| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Return of the Chopper
The Return of the Chopper scenario is intended for characters that have completed at least the first two scenarios in the Burnt Offerings Adventure. It uses cards from the Base set, Character Add-On Pack, and Deck 1.
The Late Unpleasantness is over, at least as far as the citizens of Sandpoint are concerned. However, the recently re-consecrated cathedral has awakened the ghost of the Chopper, and he’s looking for someone to possess, to continue the murderous spree he started five years ago. Who will be the unlucky host of the Chopper, and how many more people will die before the possessed is discovered? Help Sheriff Hemlock track down the murderer, and Father Zantus exorcise the spirit of the dead, to end the violence and terror once again. Or is one of them host to the psychotic killer???
# of Characters: Location
1: Waterfront
1: Junk Beach
1: The Old Light
2: City Gate
3: Prison
4: General Store
5: Town Square
6: The Glassworks
Villain: None
Henchmen: None
During this scenario: Remove all of the named allies from the Allies deck, and from any character decks. Replace any named ally removed from character decks with their choice of a non-named ally, and switch them back when the scenario is over.
Pick Sheriff Hemlock, Father Zantus and enough random named allies to equal the number of locations used in the scenario, and seed them into the location decks as if they were the Villain and Henchmen. When a named ally is encountered in a location deck, you can attempt to interrogate them by rolling their Check to Acquire +2. If you fail, shuffle the named ally back into their location deck. If you meet the check, roll a d6. On a 6, you have found the Chopper’s host, and can now treat that named ally as the Villain of the scenario (with "If your check to defeat does not have the Magic trait, the Villain is undefeated" power added), and encounter it immediately. To defeat the Villain, you must meet a combat check of their highest Check to Acquire x2, or 12, whichever is greater. If you roll a 1-5 on the die, then they have proven their innocence, and you can attempt to close the location once, as if defeating a Henchman. These named allies are not acquired, and are instead returned to the box. If you prove all the other named allies innocent, then the last named ally you find is automatically the Chopper host. Either Sheriff Hemlock or Father Zantus must prove their innocence before you corner and defeat the Villain, or the Chopper’s ghost escapes to possess again, and the scenario is considered a loss. Treat unnamed allies found in location decks as normal.
Reward: After all characters get back any named allies that they switched out at the beginning of the scenario, pick a random named Ally from the box.
Either Sheriff Hemlock or Father Zantus must prove their innocence before you corner and defeat the Villain, or the Chopper’s ghost escapes to possess again, and the scenario is considered a loss.
Consider this example:
1) First explore of the game you explore and encounter a named ally2) You successfully interrogate that ally
3) You roll the d6, resulting in a 6
4) You successfully defeat this ally as the villain
5) You lose???
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the rules of this scenario, but that seems like a harsh punishment for victory. Are you supposed to intentionally fail the combat check? If so, what if taking damage would result in fatal damage? Lose or die?
Once you determine a named ally is the host, he is treated as a normal Villain. Thus he needs to be trapped and defeated. If you defeat the Villain on the first turn, as you suggest, then there will be at least two open locations he can run to, thus not ending the scenario, and giving you time to find either Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock. Make sense?
I do need to add an additional rule to the adventure, since it is possible for the host to run to a location, and then be found before Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock, if they are in that location.
If Sheriff Hemlock or Father Zantus is found in a location deck when it is permanently closed, then shuffle them with enough blessings from the box to equal the number of open locations, then randomly shuffle one into each open location deck.
... and can now treat that named ally as the Villain of the scenario ...
I missed this part... so yes, it makes sense now. It would have made more sense to me if it read "treat that named ally as the Villain for the remainder of the scenario" or something to that effect (my opinion only, FWIW).
However, this does raise another question: once you have identified the villain, do you still have to interrogate other named allies? If you already know who it is, why then would you need to successfully interrogate Hemlock or Zantus at all?
