Like the physical damage caused by failing the exorcism of a Ghost?
;)
So one thing here still confuses me. We say that all damage caused by failing a check with a monster is now combat damage. Unless the monster says otherwise. So, if a monster doesn't specify (Ghost), it can be blocked by cards that stop combat damage or all damage. If it does specify, it can only be blocked by cards that block that SPECIFIC type and NOT combat damage.
So now we end up with a situation where a breast plate can stop a ghost but can't stop acid. That doesn't make thematic sense.
The breastplate never could stop/reduce acid damage.
This just brings cards like Ghost, Siren, Satyr, etc. more in line with the rest of the monster cards and the combat mechanics of the game.
Well, Siren and Satyr already were clear that they caused a special type of damage. From the (B), (C) and (1) cards it's just the supernaturals with alternative check types that have really changed (e.g. Ghost, Spectre).
I'm not in love with this ruling but it makes sense and I can even make up some flavour for it (you tried to exorcise the Ghost but failed and it flung a shard of metal at you, just in time you realise your efforts at exorcism had failed and raise your shield to deflect the blow), so that's fine.
...I'm not sure that's a good example of how a shield helps ;)
Chief Technical Officer
|
...why was that sentence in parentheses? There are a few sentences like that throughout, and I don't understand why any of them are in parentheses.
There are a few different reasons why parentheses are used in the rules (apart from the obvious page references, of course).
Parentheses, to me at least, often suggest a shift in tone from something formal to something more conversational, and I use that effect to encapsulate a few statements that are meant to be understood as "this it not rules—this is talk about rules."
Example: "...put it under your character card (likely losing access to it for
the rest of the scenario)."
There are also occasions where they're more asides—I really need to tell you something *right here*, but I don't want to disrupt the flow of what I'm saying too badly, so read it and move on. Often, this will be to address an infrequent exception.
Example: "If your character doesn’t have any of the skills listed for a check, you can still attempt the check (unless you’re trying to recharge a card; see Recharge on page 15), but your die is a d4."
There are also cases where there are sort of subsidiary rules-ish things that are really more reminders of ways that rules get broken or bent then they are actual rules.
Example: "When you have the opportunity and want to close a location, do whatever the location’s 'When Closing' section says. (If it says you may close the location automatically, you don’t need to do anything else.)"
And there are things that are more like "I just told you a rule, but don't make an assumption about it extending beyond what I said!"
Example: "You may give 1 card from your hand to another character at your location. (Other characters cannot give you cards on your turn.)"
H4ppy wrote:
"Take Damage, If Necessary: If you fail a check to defeat a monster, it deals an amount of damage to you equal to the difference between the difficulty to defeat the monster and your check result. Unless the card specifies otherwise, this damage is Combat damage. For example, if the difficulty to defeat a monster is 10 and the result of your check is 8, the monster deals 2 Combat damage to you. See Taking Damage, below and remember that each player cannot re-use card types or powers that they already used during this check when reducing damage."
I really like what h4ppy is saying here. This make perfect sense to me. T hoes little nudges and reminders really bring the point home.
Also its confusing when you say 1 card for each step... well when does the step begin and end. I know not each bullet is a step.
I'm assuming that the whole new Encountering a Card + Attempting a Check = 1 whole step. so one card each for this step. I'll probably get hammered for this post but I think this is important enough to risk shame.
@raven614 - Vic put the steps in a later post:
Encountering a Card
...During each of these steps, you and the other players may perform only the specified actions. You may each only play 1 card of each type during each step; for example, you may not play more than 1 weapon during a check or more than 1 spell to prevent damage from a single source, though multiple players could each play 1 spell to prevent damage from that source...These are the steps that are part of Encountering a Card:
•Evade the Card (optional)
•Apply Any Effects that Happen Before the Encounter
•Attempt the Check
•Attempt the Next Check, If Needed
•Apply Any Effects that Happen After the Encounter
•Resolve the EncounterThese are the actions that are part of Attempting a Check:
•Determine which Die You’re Using
•Determine the Difficulty
•Play Cards and Use Powers that Affect Your Check (optional)
•Assemble Your Dice
•Attempt the Roll
•Take Damage if you lose a check against a monster
So, if I understand correctly (now!)...
Encountering a Card is not one step, it's something else (a phase??) which has 6 steps in it.
