That seems pretty good mechanically since you can load him up with the very niche allies/items that do not have the "discard to explore ability" and make use of them.
I quite like the idea of discarding from the top of your deck (once per turn) to explore again - it's more unique than discarding from your hand and would even let him ride into battle with an empty hand.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Isn't the iconic cavalier in Order of the Cockatrice (my friends and I think of it as the "jerk" order)?
Perhaps he should have a bunch of selfish abilties; ones that still help the group win, but help him more.
Something like "add d4 to another player's check to acquire a boon at this location. If the check succeeds you get the boon instead."
Maybe something that lets him jump in front of monsters. Like if a another player encounters the monster he can fight it anyway. That could encourage others to adventure with him despite stealing the boons.
Now that I think of it, does the guy in the antipaladin art count as an iconic?
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Isn't the iconic cavalier in Order of the Cockatrice (my friends and I think of it as the "jerk" order)?
Perhaps he should have a bunch of selfish abilties; ones that still help the group win, but help him more.
Something like "add d4 to another player's check to acquire a boon at this location. If the check succeeds you get the boon instead."
Maybe something that lets him jump in front of monsters. Like if a another player encounters the monster he can fight it anyway. That could encourage others to adventure with him despite stealing the boons.
Now that I think of it, does the guy in the antipaladin art count as an iconic?
No, the antipaladin isn't considered an iconic.
I really like your idea of him "working for hire" as in he'll fight a monster for you but he gets boons if he helps. Cool concept.
|
|
As discussed on the thread I linked to, I don't think I want to use the potions... I want to transmute them into something more useful!
Hmm... most alchemists in the RPG throw bombs as their main weapon. Maybe the alchemist could start with a ton of items, and have a power that lets him discard any potion to play it as a bomb in combat. Kinda like Seoni's fire blast spell, but limited to liquid consumables.
|
I did this write up for Lirianne on the BBG boards. Just wanted to see what you all think. Mind you some of the write up might be changed based on input from that thread. BTW, I have play tested her by changing the Shortbows in the game into the Pistol card as represented below. Seems to be balanced in my runs.
-----------------------------------
I got her iconic stats from here: http://arizonapfs.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/7/6/13760094/gunsli...
Kinda started with Valeros to help convert stat scores to die:
SKILLS:
STR d6 [based on a 12 STR]
DEX d10 [based on a 16 DEX]
RANGED [FIREARMS]: DEX +2 [to reflect her weapon focus]
CON d8 [based on a 14 CON]
INT d4 [based on a 10 INT]
WIS d8 [based on a 15 WIS, I could have gone with a d10 here, but I thought a d8 would balance her]
PERCEPTION: WIS +2 [to reflect her Skill Focus - Perception]
CHA d6 [based on a 11 CHA]
I didn't give her any more skills because she only starts out with 4 + INT modifier, though I could add the skill Sleight of Hand: DEX +2 if that becomes a skill
POWERS
HAND SIZE 4 [because she has the same hit dice as Valeros]
PROFICIENT WITH Light Armors & Weapons [no brainer here]
Her DEEDS ability helps with to hit, AC and fixing her guns. I came up with a power for her Gunsmithing below, so no need to worry about that. Also the Combat check takes into account both to hit and AC. So I gave her the power: Discard a card to Add 1d6 to Ranged Combat Check. Now I know you are saying this isn't as good as Valeros' power, but the discard reflects her use of Grit to use the power.
[Note: this whole section got changed around some. See below. I just thought I would keep it in here to show you my thought process ] So that takes us to how does she get Grit back. Well you get Grit by either confirming a Crit or taking out a foe. Well there are no crits in the game, so I gave her the power: Randomly Recharge 1 card from the discard if you succeed in a Combat Check. It is a little more risky then some of the other powers that just allow you to Recharge instead of Discard, but I think it really shows how Deeds and Grit go together.
Finally, she has Gunsmithing. This comes down to a decision. I figured Firearms could be represented one of two ways. Either, make is a power like Seoni's or Kyra's where you have to use another card to power it. Or, actually put Firearm Weapon cards in the PC character pack. Personally I chose the cards because it adds something for other people to use. The Firearm cards are later. So to represent Gunsmithing, or the ability to fix a broken Firearm card, I gave her the power: Discard a card to pull a Weapon card with the Firearm Trait from your Discard or Character Deck.