Also, instead of having to remember which one is the villain (because some people--myself included--may forget while playing, or they may leave the game for a while and come back later), it might make sense to set the ally card aside and substitute it with a token villain card, with the understanding that it represents the villain you've described above, not the printed villain.
My reasoning behind needing either Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock was for flavor. As a ghost possessing someone just seems to need a man of the cloth to take care of it, enter Father Zantus. As for Sheriff Hemlock, he's the one that originally tracked down and killed the Chopper (from the Adventure Path Player's Guide), so the Chopper wants revenge and won't flee if Sheriff Hemlock is around. I toyed around with you having to acquire and keep either of them in your hand, when you face the host, but decided it was too messy, so kept it that they just have to have been found and successfully questioned. Once the host is found, you can view future interrogations as being a plea for assistance, following the same rules as the interrogation. This goes for other named allies as well. Also, it is necessary as a game mechanic, as a means to permanently close locations.
Yes, substituting any Villain card for the host, once found, makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the suggestion!
My reasoning behind needing either Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock was for flavor. As a ghost possessing someone just seems to need a man of the cloth to take care of it, enter Father Zantus. As for Sheriff Hemlock, he's the one that originally tracked down and killed the Chopper (from the Adventure Path Player's Guide), so the Chopper wants revenge and won't flee if Sheriff Hemlock is around. I toyed around with you having to acquire and keep either of them in your hand, when you face the host, but decided it was too messy, so kept it that they just have to have been found and successfully questioned. Once the host is found, you can view future interrogations as being a plea for assistance, following the same rules as the interrogation. This goes for other named allies as well. Also, it is necessary as a game mechanic, as a means to permanently close locations.
I get the flavor aspect, but it just seems to me like an unnecessary victory requirement. I would hate to do everything right, only to lose because of the luck of the draw or order of the cards.
As for being a necessary game mechanic, I would argue it's not. Other characters/players can temporarily close their locations while you encounter and defeat the villain, in which case you wouldn't necessarily need to encounter either of them to win.
Maybe instead of being a loss condition, you would get a bonus for having successfully gained their assistance, such as an extra die in the combat check (Zantus grants divine assistance, similar to Kyra's vs Undead power), or a reduced difficulty (Hemlock's familiarity with the Chopper) in combat against the Chopper.
Again... my opinion only; take it or leave it. :)
I would hate to do everything right, only to lose because of the luck of the draw or order of the cards.
Let me clarify this statement with another example:
The Blessing deck is winding down, there are 3 open locations and 3 players, one at each location. Neither Zantus nor Hemlock have been successfully interrogated/recruited. You've just encountered the Villain, and both other characters succeed in temp-closing their locations. You defeat the Villain in Combat.
Now what? Because you didn't succeed in your checks with Zantus or Hemlock... is he defeated, but you still lose the game with time left? Is the Villain considered undefeated, in which case you shuffle him back into your current location and continue play?
Either way, I'd be rather frustrated.
As for being a necessary game mechanic, I would argue it's not. Other characters/players can temporarily close their locations while you encounter and defeat the villain, in which case you wouldn't necessarily need to encounter either of them to win.
I agree it isn't "necessary" per se, and it is definitely possible to not encounter Zantus or Hemlock before being in a position to defeat the Villain. However, if you do get to that position, you should have time left in the game, to continue to seek out Zantus or Hemlock before going in for the final kill.
The Blessing deck is winding down, there are 3 open locations and 3 players, one at each location. Neither Zantus nor Hemlock have been successfully interrogated/recruited. You've just encountered the Villain, and both other characters succeed in temp-closing their locations. You defeat the Villain in Combat.
Now what? Because you didn't succeed in your checks with Zantus or Hemlock... is he defeated, but you still lose the game with time left? Is the Villain considered undefeated, in which case you shuffle him back into your current location and continue play?
In the scenario above, if you chose to temp close the two open locations and defeat the Villain, without having interrogated/recruited either Zantus or Hemlock, then yes, you'd lose the scenario, as the Chopper leaves the host and looks for someone else to possess. But, if you just temp close one location, and defeat the Villain, then you know where he'll run to, and you have time left to look for either Zantus or Hemlock, before finishing off the Villain for good.