You can play an item "Before the Encounter", then another one during "Attempt the Check", another one for each extra check (e.g. recharges, multiple checks on a bane, etc) and then another one "After the Encounter".
The "Attempt the Check" step has 6 actions within it (but it's a single step, so you can only play one card of each type for its duration).
Now... if anyone has any better ideas about how to concisely convey this in terms that any newbie and every veteran will understand without ambiguity, doubt or confusion then I'm sure Vic would love to hear from you!
Very nice got it. I like the part about 6 actions in the Attempt the check part. Makes sense.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
When do cards that auto-defeat an encounter get played? ie Caltrops, Thieves Tools, most potions, etc. I'd assumed they'd be playable at the optional evasion step, but they aren't mentioned here.
They get played during the "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" action.
It can't be after the "Determine the Skill" step, because that would allow you to play a card in that step which doesn't matter. ie Valeros could recharge a weapon just to cycle through his deck, then use holy water to win the encounter, without rolling for the weapon attack.
Meh. If you want to do that, you can—no big deal.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Yeah—expect immunity to become more a universal concept than it is. That is, it needs to work uniformly, and in places other than just "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" and "Assemble Your Dice".
Immunity has been pulled out of "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" and "Assemble Your Dice", and now lives in "Encountering a Card": "If the card you're encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the check, or roll dice with that trait during the encounter."
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Here's the current draft. Still hasn't been through editor Judy.
• On page 10, under Playing Cards, replace the paragraph under the example with the following text: "If a card in your hand does not specify when it can be played, you can generally play it at any time, with the exception that during an encounter you may only perform specific actions at specific times."
• Replace the Encountering a Card section with the following text:
Encountering a Card
When you encounter a card, you—and only you—can go through the following steps. No one else can do these steps for you, though other players might be able to play cards to help you deal with the encounter's challenges. During each of these steps, you and the other players may perform only the specified actions. Players may only play cards or activate powers that relate to each step. Each player may play no more than 1 card of each type during each step; for example, no one player may play more than 1 blessing while attempting a check, though multiple players could each play 1 blessing during that check. Players may not activate the same power more than once during each step. Players may not play any cards or activate any powers between these steps.
If the card you're encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the check, or roll dice with that trait during the encounter.
After you flip over the top card of the location deck, put it on top of the deck and read it, then go through these steps in order:
- Evade the card (optional): If you have a power or card that lets you evade the card you're encountering, you may immediately shuffle it back into the deck; it is neither defeated nor undefeated.
- Apply any effects that happen before the encounter, if needed.
- Attempt the check: If it’s a boon, you may try to acquire it for your deck; if it’s a bane, you must try to defeat it. (See Attempting a Check, below.) If a bane’s “Check to Defeat” section says “None,” look at the bane’s powers, and immediately do whatever it says there.
- Attempt the next check, if needed: If another check is required, such as if you played a boon with a check to recharge, or if your bane requires a second check to defeat, resolve it now.
- Apply any effects that happen after the encounter, if needed. Do this whether or not you succeeded at your checks.
- Resolve the Encounter: If you succeed at all of the checks required to defeat a bane, banish it; if you don’t succeed, it is undefeated— shuffle the card back into its location deck. If you succeed at a check to acquire a boon, put it in your hand; otherwise, banish it.
• Replace the Attempting a Check section with the following text:
Attempting a Check
Many times during the game, you will need to attempt a check to do something, such as acquire a new weapon or defeat a monster.
Each boon card has a section called “Check to Acquire.” This section indicates the skills that can be used in checks to acquire the boon, and the difficulty of the checks. If multiple checks are listed on the card with “or” between them, choose one of them. If you succeed at the check, put the card into your hand. If you fail, banish the card.
Each bane card has a section called “Check to Defeat.” This section indicates the skills that can be used in checks against the bane, and the difficulty of the checks. If multiple checks are listed on the card with “or” between them, choose one of them. If there’s a “then” between them, you’ll need to succeed at both checks sequentially to defeat the bane; you must attempt both checks, even if you fail the first (because failure often has consequences). “Or” takes priority over “then,” so if a card says “Wisdom 10 or Combat 13 then Combat 15,” you must first attempt either a Wisdom check with a difficulty of 10 or a Combat check with a difficulty of 13, and then attempt a Combat check with a difficulty of 15. In the case of a bane that requires sequential checks, any character at that location can attempt one or more of the checks, as long as the character who encountered the bane attempts at least one of them. If the character who encountered the bane is not able to attempt at least one of these checks, the bane is undefeated; other players do not attempt checks against it. If you fail to defeat a bane, it is usually considered undefeated and is shuffled back into the location deck. If you fail to defeat a monster, you take damage (see Take Damage, If Necessary, below). If you defeat the bane, it is usually banished.