CARD LIST FAVORED CARD TYPE: WEAPON W/ FIREARM TRAIT
WEAPON 3 [that way not only can she have a Firearm in her deck but a sword or something]
SPELL - [of course]
ARMOR 2 [She can use Light armor]
ITEM 3 [to make up for lack of weapons]
ALLY 3 [I always thought of her like the Clint Eastwood type and he always had followers]
BLESSING 4 [to round out 15]
Now the Firearm card. Of course it won't be too powerful, unless in Lirianne's hands. Card name is PISTOL [WEAPON], give it the Firearm, Basic, Blunt, & Pierce Traits. It's power is: Banish to add 1d8 to a Ranged Combat Check. If you have the Ranged [Firearm] skill, Reveal instead. So it is a one shot like a spell/scroll for anyone else. In the hands of Lirianne, it is deadly.
I think she balances well. Yea, she can get off a combat check at 1d10 + 1d8 + 1d6, but that is with a discard she isn't guaranteed to get back. That is pretty close to what the other fighter types can do.
I've tried her out [just used the Shortbow cards as her Pistol cards] and she seems to hold her own in combat like Valeros and Amiri. She isn't that helpful with other characters though. I think she works out pretty good.
Edit: As per what was suggested by another poster, I've now combined the Deed & Grit sections so that the combined ability states: Discard a card to add 1d6 to your Ranged combat check. If you succeed at the check, then recharge the card instead. Also, sorry if my explanation of the why for each power was confusing some people on what the powers are so here is a simplified version:
LIRIANNE
FEMALE HALF ELF GUNSLINGER
SKILLS
STRENGTH d6 [ ]+1 [ ]+2
DEXTERITY d10 [ ]+1 [ ]+2 [ ]+3 [ ]+4
RANGED [FIREARMS]: DEXTERITY +3
CONSTITUTION d8 [ ]+1 [ ]+2 [ ]+3
INTELLIGENCE d4 [ ]+1
WISDOM d8 [ ]+1 [ ]+2 [ ]+3 [ ]+4
PERCEPTION: WISDOM +2
CHARISMA d6 [ ]+1
POWERS
HAND SIZE 4 [ ]5
PROFICIENT WITH [X]Light Armors [X]Weapons
You may discard a card to add 1d6 ([ ]+1) ([ ]Magic Trait) to your ranged combat check. If you succeed in the check, recharge the card instead
You may discard a card to put a Weapon Card with the Firearm trait into your hand from the discard or [ ] character decks.
CARDS LIST FAVORED CARD TYPE: WEAPON WITH FIREARM TRAIT
WEAPON 3 [ ]4 [ ]5
SPELL -
ARMOR 2 [ ]3
ITEM 3 [ ]4 [ ]5 [ ]6
ALLY 3 [ ]4 [ ]5 [ ]6
BLESSINGS 4 [ ]5
PISTOL WEAPON
TRAITS -
BASIC
BLUNT
PIERCE
FIREARM
RANGED
You may banish to add 1d8 to ranged combat check. If you have the RANGED [FIREARMS] skill, reveal instead.
Seems a pretty hefty penalty if you fail the combat check, and a freebie if you succeed the check. I don't really like the recharge for free if you succeed.
I was thinking the Gunslinger could use the concept of bullets. Something like: Bury X cards from your discard pile and add that to your combat check. X has the maximum of 3[]+1,[]+2.
Your discard pile is the number of bullets you have, and you need to reload it next turn by putting more cards into your discard pile as you play the game.
|
|
How is a recharge a freebie? There is only 5 things you can do with a card. Reveal, recharge, discard, bury or banish. Recharge is just one category below discard. Reveal is a freebie.
Also look at Lem [recharge for a 1d4 for someone else's check], Seoni [discard to roll your arcane die + 1d6], Harsk [recharge for 1d4 to a check in another location], Lini [reveal animal for 1d4 to any checke, and discard a card to change either a 1d4 or a 1d6 to a 1d10], heck Valeros doesn't even have to do anything with a card to help someone out by 1d4 on their combat check.
