's reasonable to suggest that users enact their own changes if something is making the game less fun for them while the development team is coming to an official resolution.

The alternatives are to continue to struggle with the problem, or stop playing until an official resolution is announced. It's your choice.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Alainplus2 wrote:

My hand size is 6.

And my weapons are reveal to crush (Soulshear). I can get blessing help from my team, which eliminates the opportunity cost of playing a blessing for boon acquisition because it still nets the team an explore. Plus I have 4 d20's sitting in front of me.

Ok. Thanks for the reply. So, you team must like you doing this if they are throwing blessings at you. How many times are you pulling this off in a turn? In a scenario? If your team didn't throw the blessing at you, how well would it go?

Hey Hawk. I forgot to mention. CONGRATULATIONS ON THE KID! I can only imagine a little one that will grow up to rule the world one day with a father who is as patient, knowledgeable, and didactic as you.

Alainplus2 is my Alain. It isn't a question of whether or not we like what is going on. We play the game the way it is intended according to the rules. We love Mike Selinker's vision and don't want to craft our own.

Without consideration for Alain, I'm Kyra with my 8 blessings. It is my role to heal and bless. I like healing and blessing. This is independent of where the heals and buffs go, which is to anywhere they need to be.

So let's not factor subjectivity and predilection into the discussion of whether or not Alain's lancer mount recursion ability is overpowered. I'm not going to stop issuing blessings where the blessing need to be given. The lancer isn't going to stop riding.

We play this game because the world created by Mike and his team rocks, and we enjoy playing our roles. I think it's not only unreasonable but lazy if anyone on the dev team begins to attempt to ask the players to self-impose limitations. When I read a book, I don't cross out the sections I don't like and write in my own preferences. I have that power because I bought the book, but that's not what I'm seeking here.

Alain's Lancer ability is the literary equivalent of deus ex machina. Crazy things can happen, but Alain can currently run in and shut everything down, leaving everyone bewildered as they witness it happen. That's poor penmanship and unfun to be a part of.

Keith - I hope you're spreading the joys of PACG at PAX! As for your comments, though, I think that's a weak out. Our Alain had a calling in the days of his youth when he witnessed a grand tournament. As he bore witness to the splinters of wooden lance on wooden shield, he knew in his mind what his destiny was to be when he came to age.

Alain isn't just a man now. He's a man's man. And his desire to bathe in the applause of his audience shouldn't be hampered by the lack of desire among his companions to watch him solo every adventure to completion.

A self-nerf is not the answer here.

edit: I really do understand you guys are busy. I just wanted to add points for consideration when you get around to it.

Keith Richmond wrote:

Almost everyone on the PACG team is at PAX right now, so this will not be resolved instantly. It's on our radar.

If you feel strongly that it's too powerful, don't take it. Or change it to one of the many options listed above in the thread.

If you want to dodge the issue entirely, take Glory Hound. It's pretty awesome.

I foresee the blessings being contingencies. Not every single boon acquisition is going to require a blessing, and you're not going to want every single boon you encounter anyway. That's how it works in my group.

I play Kyra in my group with 8 blessings. I believe others in my group are all also very blessing heavy. Most boons are junk. If we need to stop down to pick up a good one, then great! Useful boon \o/!

But except for this desirable, self-imposed slow down, Alain mows down all banes he encounters save for a few barriers. So at 6 cards, that's 6 explorations a turn (including the free one). We run a 4 person party so that's 60 cards to go through. Assuming Alain never fails, and all other players on the team take 1 exploration per turn, that's 6.75 orbits to go through all cards. 6.75*4 is 27 blessings exhausted by the time all cards in all location decks are gone.

It's virtually inconceivable to reach this point to me. You would have to hit a villain or henchman earlier than that at some point in some deck.

So in our 4 player game where Alain kills everything he encounters, and our group helps him when he can't, this single ability trivializes the blessings deck.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Alainplus2 wrote:

My hand size is 6.