Many cards also require checks to activate powers or to recharge them after playing them.
Attempting a check requires several actions which are explained below. Remember that players may not play more than one card of each type or activate any one power more than once during each check.
- Determine Which Die You’re Using: Cards that require a check specify the skill or skills you can use to attempt the check. each check to defeat or acquire a card lists one or more skills; you may choose any of the listed skills for your check. (For example, if a check lists Dexterity, Disable, Strength, and Melee, you may choose to use any one of those skills to attempt your check.)
Most monsters and some barriers call for a combat check. Weapons and many other cards that can be used during combat generally tell you what skill to use when you attempt a combat check; if you don’t play such a card, use your Strength or Melee skill. (A few items that can be used in combat don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll.)
Some cards may allow you to replace the required skill for a check with a different one; as part of this action, you may play only 1 card or use only 1 power that changes the skill you are going to use. When you play a card that does this, add that card's traits to the check; for example, revealing the weapon Longsword +1 for your combat check adds the Sword, Melee, Slashing, and Magic traits to the check. (This isn't the same as giving you a skill; for example, the spell Holy Light adds the Divine trait to your check, but it does not give you the Divine skill.) Even if your character doesn’t have any of the skills listed for a check, you can still attempt the check (unless you’re trying to recharge a card; see Recharge on page 15), but your die is a d4. - Determine the Difficulty: To succeed at the check, the result of your die roll and modifiers must be greater than or equal to the difficulty of the check. In checks to defeat a bane or acquire a boon, the difficulty is the number in the circle under the skill you’ve chosen. In other checks, the difficulty is the number in the text that follows the skill you’ve chosen. (For example, where a card’s power instructs you to attempt a Fortitude 7 check, the difficulty is 7.) Some cards increase or decrease the difficulty of a check; if, for example, a card says that the difficulty is increased by 2, add 2 to the number on the card you encountered; if it says that the difficulty is decreased by 2, subtract 2 from the number.
- Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check (Optional): Players may now play cards or use powers that affect the check. Players may not play cards that modify a skill unless you’re using that skill, and players may not play cards that affect combat unless you’re attempting a combat check. Do not add traits from these cards to the check; for example, playing the spell Guidance does not give the check the Divine trait.
- Assemble Your Dice: The skill you’re using and the cards you played determine the number and type of dice you roll. For example, if you’re attempting a check using your Strength skill, and your Strength die is d10, you’ll roll 1d10. If another player played a blessing to add a die to your check, you’ll roll 2d10.
- Attempt the Roll: Roll the dice and add up their value, adding or subtracting any modifiers that apply to the check. If the result is equal to or greater than the difficulty of the check, then you succeed. If the result is lower than the difficulty, then you fail. No matter how many penalties are applied to a die roll, the result cannot be reduced below 0.
- Take Damage, If Necessary: If you fail a check to defeat a monster, it deals an amount of damage to you equal to the difference between the difficulty to defeat the monster and your check result. Unless the card specifies otherwise, this damage is Combat damage. For example, if the difficulty to defeat a monster is 10 and the result of your check is 8, the monster deals 2 Combat damage to you. See Taking Damage, below. Remember that players may not play more than one of each card type during a check, so if you previously played a spell to affect the check, you may not play a spell to reduce damage.
• Insert a new section, Taking Damage:
Taking Damage
When you are dealt damage, you and other players may play cards and use powers that reduce or otherwise affect the specific type of damage you’re being dealt. If you’re being dealt Fire damage, for example, you may play cards that reduce Fire damage, or cards that reduce all damage, but you may not play cards that reduce only Electricity or Poison damage. Each player may play no more than one of each card type to affect damage to the same character from the same source. If a card says it reduces damage, with no type listed, it reduces all types of damage.
When you are dealt an amount of damage, choose that number of cards from your hand and discard them. If you don’t have enough cards in your hand, discard your entire hand and ignore the rest of the damage.