Merisiel has a +1d6 on a discard, but only if they are alone.
I like the ability because it follows what Gunslingers can do. They can give up Grit to increase their combat abilities. Meanwhile they can get it back by using those combat abilities. So you discard to use up the ability, but if you are lucky, you can recharge it instead [i.e. get it back]. Plus it is a different game mechanic then any other character. No one else is actually dependent on the success or failure of the check itself.
The only argument I can see is that the Discard mechanic is a little redundant. If you fail the roll, you probably are going to lose the card anyways after taking damage. But that even isn't assured since she does have armor.
As for your Bullet idea, that is way underpowered. Amiri can bury a card to add 1d10 to a roll. So an average of +5.5 and most people say that is a weak ability. You are burying for only a +3 per card? So taking huge damage for little to no gain.
I bet you didn't read my suggestion properly. "Bury X cards in your DISCARD pile". You can't compare that to Amiri's at all.
My point on it being a freebie is because you didn't lose a card for succeeding a check, but if you fail the check you will lose that one card you discarded AND take damage. Seems the variance is too high there and I don't see any other abilities in the game that punishes your character so much for failing to use his ability.
Bury from your discard pile... now there's a whole new mechanic I hadn't thought of. Ooohh!
|
|
I just showed you one: Merisiel - Discard a card to add 1d6. With no chance to recharge it instead. How is my ability hurt the PC more than Merisiels?
Also, you did lose a card, you recharged it. Compare that to Lini's ability, she only has to Reveal an Animal Ally to add 1d4 to ANY check. Mine is upped to a 1d6 and any card, but can only be used for Ranged Combat Checks. Which means you need to have a Ranged Weapon in your hand in the first place to set the check.
Also, so your ability is that you have to take damage FIRST, then you can use your ability. And by using that ability you limit the amount of healing you can get? Explain to me again, how that represents a bullet? What you are picking up your blood from the ground, putting it in your pistol, and shooting someone one with it? No offense, but no one would use that ability. It's a real good way to get your PC killed, and more importantly has no basis in the Gunslinger class from the RPG.
And of course I can compare that to Amiri's ability. Both are a bury mechanic. Just you have yours coming from your discard pile and for a lot less bonus.
|
|
I will admit that I can see a place for using a bury from your discard mechanic. Maybe as a basis for a new Role card for Amiri to represent increased rage as she takes damage. But it better be at a higher bonus then just +3 per card.
Or even a sacrifice mechanic for Seelah. Bury X cards from your Discard to Recharge X cards from all PCs at your location from their Discard deck.
Burying from the discard pile and burying from the hand is a LOT different mechanically, since one is accumulated over time as you play the game while the other is spending your hitpoints to get a bonus. Very different indeed. And taking damage and using it for bullets? How is taking cards from the discard pile taking damage? Are you having confusion on how hit points work? Again, FROM THE DISCARD PILE.
Meaning like in certain RPGs you adventure, find bullets or arrows from a crate to fuel your ranged weapons. If you want to argue semantics further, how is burying the Elven Archer Ally from my hand giving Amiri an extra 1D10? She whacks the Elf into the next scenario and thereby gains enough confidence to beat up that goblin?
IMO, I have in my mindset hoping that the next set of Iconic characters have a totally different set abilities that are less similar mechanically than existing ones. There is still some design space here...
The idea to take weapon cards from the discard pile is interesting mechanically, but IMO is more fitting for the Alchemist using his Alchemical stuff or Witch using Potions.
Calm down guys!
Clarify your positions, debate the pros and cons, but keep it civil :)
|
In this game, hit points are simulated by a combination of hand size and deck size. The banish and bury mechanics (whether from your hand, deck or discard pile) impact you total potential hit points. These are card that you cannot get back during the course of a single game.
There are several cards and powers that return cards from the discard pile to your hand or deck. To my knowledge, there are no cards that allow you to return a buried card. I would be very cautious of a power that depleted the discard pile without a significant advantage. A +1 bonus to a check per card seems really underpowered.