And my weapons are reveal to crush (Soulshear). I can get blessing help from my team, which eliminates the opportunity cost of playing a blessing for boon acquisition because it still nets the team an explore. Plus I have 4 d20's sitting in front of me.

Ok. Thanks for the reply. So, you team must like you doing this if they are throwing blessings at you. How many times are you pulling this off in a turn? In a scenario? If your team didn't throw the blessing at you, how well would it go?

Them giving you blessings is basically them sacrificing their exploration for your exploration. Is that really a problem?

For comparison: In RotR, I'd tell my team the same thing when I was Ezren. ("Hey, help me get this magic Sword. I get an exploration and I'll give you the sword after the scenario.) And in S&S I use my Damiel to make Calthaer's Olenjack go crazy with explorations from the poison trait.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It doesn't need to be infinite to be overpowered. It's overpowered at one location close per turn. It's overpowered at half a location explored per turn. Nothing should make the blessings deck inconsequential, which this ability does due to the exploration rate and Alain's combat prowess. If your group knows what it is doing, it can get Alain past the hiccups. There are also mythic charges to do that as well.

I think the hyperbole is present only in the company of ignorance, pardon the harsh reality. Our Alain waxes every encounter, barring a bad beat, with room to spare.

nondeskript wrote:

A bit hyperbolic. I don't think it's possible for Lancer Alain to have infinite explores.

He won't acquire every boon he encounters. He won't want to recharge his weapon to get his mount back to explore. He shouldn't recharge his armor due to the high occurrences of before/after you act damage. That leaves a had with 4 explores +1 free explore, if he maxes out his hand size and takes no damage. Add on to that whatever cards he acquires, noting that he has a d4 Dex, so he's not getting any dex based items. He has a d6 Int and d6 Wis, with no divine or arcane so he's not getting many spells.

It's powerful, but it's only game breaking with a lot of luck in boon distribution in the decks. I'd probably end up using the ability to move and scout more than burn through a whole deck, so that all my fellow players can know what they will hit, and I can use my strength to kill a couple monsters for them on the way.

Vic and the dev team: thanks for considering the fix.

To pitch in another voice, this feels like a game-breaking oversight. Everyone can modify the game as they see fit to correct it, but that's not what we're talking about. The community loves the game as written by the creators of the game, and I don't think a lot of us want to author the game ourselves.

I feel bad for the people that looked at the Lancer role card and said, "This is going to be awesome when I take infinite turns," because that just can't be intent for a co-op game. If you didn't expect to take infinite turns, this doesn't affect you anyway. Even if you somehow limited the number of locations closed to one per, that's still too powerful because there are still too many blessings in the blessings deck for exhaustion to be a threat and everyone is basically holding their d until Alain comes to the rescue in one orbit.

There are 5 scenarios per AD. My group's time is limited so we don't replay scenarios. Can we please get a ruling or at least comment on whether this is what you guys want? Picture that each scenario played is $4.00 thrown out the window because that one ability completely breaks the game for everyone else.

This isn't a social contract issue or abuse issue. The text as written leaves very little to the imagination and subsequent room for interpretation. Also, please don't let the Ranzak conversation distract from this one because Ranzak is a separate character created in a separate game. Ranzak can be addressed if need be in a different thread, but for the people that bought WotR and play with only WotR characters, this is what matters now.

The fact that people are laying out passionate debate and calculations on this matter is a testament to the quality of your game, but the fact of the matter is that the game is dead right now.

We bought Mike Selinker's and Vic Wertz's and the entire dev team's game. We really enjoy the game, but we can't play the game anymore. Our Alain wants to play Lancer for every reason except that ability, but if it's there, he can't be asked to not use it. He's considering altering to Glory Hound just to avoid the issue, and that's a tragedy. I might trump his wishes by pulling the "decisions have to matter" card, because decisions do need to matter for the game to be fun.

Help us out, Devs, and please expedite the process so my group can continue to enjoy your game during our weekly gatherings.

Vic Wertz wrote:
Are you talking about the recursion thing? It's still under consideration.