• Add a new section to the back page, Encountering a Card:
- Evade the Card (optional)
- Apply Any Effects that Happen Before the Encounter
- Attempt the Check
- Attempt the Next Check, If Needed
- Apply Any Effects that Happen After the Encounter
- Resolve the Encounter
• On the back page, replace Attempting Checks with the following (and rename to “Attempting a Check”):
- Determine which Die You’re Using
- Determine the Difficulty
- Play Cards and Use Powers that Affect Your Check (optional)
- Assemble Your Dice
- Attempt the Roll
- Take Damage if you lose a check against a monster
When do cards that auto-defeat an encounter get played? ie Caltrops, Thieves Tools, most potions, etc. I'd assumed they'd be playable at the optional evasion step, but they aren't mentioned here.They get played during the "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" action.
Well... I almost got it right :)
v0.7a of the Turn Sequence docs has the 'auto-pass window' (as I call it) just before the Affect the Check action.
I put it there (separately) to stop people from being able to play check modifying cards if they were actually going to auto-pass the check. However, Vic's note suggests that auto-passers are just cards you can play during 'affect the check' so you could all play any cards you liked (if you wanted to cycle anything check related) and THEN the turn player could play the auto-pass.
Vic - if you wanted to close this loophole it might be better to say (somewhere, even in the FAQ so it's just there for people that care about the minutiae) that auto-pass cards have to be played before any other cards that affect the check.
It can't be after the "Determine the Skill" step, because that would allow you to play a card in that step which doesn't matter. ie Valeros could recharge a weapon just to cycle through his deck, then use holy water to win the encounter, without rolling for the weapon attack.Meh. If you want to do that, you can—no big deal.
...or maybe it really doesn't matter :)
I'll update the Turn Sequence docs when I get a chance, to reflect how and when auto-pass cards can be played.
---
Also, @Vic - thanks for posting the updated draft. I'll try to take a look at it later today - I hope you find feedback from punters like me helpful! It sends a tingle down the spine to see some of my edits in there :)
Yeah—expect immunity to become more a universal concept than it is. That is, it needs to work uniformly, and in places other than just "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" and "Assemble Your Dice".Immunity has been pulled out of "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check" and "Assemble Your Dice", and now lives in "Encountering a Card": "If the card you're encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the check, or roll dice with that trait during the encounter."
So, this is still not clear to me.
If a monster is immune to a trait, can a character play cards during the play cads /powers that affect the check?
I think the answer is no these cards can not be played, but it is confusing now that the explicit statement has been pulled to the other section, and now what is said in this action window is " do not add traits from the cards to the check"
Maybe it is clearer than I think, but something seems a little off on how this section is working. Since, this action window no longer allows us to add traits to the check, it seems like they would by pass the immunity.
Unless i should interpret immunity as; if i have a card in hand with a trait that a monster is immune to, I can not play that card, and trying to play that card during the play cards/powers action window does not remove the trait and allow the card to be played.
Sorry for dragging you through my thought process on this, but just wanting to make sure i understand this correctly.
Also, the latest revision look great, other than my confusion about the above.
Thanks
So, this is still not clear to me.
If a monster is immune to a trait, can a character play cards during the play cads /powers that affect the check?
I think the answer is no these cards can not be played, but it is confusing now that the explicit statement has been pulled to the other section, and now what is said in this action window is " do not add traits from the cards to the check"
The immunity statement has been pulled to be an overarching rule in the "Encounter a Card" section. Therefore it applies to every step while you are encountering a card.
Encountering a card starts when you flip the card in an exploration and ends when the card is resolved (banished, shuffled, or acquired). This leaves no time when you could play a card or use a power to affect the check.
Unless i should interpret immunity as; if i have a card in hand with a trait that a monster is immune to, I can not play that card, and trying to play that card during the play cards/powers action window does not remove the trait and allow the card to be played.
I believe this is the correct interpretation, with the addition of "or activate powers that add that trait".
For example, if you were fighting a monster immune to the Fire trait, you could not play Scorching Ray or Flaming Weapon, etc. However, you could play Flaming Mace +1 since the weapon itself does not have the Fire trait (if I recall correctly), but you could not use its discard power to add the extra 1d4 with the Fire trait.
Wait wait....
What if I have magic armor. Are you saying I can't defend myself with magic armor because the thing that hit ME is immune to magic?
|
Wait wait....
What if I have magic armor. Are you saying I can't defend myself with magic armor because the thing that hit ME is immune to magic?