How about a +2 per card then or a +3? Those are arbitrary numbers that can be modified easily through playtesting; the mechanic being the point here.
|
|
I would think that a "bury from the discard pile" effect should be slightly less powerful than a "bury from your hand" power. The bury effect has the same result. The card becomes unavailable for the rest of the game. You can argue that the discarded card has less value than one in your hand as it has already been used but the generated effects should be comparable. Since Amiri gets a d10 when burying a card (5.5 added to a check on average) then a similar effect from the discard pile should grant a d8 (4.5 average) or a d6 (3.5 average). If it is only combat checks I might go with a d8 and if it is multiple types of checks a d6 per card.
Alchemist is more to Alchemical items though there is not many of these in the base set. I can only think of one at the moment.
There are more than a dozen in the base set, and about half that many in the character-add on pack. Just FYI. :-)
Alchemist is more to Alchemical items though there is not many of these in the base set. I can only think of one at the moment.There are more than a dozen in the base set, and about half that many in the character-add on pack. Just FYI. :-)
Well, I've not been paying attention then :-D
|
|
Burying from the discard pile and burying from the hand is a LOT different mechanically, since one is accumulated over time as you play the game while the other is spending your hitpoints to get a bonus. Very different indeed. And taking damage and using it for bullets? How is taking cards from the discard pile taking damage? Are you having confusion on how hit points work? Again, FROM THE DISCARD PILE.
Meaning like in certain RPGs you adventure, find bullets or arrows from a crate to fuel your ranged weapons. If you want to argue semantics further, how is burying the Elven Archer Ally from my hand giving Amiri an extra 1D10? She whacks the Elf into the next scenario and thereby gains enough confidence to beat up that goblin?
IMO, I have in my mindset hoping that the next set of Iconic characters have a totally different set abilities that are less similar mechanically than existing ones. There is still some design space here...
The idea to take weapon cards from the discard pile is interesting mechanically, but IMO is more fitting for the Alchemist using his Alchemical stuff or Witch using Potions.
Your 'hit points' are defined by your character deck. If you discard a card then you have taken damage, but it can be healed. If you banish or bury a card, you've taken damage that can't get healed. I don't care where the card is buried from, it is damage that can't be healed.
Now, no one has still explained to me how taking damage is the equivalent to bullets. Also, if a Gunslinger has the ability to make more bullets with her Gunsmith ability from the RPG....why are you burying cards to simulate her bullets?
Again, I understand the mechanic, but I don't see how it simulates any abilities of a Gunslinger.
As for the swapping a card to get back a Weapons, that is to reflect her ability to fix her weapons. Also, since she is so dependent on her Firearms, it's a way to help her if she loses a gun to damage. I kinda took the idea from Lem's ability to get back a Spell.
Nice, I'm gonna leave this as it is since you choose to ignore everything else in my post.
|
|
Nice, I'm gonna leave this as it is since you choose to ignore everything else in my post.
I didn't ignore anything. You stated your case and I don't agree with it. I've mentioned a number of different ways that your mechanic would work for other characters but you still haven't convinced me that it represents bullets at all. It still comes down to one question, you still haven't answered. I'll reword it for you. Why should the Gunslinger have to discard cards first to use one of their main abilities? If you equate the discard pile as basically taking damage or using up resources, then you are saying they have to weaken themselves to make themselves more powerful.
That doesn't make any sense. It would make sense in say a case for the barbarian Amiri. She's taking damage, fighting hard, cards are going into her discard pile, at some point she takes enough damage that her rage overwhelms her and she moves a bunch of cards from her discard to her bury pile to really take something out.
Or with the paladin Seelah to show her sacrificing her potential future healing to help out her other companions.
Or it could work with a character who's other abilities cause them to discard a lot of cards. Then if they are stuck with an empty hand they can burn cards from their discard pile to help out with another check that turn. Maybe an ability for the Alchemist.
I'm more then willing to make changes to the character. I already have based on suggestions from the BGG boards. You just haven't convinced me.
So no character will ever get played more than 1 AP... Make sense in a way considering the level progression.
But I think base set wont be mixable or you would encounter the Arkham Horror dilluting effect on expansion.1 AP + 1 Base set, not more.