Including the possibility of making money this early when the game is so unpolished is a major turnoff.

Vic Wertz wrote:
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
But save yourself the time, you bought a great product, you deserve to use that card. Go ahead, just swap something for it. Mike will never know.
Vic agrees with Hawkmoon.

Ok! I'm not going to disagree with both Hawkmoon and Vic. Thank you.

It's creepy that Hawkmoon knows all the things. I'm not pretending to play Kyra; I'm playing Kyra. How did he know? :o

I get what you're saying, Hawk, regarding how the change is insignificant and it should just be allowed. Like Zenarius, our group really enjoys the game, and we try really hard to play as much by the rules as we can.

I also feel bad for our Adowyn and Enora as they have no iconic minis. Although, if they did, I'd try really hard to steal the Occularium Vestments.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
If you aren't playing Organize Play but just a home game, then I say just swap it in. The owner cards are cool. If you'd had it back when you first started, you probably would have put it in (and it would be legal to do so). So next just let them have it if you want.

Yeah, I hear what you're saying. Let's say we're sticklers for rules, though. Do you think what I outlined above is against the rules?

My group recently acquired some iconic minis and their associated ACG cards. We're at a point where we haven't received any check marks on our character cards yet, but each deck has a decent amount of non-basics.

If we wanted to rebuild a character to include the character's owner card, would the rules allow this sequence of events to happen:

1) Player X trades all his non-basics for basics with his party.
2) Player X dismantles his deck
3) Player X creates a new deck using cards from his former deck + owner card (keeping the card type count restrictions in mind)
4) Player X trades all of the previously handed off basic cards back to their respective owners in return for his previous cards.

The sequence of moves would be limited by the number of basic cards available for each card type. If there are an insufficient number of basic cards for any number of types, then an equal number of non-basic cards are returned to the box.

Is this all compliant under "Between Games"?

Thanks all.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Elven Entanglement wrote:
If you would encounter a card that has the Animal trait, summon and encounter the henchman Carnivorous Stump instead.

2. What happens to the card with the animal trait you would have encountered? Is it banished? Shuffled back into the location deck? Does it depend on how things go with the Carnivorous Stump?

This came up with us, and we had to house rule it. We shuffled an undefeated monster back into the deck and banished a boon as a failure to acquire. An official rule clarification would have been nice.


For beating the scenario, we ran down one location, encountered the villain in the Dark Forest and opted for the other card to leave him in a friendly and easily accessible location, and then closed one more location by running it out. We then chose the villain slayer and had everyone else go and run down the deck.

Two separate people had to choose between the villain and Arboreal Blight. Both people chose to fight the villain and intentionally lose and discarded their hands, which was oddly more appealing than encountering the blight x_X.

We kept track of the blessings deck to make sure we don't do this for too long.

Finally, when the deck was down to 3 cards, we got everyone into position to temporarily close, cull their hands for blessings and bows, and had our designated villain slayer go in with some obscene number of die.

Even though we ran it down to the last blessing card, there wasn't a point where the outcome was less than 99% determined.

Props to Paizo for making a challenging PACG that requires cooperation and strategy :D.

elcoderdude wrote:
Wrath Rules p.10 wrote:
If you are instructed to play, reveal, display, discard, recharge, bury, banish, or otherwise manipulate a card, that card must come from your hand unless otherwise specified.

Thank you both. I missed "or otherwise manipulate a card".

Adowyn's Blight Scout role allows her to "shuffle a cohort into your deck to add your Stealth skill to your combat check."

Does this mean she gets to add an extra d12+2? The phrasing is the same as Kyra or Padrig, so I'd think so. However, this seems so powerful for a single power feat check mark. Leryn provides 1d8, but that's restricted to ranged, and Adowyn's power is not restricted to just Leryn.

Next, if Leryn is displayed, can you shuffle him into your deck from display using the power? I'm not sure how this interacts with displayed cards not being a part of your hand, discard, or deck. I've always though "shuffle" without specifying from where means from your hand, but I can't find this in the rules.

Thanks in advance!

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>