Good question. I hadn't thought of that.
I'll try to find time to look through the new draft in detail later, but I may not have time for a couple of days.
@mostman79 - Yes, I think that's right. If something is immune to magic then you cannot use anything magic against them. Might make you wish you kept that shortsword and leather armor in your Adventure 6 uber-deck ;)
|
There are certainly cards which are immune to fire, acid, posion, electricity and mental. I do not believe that anything is immune to magic but some can be immune to spells.
Further, I do not believe that defense cards apply against the monster but rather against the damage. Monsters deal a type of damage which should have nothing to do with its immunities.
Nothing is immune to Magic.
I am.
|
Nothing is immune to Magic.
Maybe not yet...but you have to admit that it would be a pretty sweet twist to throw in a monster that is resistant vs. magic (like some are with Piercing / Slashing) but normal from physical late in an adventure path...just for those characters that thought it would be a good idea to stack their deck with all magic weapons.
|
|
Nothing is immune to Magic.Maybe not yet...but you have to admit that it would be a pretty sweet twist to throw in a monster that is resistant vs. magic (like some are with Piercing / Slashing) but normal from physical late in an adventure path...just for those characters that thought it would be a good idea to stack their deck with all magic weapons.
I'm trying to think if there's anything like this in the RPG. There's SR (spell resistance), but it doesn't apply to all magic, and the spellcaster gets a roll to try and overcome it.
There's also the anti-magic shell spell, which does prevent all magic, from everybody. That actually seems more appropriate as a location affect. In fact, that would be pretty awesome as a location affect. We've talked about a possible Pathfinder Society adventure path in other threads. There's actually something like this in one PFS adventure. Despite being my absolute least favorite PFS scenario, I can totally see doing it as a PACG scenario, just to include that anti-magic location.
Though we also have to remember that the card game isn't an RPG. It emulates one in certain respects but many RPG factors are beyond the scope of the card game.
Just as an example. In an RPG a rogue and a sorcerer are exploring a cavern and the sorcerer sees a locked chest. Obviously, the rogue is going to use her masterwork tools to open the chest with no problem, everyone is happy 1d4 items for all! Yay!
Same situation in the card game: Merisiel cries as her items are lost because though she is right there, Seoni cannot unlock or beat the chest to death but must try since she is the one who found it while they were exploring the treacherous cave together.
However, I think the simplicity of the card game has brought an RPGesque experience to audiences before unreachable, and for those strapped for time we can get a taste of that RPG goodness without having to commit more than 2 hours. Everyone wins! =D Kudos to that and to the rule clarifications. (Btw, that would be a kind of cool and dangerous location Fromper!)
If I ever create a fan scenario there will be something in it that's resistant to Magic ;)
@VicWertz - here's my feedback on the revised text. In summary, I think it's much, much better now and only have some minor suggestions:
---
Attempt the next check, if needed: If another check is required, such as if you played a boon with a check to recharge, or if your bane requires a second check to defeat, resolve it now.
I have always assumed that you need to recharge all relevant cards before any secondary checks on the encounter. Is this correct? If so this bit could be reworded to:
Attempt the next check, if needed: If you played any cards that have checks to recharge them, resolve these now treating each one as a separate check. Then, if there are any other checks required, such as if your bane requires a second check to defeat, resolve them now.
---
In Determine Which Die You’re Using you have a typo - there's a lower case e instead of an E at the start of the second sentence.
attempt the check. each check to defeat
---
The Determine Which Die You’re Using makes perfect sense to me now that I've gone through the whole What is a Die shenanigans. But is it really the clearest wording to use for newbies and people coming from non-RPG backgrounds?
This is compounded by the title being about a "Die" but the text is all about "Skills". Personally, as mentioned before, I would change the title of this section (here and on the back cover) to "Determine Which Skill You’re Using". (I say this in the knowledge that you have already shot this idea of a title change down once already!)
If you're going to stick with the 'Die' title, it might be helpful to add a sentence along the lines of "The Skill you choose sets the base Die for the check." Otherwise there's no relation between the content of this section and the title.
However, I'm a little concerned that this might cause new problems with things like blessings played on skills which are boosted. (E.g. Lini has strength 1d4. If you play a blessing and then use her bear power the blessing adds 1d10 not 1d4. This is because you only really consider the physical die of your skill in the later "Assemble the dice" action - this is what caught me, and a lot of other forum members, out initially.)