I think also there wont be enough variety to provide for another base set of cards without the change being purely cosmetics (renamed, new pics, but same mechanism on weapons, armons and spells...).
I'd rather see another AP and another intro campaign + characters pack. No need for a full base set.
The problem here is that the base set is very weighted towards Sandpoint as an origin. The intro adventure, the allies, even a lot of the enemies and equipment go with Sandpoint and Varisia. If they, for example, chose to do something like Legacy of Fire much of the current base set wouldn't make much sense.
Though if you're not meant to continue playing a character after the AP why does it have a reward for finishing? I wonder about that. Maybe just for advanced fan scenarios.
I too think it is odd that there is a reward for finishing an AP if we are only meant to complete one AP per character.
Maybe the thought of death half way though a second AP is too excruciating?
I'd like to see a mechanic that allows characters to complete multiple APs back to back.
|
|
I do not think that is is impossible to complete additional adventures after an AP but I think the current expectation is that these adventures would have to be fan created. Maybe we will eventually see "higher level" content decks published.
Completing another AP without it being a cakewalk would require the use of "higer level" challenges which may not be available in an AP. Things (banes and boons) would not scale well. The current versions of the characters would eventually run out of feats.
@Drunkenping - I gues you can always houserule it. E.g consider the adventure number to be the total number of adventures completed so far (i.e. the previous AP plus the new one) and add a certain number to ALL checks (e.g. make ALL checks 4, 5, 6, etc harder on top of the adventure number banes' own scaling).
By that time you'll be an expert so should be up for the challenge ;)
We'll have to see how the difficulty scales, I think a larger boost may be needed? Maybe adding random locations in addition?
Who knows I may be satisfied at the end of an AP. Only time will tell.
I think it just feels incomplete to gain a feat that will never be used at the end of the AP.
Shouldn't Cavalier favored card be Allies : Horse ?I was actually thinking the same thing. He should definitely get a horse ally and start with allies as his favored card type, much like Lini's animal allies.
I won't comment much in general on your creations, but this did bring up an issue that I think is interesting and general enough to talk about in public: characters that depend on specific cards. We tried very hard to avoid this in RotR, for a bunch of reasons (including but not limited to: dead cards for other characters, upgradability, variety, etc).
ASIDE: That's why there's no Droogami card for Lini. It would feel wrong to have the card anywhere but with Lini, finding it would be weird, replacing it with another card would be weird, etc. We could have made a series of Droogami cards, but that exacerbates several problems to solve one.
In general, we tried to keep those essential features on the character and role cards, rather than putting them on another card that we expect them to want. Thus, we expect Ezren to want Lightning Bolt, Amiri to want the Greataxe, and Sajan to want the Amulet of Mighty Fists - but we don't bind them directly to the character.
QUESTION: How do you all feel about having characters depend on very specific cards? Good, bad, complicated, or other?
We'll have to see how the difficulty scales, I think a larger boost may be needed? Maybe adding random locations in addition?
Who knows I may be satisfied at the end of an AP. Only time will tell.
I think it just feels incomplete to gain a feat that will never be used at the end of the AP.
This question is only tangentially related, but I think it's interesting: If you play Pathfinder, do you typically play past 20th level?
QUESTION: How do you all feel about having characters depend on very specific cards? Good, bad, complicated, or other?
I don't mind: it is part of the nature of RPGs. I would think you'd have to make it a very small percentage, but it's just like Valeros turning over a spell card or Ezri a Longsword. Class and race specific cards would add some flavor, like a dwarven axe.
Players can always choose to take it out of the set if they're not using the character. (e.g. Droogami wouldn't be in the Ally set if you're not using Lini)
|
I'd prefer to see a "white tiger" ally (that might happen to use Droogami's art) rather than an animal ally named "Droogami". My wife definitely believes that this game needs "more kitties."
Characters shouldn't depend on very specific cards. There's a chance they might not run into them at all, and even if it's in their deck, there's a chance they might not get it into their hand. If the saber-toothed tiger were replaced with Droogami, and Lini "depended on" that card, I've a feeling that most of us would be running around with pretty crippled druid characters...
|
|
QUESTION: How do you all feel about having characters depend on very specific cards? Good, bad, complicated, or other?
