I was wondering what you guys thought about failing a check on purpose. Are you allowed to fail if you want? Specifically, can you choose to fail a check instead of rolling it and potentially passing?
An example of when on earth you'd want to do this? Well, here's the first one that came to mind (there are others):
Seoni casts Augury for spells because she loves acquiring spells, but she also reveals some awesome cards, say, Poog and a Masterworks Thieves Tools. No spells come up, but now she knows where some great boons are! She explores and kills a random monster. Now Amiri joins her, since the party's got the blessings to ensure that even she will acquire the boons if they show up. She explores - right into the villain. It's one of the easier ones (maybe the party is re-running a scenario) and Amiri is so pumped up that even if she doesn't use a weapon, it's quite possible that she will simply punch the villain to a paste and close the location, thus banishing the awesome boons. If she fails the combat check, all she has to do is use her armor, and since the party has plenty of time, that's what they want to do, so as to get another shot at those boons.
That's the way I thought it was, but I was curious if anyone disagreed or even played it differently.
Also, from a realistic perspective, your character should be able to just stand there and take it and let the villain run away, rather than be forced to swing blindly.
My buddy is using the bard and would like to fail his recharge checks for spells he plays, that way he keeps them immediately available if needed in his discard pile. I told him you can't purposely fail a check, so he's always rolling hoping to fail.
Those are optional! Only checks to defeat banes are mandatory.
Dagnabbit you're right! We've been playing this wrong the whole time.
I think you have the option to roll a Melee die for a combat check even when you don't have that skill. This would be an untrained check using 1d4 for most characters. Obviously this does not apply to the scenario you illustrated with Amiri. But something to keep in mind for those non-melee classes.
if you don’t play such a card, use your Strength or Melee skill.
So yeah, you could just choose strength instead.
But you would still have to apply any skill feats you'd added to your strength, since once they are added they define what your strength is.
Sometimes we intentionally lose against the boss, even without armor, rather than close a location that has a good number of boons we're interested in, even when we haven't seen them yet. A perfect example is the Academy when you have multiple spellcasters in your party. Fortunately, it is very easy for a spellcaster to intentionally fail combat checks.
This is great help when trying to banish basic items for the later scenarios and adventures.
Exactly this. My group has been using this to get rid of all of the low tier junk. it helps us out a lot, especially in A4.
Sometimes we intentionally lose against the boss, even without armor, rather than close a location that has a good number of boons we're interested in, even when we haven't seen them yet. A perfect example is the Academy when you have multiple spellcasters in your party. Fortunately, it is very easy for a spellcaster to intentionally fail combat checks.
I'm not sure that is a good idea, cause it costs you cards out of the blessing deck and you randomize his location.
|
Sometimes we intentionally lose against the boss, even without armor, rather than close a location that has a good number of boons we're interested in, even when we haven't seen them yet.I'm not sure that is a good idea, cause it costs you cards out of the blessing deck and you randomize his location.
It all depends on how many blessings are left in the deck, doesn't it? Sometimes getting the gravy is worth risking a scenario-loss.