I guess the real question is: "How do we name and describe things here to make it as clear as possible for newcomers, RPG veterans and everybody who's reading the manual?"
My opinion (as somebody who came to this as a non-RPG player but very experienced with board/card games) is that the physical die is completely irrelevant at this stage of proceedings. You're actually choosing which circle/number to attempt and which skill to use - the dice themselves come later.
---
In a related note, it might help newcomers avoid "What is a die" problems if a new sentence was added to Assemble Your Dice:
Assemble Your Dice: The skill you’re using and the cards you played determine the number and type of dice you roll. For example, if you’re attempting a check using your Strength skill, and your Strength die is d10, you’ll roll 1d10. If another player played a blessing to 'add a die' to your check, you’ll roll 2d10. (Note that 'add a die' always adds whatever die your base skilll ended up as, e.g. if your base Strength is 1d4 and you boost it to 1d10 during the check then you would add 1d10 when you 'add a die')
You might, however, feel that this is overly verbose.
---
That's all - I hope you find these suggestions helpful!
Nothing is immune to Magic.
Fantastic , IMO your last take rulebook changes are clear and unambigous.
Before the second take included "even" and differentiated between Phase , Step and Actions (the latter realy helped) as well as deleting the sentance "You may use a skill that isn’t listed on your character card only if another card gives your character that skill. " I was still confused.
Its a shame that damage is not a seperate step and an introduction to new players will have to point out the danger of using a spell to add 1 to a check when you could use a spell to counter 2 or more/all damage, which may be more mportant than defeating the bane, which may inflict damage if defeated. Maybe this should be added as advice in the rulebook or FAQ.
Of course nothing is immune to magic only applies if a card doesn't override it.
As for players playing multiple characters it would be easy to add a sentance somewhere in the rules "If a player isplaying multiple characters then treat each character as though it is controlled by a seperate player."
Actually this update has helped me a lot and I will definitely be taking PACG off the shelf and onto the table. Thanks Vic and Mike,
Of course nothing is immune to magic only applies if a card doesn't override it.
True. But it's on our "don't do this" list. So, unless someone else decides to do it, it's not happening. You will see spell resistance later on, but not like that.
As for players playing multiple characters it would be easy to add a sentance somewhere in the rules "If a player is playing multiple characters then treat each character as though it is controlled by a seperate player."
Page 19:
You can also play multiple characters if you like; we suggest you try solo play with 2 characters. Treat each character as if he were being played by a separate player (so if you’re playing Sajan and Valeros, advance the blessings deck at the start of Sajan’s turn and at the start of Valeros’s turn).Actually this update has helped me a lot and I will definitely be taking PACG off the shelf and onto the table. Thanks Vic and Mike.
That's very good to hear, and you're welcome.
Actually this update has helped me a lot and I will definitely be taking PACG off the shelf and onto the table. Thanks Vic and Mike,
Glad to hear you're back in the game!
Just in time for Skinsaw too ;)
@h4ppy , hopefully it will arrive this month.
On your comment about add a die , I would haply go for renaming it determine which skill die you are using.
I disagree with your use of boost as this could cause confuion with adding a bonus to a die.
I think it is already quite clear that any powers or boons that add a die do so by adding a die of the type (dx), determined at the end of the action :- Determine which Die You’re Using.
Good point about the use of a new and made up term 'boost', but hopefully you guys can see where I'm coming from with that! If Paizo think's it would be helpful it could be rewritten.
... it would be a pretty sweet twist to throw in a monster that is resistant vs. magic (like some are with Piercing / Slashing) but normal from physical late in an adventure path...just for those characters that thought it would be a good idea to stack their deck with all magic weapons.
Do you know of any Pathfinder monsters that behave like that, offhand? We considered the benefits and costs of implementing Anti-magic Field, but I'm wondering if there are any monsters that are specifically immune to magically enhanced equipment but not mundane equipment.
The idea is only a problem if it does something that we didn't expect and didn't want. If we decided that we did want it, it actually causes very little trouble for the game, and it makes certain cards (allies and blessings, for example) more valuable. That said, we're not likely to do it without a solid reason, and we haven't seen that reason in Burnt Offerings or The Skinsaw Murders.