I would think that you would want to avoid specific cards unless those cards were always available to the character. i.e. reduce you hand size by one and add Charger the Horse to your hand. You could choose to "dismiss" this card to send it to your discard pile or bury it to bring your hand size back up to normal. These cards would have to be special and be outside of the normal deck for its type.
You could also simulate the animal companion/ mount with traits on the animal ally cards themselves. i.e. power x is only usable when revealing an ally with the companion and animal traits or power y is only usable when revealing an ally with the mount trait.
|
|
This question is only tangentially related, but I think it's interesting: If you play Pathfinder, do you typically play past 20th level?
Not typically but none of the adventure paths currently take a character up to 20th level. I think the issue that was raised is why you would add "experience" and loot to a character that has no means to be played again? What is the point of a reward for completing an adventure path and by extention the 6th adventure if there is no content beyond?
Well, if you didn't get ANYTHING then it would also look a bit odd having 'no reward' or 'none' written on the AP card.
Giving a reward you can never use is probably more satisfying in a weird way than knowing you'll not get anything!
You can still use your reward on replaying scenarios you have completed in order to help say.... that character who died and lost two Adventures worth of feats.
|
|
I should note that my suggestion that Chad responded to when asking about specific cards didn't actually have anything to do with specific cards.
When I said the cavalier should rely on horse allies and work like Lini, I meant pretty much exactly like Lini. The horse I was talking about isn't a specific card. It's just a generic mount. Give the cavalier a power that gives him a bonus when he reveals a mount from hand. Then make some animal allies with the "mount" trait (horse, camel, mule, pony). Make sure there are enough basic mounts for the cavalier's starting deck, and make ally his favored card. No specific cards necessary.
The real question is what type of bonus a mount would give a cavalier. I'm thinking combat and diplomacy, but nothing else.
Fortitude / Survival?
I should note that my suggestion that Chad responded to when asking about specific cards didn't actually have anything to do with specific cards.
Absolutely true. It wasn't meant to be a direct response, but more of a question on the concept. I picked yours from several similar posts because yours was well-written, you've been involved and helpful on the forums, and your post was in front of me when I had time to write my question.
Sorry if it seemed like I was picking on you directly; I was just interested in feedback on the idea of `key cards' from people who've played the game a bunch.
Thanks!
|
I second the idea of a "Mount" keyword in an PACG set with a Cavalier.
I'm not all that familiar withe iconics in Pathfinder (the idea of playing a pre-made character in an RPG has never appealed).
But I'm not sure I like the idea of tying a specific card to a character like that. I'm sure it could work, but it troubles me.
What if it gets banished, would there be a rule that lets you bring it back, either allowing you to banish another card to pull it back from the box, or just allowing you to add it to your deck in the post-game sequence? The chances of actually encountering that one card in an deck of allies (or items or whatever) would be high.
Another alternative would be to make character specific cards(heirloom cards, Iconic cards?) specifically not shuffled in, like Loot cards, and have text like "You may add the Droogami Iconic Card to your deck whenever you build or rebuild your character deck, even if banished in the previous game"
Hmmm, requires thought and I need sleep.
Another alternative would be to make character specific cards(heirloom cards, Iconic cards?) specifically not shuffled in, like Loot cards, and have text like "You may add the Droogami Iconic Card to your deck whenever you build or rebuild your character deck, even if banished in the previous game"
What if these cards had text that read something like "when banished, bury this card instead".
I'd be interested in standalone character decks that contained cards specific to that character (like Runebound). Maybe items, armor, weapons that could only be wielded by the advanced character roles. If banished, the card is buried instead or can be restored back to the deck (thematically represents an item that required preparation like poison on dagger).
Including these in a base set or adventure path takes up card spaces that not everyone would use so I understand wanting to avoid character specific cards in those sets. I know from the other thread (about updated cards) that there are minimum press run requirements. So unless there was room for negotiating cost by including in the print run of the next adventure path, the other option is print on demand? But I'm also aware of the drawbacks with that route. Regardless, I'd be willing to paying more for the option for card packs like that.