Either way, I'd be rather frustrated.
I understand why you would be frustrated, but this is not meant to be an easy scenario, or one that exactly matches most of the Official Scenarios to date. It's meant to be a challenge, though I expect that not being able to interrogate/recruit either Zantus or Hemlock before having a chance to defeat the Villain (with no place to run) won't happen as often as you think.
With that being said, I haven't had the benefit of a bunch of playtesters seeing how it plays out, so I'd be very interested to hear from people who choose to play it, to see how it goes (and hopefully you'll be one of them). I am open to changing the win requirements, if the failure rate is too high, which hasn't been the case in the testing I've done.
As for being a necessary game mechanic, I would argue it's not. Other characters/players can temporarily close their locations while you encounter and defeat the villain, in which case you wouldn't necessarily need to encounter either of them to win.I agree it isn't "necessary" per se, and it is definitely possible to not encounter Zantus or Hemlock before being in a position to defeat the Villain. However, if you do get to that position, you should have time left in the game, to continue to seek out Zantus or Hemlock before going in for the final kill.
I guess the main point of my confusion with regards to this scenario is the ambiguity about whether you lose or whether the villain is undefeated. The original text makes it sound (to me) like you lose (automatically?) if you defeat the villain without meeting one of these other criteria, but from the way you've explained it, it sounds like an condition for defeating the villain (like the Magic trait requirement).
In the scenario above, if you chose to temp close the two open locations and defeat the Villain, without having interrogated/recruited either Zantus or Hemlock, then yes, you'd lose the scenario, as the Chopper leaves the host and looks for someone else to possess. But, if you just temp close one location, and defeat the Villain, then you know where he'll run to, and you have time left to look for either Zantus or Hemlock, before finishing off the Villain for good.The Blessing deck is winding down, there are 3 open locations and 3 players, one at each location. Neither Zantus nor Hemlock have been successfully interrogated/recruited. You've just encountered the Villain, and both other characters succeed in temp-closing their locations. You defeat the Villain in Combat.
Now what? Because you didn't succeed in your checks with Zantus or Hemlock... is he defeated, but you still lose the game with time left? Is the Villain considered undefeated, in which case you shuffle him back into your current location and continue play?
So you'd actually want to strategically not close one to intentionally let him escape? I had not considered this option.
Not to pick your scenario full of holes (I do software development & testing, so boundary conditions are what I look for), but here's another example:
Let's say all of the allies checked out except Zantus and Hemlock; this would leave 2 open locations. Then after successfully interrogating Hemlock, you rolled a 6 and found that he is the Chopper. You defeat him in combat, closing that location and forcing him to the last open location (which was intentionally not closed to allow him to escape), where Zantus (by process of elimination) is known to be. Then later in the last open location, you encounter him again before Zantus. Do you defeat him, closing the location and forcing an automatic loss, or do you throw the fight, possibly taking fatal damage (depending on the state of your character deck)?
I think 2 additional changes would clear this up:
1) A location cannot be permanently closed if either Hemlock or Zantus (non-villain forms) is in that location deck. Instead treat them like Villains in that regard: banish all other cards (except villains) from that location deck and leave it open. This would prevent the last victory condition from being banished.
2) If neither Hemlock nor Zantus are successfully interrogated, then the Villain is considered undefeated (a similar condition to the Magic requirement). The key distinction being "villain is not defeated" as opposed to "scenario is considered a loss".
I expect that not being able to interrogate/recruit either Zantus or Hemlock before having a chance to defeat the Villain (with no place to run) won't happen as often as you think.
Granted, it may not happen often, but it is possible and still needs to be considered. I'm just trying to nail down what happens in those cases when it does, and/or help figure out a way of dealing with these exceptions, other than automatic/premature scenario loss (unless that really was your intent).