(If we were to implement banes like this in PACG, we'd probably spell it out on the card.)
|
|
... it would be a pretty sweet twist to throw in a monster that is resistant vs. magic (like some are with Piercing / Slashing) but normal from physical late in an adventure path...just for those characters that thought it would be a good idea to stack their deck with all magic weapons.Do you know of any Pathfinder monsters that behave like that, offhand? We considered the benefits and costs of implementing Anti-magic Field, but I'm wondering if there are any monsters that are specifically immune to magically enhanced equipment but not mundane equipment.
The idea is only a problem if it does something that we didn't expect and didn't want. If we decided that we did want it, it actually causes very little trouble for the game, and it makes certain cards (allies and blessings, for example) more valuable. That said, we're not likely to do it without a solid reason, and we haven't seen that reason in Burnt Offerings or The Skinsaw Murders.
(If we were to implement banes like this in PACG, we'd probably spell it out on the card.)
As I mentioned above, there's spell resistance, but I've never heard of anything in Pathfinder RPG that's resistant to magic weapons, other than DR, which also affects non-magic weapons.
Spell resistance in PACG could be interesting. If you attempt to use a spell against this monster, roll arcane/divine to see if the spell even works before rolling for the spell's result.
@shoya - some unofficial feedback on your comments:
2) The point is that, during an encounter, you can only do certain things at certain times. (E.g. you cannot cast Cure during an encounter)
3) The second (summoned) encounter is completely separate, so 'no', the first card's immunities would not affect it.
4) I've answered some questions about this on the forum. Perhaps an annotated diagram of a card would be the best way to clarify this. And I'm pretty sure the RAW doesn't say you can try again if you fail the first time!
5a) I think the point is that you cannot just 'choose' to noot attempt any of the checks. If you can, you have to try. But imagine a scenario where Amiri encounters a bane with two checks. Seoni is at her location and passes the first check. As a side-effect of that check the bane somehow paralyses Amiri so she is completely unable to do anything. As such she is now unable to do the second check so the bane is undefeated (even if Seoni tried to do the second check).
5b) I think I agree with you - this part is probably superfluous.
8) The "Even" part of "Even if..." is meant to make it clear that you can always choose to use this and roll a d4. Compare this to the other possibility of writing "Only if...". Before it was ambiguous (not clear if it meant "Even if" or "Only if") but I'm not sure how you can read it now and come away thinking that you can only do this if you're missing any of the listed skills.
Spell resistance in PACG could be interesting. If you attempt to use a spell against this monster, roll arcane/divine to see if the spell even works before rolling for the spell's result.
If you peek ahead at future chapters of the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path, or if you've played any high-level Pathfinder, you'll probably notice pretty quickly that Spell Resistance is really hard to avoid. In PACG, we did not avoid it. :-)
|
|
Spell resistance in PACG could be interesting. If you attempt to use a spell against this monster, roll arcane/divine to see if the spell even works before rolling for the spell's result.If you peek ahead at future chapters of the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path, or if you've played any high-level Pathfinder, you'll probably notice pretty quickly that Spell Resistance is really hard to avoid. In PACG, we did not avoid it. :-)
Haven't played Runelords, but played a lot of Pathfinder Society. My high level PC is a barbarian, but I know my friend's witch had a tough time with SR once we hit about level 8 or 9. It's a pretty constant problem at higher levels, so I'm not surprised that it was included in the card game.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I'll address a few more of these tomorrow; right now I only have time for one:
Example: in the Taking Damage section, there is a sentence
Each player may play no more than one of each card type to affect damage to the same character from the same source.It seems like it just reminds us what we already know from
Each player may play no more than 1 card of each type during each stepHowever, I wasn't 100% sure, and spent some time trying to see if it added any new rule.
It *is* actually a distinct rule. The second rule you quoted is about not playing multiple cards of the same type during each step of an encounter. The first quote, though, is in the section about taking damage in general, which can happen outside of an encounter.
Imagine that there's a location that says "When you move here, you are dealt 1 point of Mental damage." Since that's outside of an encounter, the second rule isn't in effect, so without the first rule, everybody could play any number of cards of any type to prevent that damage.
We still *need* the second rule, though, as it's the one that also prevents you from playing two allies on the same encounter, and so on.
So I just realized that the Loot card in the first pack is an Item and its basically armor. In our party Sajan (played by me) grabbed that Item. So now I won't be able to defend myself with it in situations where I also used an Item to boost my check. That's a bummer. Sajan loves items - nerf :(