If that is your intent, it just seems odd to have a "if I win, I lose early" type of situation without offering a chance for recovery (assuming you still have time left, of course).
With that being said, I haven't had the benefit of a bunch of playtesters seeing how it plays out, so I'd be very interested to hear from people who choose to play it, to see how it goes (and hopefully you'll be one of them). I am open to changing the win requirements, if the failure rate is too high, which hasn't been the case in the testing I've done.
I am definitely interested in testing this, which is why I am so eager to understand the finer details.
Let's say all of the allies checked out except Zantus and Hemlock; this would leave 2 open locations. Then after successfully interrogating Hemlock, you rolled a 6 and found that he is the Chopper. You defeat him in combat, closing that location and forcing him to the last open location (which was intentionally not closed to allow him to escape), where Zantus (by process of elimination) is known to be. Then later in the last open location, you encounter him again before Zantus. Do you defeat him, closing the location and forcing an automatic loss, or do you throw the fight, possibly taking fatal damage (depending on the state of your character deck)?
Here's my attempt to clear up the scenario rules, taking your questions/suggestions into consideration, and not making it too convoluted. I've changed the rules, so in your example above, if you defeat the Villain at the last location, then when you find Zantus in the location after the Villain is defeated, he is automatically recruited, so you win the scenario. Please let me know what you think.
During this scenario: Remove all of the named allies from the Allies deck, and from any character decks. Replace any named ally removed from character decks with their choice of a non-named ally, and switch them back when the scenario is over.
Pick Sheriff Hemlock, Father Zantus and enough random named allies to equal the number of locations used in the scenario, and seed them into the location decks as if they were the Villain and Henchmen. When a named ally is encountered in a location deck, you can attempt to interrogate them by rolling their Check to Acquire +2. If you fail, shuffle the named ally back into their location deck. If you meet the check, roll a d6. On a 6, you have found the Chopper’s host, and can now treat that named ally as the Villain* for the remainder of the scenario (with "If your check to defeat does not have the Magic trait, the Villain is undefeated" power added), and encounter it immediately. To defeat the Villain, you must meet a combat check of their highest Check to Acquire x2, or 12, whichever is greater. If you roll a 1-5 on the die, then they have proven their innocence and joined your cause, and you can attempt to close the location once, as if defeating a Henchman. Named allies are never acquired, and are instead returned to the box. Once you discover the Chopper host, continue to follow the rules above for named allies, but instead of interrogating them, you are recruiting them for assistance. If you prove all the other named allies innocent, then the last named ally you find is automatically the Chopper host. Either Sheriff Hemlock or Father Zantus must prove their innocence/be recruited before you corner and defeat the Villain (or be in the Villain's location deck when it is closed), or the Chopper’s ghost escapes to possess again, and the scenario is lost.* If either Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock is found in a location deck when it is permanently closed, return them to the box and consider them proven innocent/recruited, for purposes of successfully defeating the Villain. Treat unnamed allies found in location decks as normal.
1st* If you think you’ll have trouble remembering which named ally is the Chopper host, proxy it with any Villain card from the box.
2nd* If you have a chance to corner and defeat the Villain, and you haven’t proven innocent/recruited either Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock, then leave at least one location open, so you can continue to look for them, before defeating the Villain for good.
Very nice concept, theme and I like the mechanics.
Just started a group playing PACG (our very first game), so it will be a bit before we achieve sufficient level to give this scenario a try, but I am definitely interested in running it so I will be keeping an eye on this thread.
Thank you for sharing.
Thanks, Arkadese! Enjoy the opening scenarios of the game, and I look forward to hearing your feedback, once you attempt this scenario.
If the Chopper is found in a Host, he escapes in that Host, as well. He only chooses to find another Host if it is at the end of the scenario, and you haven't recruited either Father Zantus or Sheriff Hemlock (who he would stick around and try to kill till the bitter end). He likes the Host he is in, and would only choose to leave that Host if he had no other choice. At least that is what I was going for in this scenario. :)