So, one of the new entries in the FAQ says:
What if a card tells me to do something impossible, like draw a card from an empty deck?
Ignore that part—and only that part—of the card.Resolution: On page 2 of the rulebook, at the end of the Golden Rule, add the following sentence:
If a card instructs you to do something impossible, like draw a card from an empty deck, ignore that instruction.
What if the impossible thing is needed to activate a cards power?
For example, can I play Vicious Trident + 1 if it is the only card in my hand? Its power says I have to discard another card to play it. I was assuming no. However, I assume I can play it with only two cards in my hand, discard it as well for the extra die, and ignore the instruction to take 1 Force Damage since I have no cards left.
This was the way I played it as well. I think this is one of the best weapons for Valeros. I love it.
@Hawkmoon269 - I read it the same way as you. If there's a 'cost' to play a card then you have to be able to pay that cost to use the card.
@JScotShady - I have struggled to find a use for the Trident. Valeros' hand size is small enought without having to discard two cards to use the Trident, especially since he cannot recharge either the "discard another card" or the "take 1 Force damage" card back into his deck.
I'm wondering whether the "and discard a card" after reveal isn't a mistake. In the RPG "vicious" means the weapon deals more damage (2d6) but half as much to you (1d6). Since the bonus here is apparently +2 on the check, it makes sense to discard 1 card.
But I don't understand why you'd have to de facto discard 2 cards. Maybe the text after reveal wasn't striking enough to players, so the the extra paragraph about the force damage was added at the bottom of the card, but then the discard above was left on the card as well.
I don't really think that a heavy crossbow comes close to being better, especially to Valeros.
Yes he has a small hand size, but played right this weapon can be an awesome boost. You discard one card to activate it and also discard it (recharge as Valeros) to deal an extra 2d8+6 damage, that's a minimum of 8 extra points. The heavy crossbow gives you an extra d10. That's a minimum of 1. To get another extra bonus you would need to use a blessing or something, so you are losing another card there and that still would only be an extra 1 (2 if using Blessing of Gorum) minimum. That's still a minimum of 3 vs. 8.
And if played right there will not be damage dealt by the second point. Plus, it's been my experience that Valeros usually takes the least amount of "damage" represented by discards.
Well, Nathaniel said heavy crossbow is for decks without weapon proficiency, not Valeros. I haven't found anything better for Seoni. For Valeros I can see situations where the trident would be good, but it requires such an amount of card juggling and mental bandwidth that I hardly see the point compared to some ordinary old Longsword +2. You're right that +6 is a huge number, and straight-up buffs are more reliable than extra dice. However, it's not significantly more huge than discarding a blessing on the check, instead of losing two cards to the trident.
I have Ezren carrying it right now. I figure if he gets in a situation where he has to use a weapon, he better make sure he can get a high result, even if it costs him a few cards. Might switch it for venomous dagger if the opportunity presents itself.
There's plenty of goblin raiders, ancient skeletons, and zombie minions hanging around to totally warrant using a card feat on a weapon for Seoni. Half her deck is extra explores, so if you're burning those for fireballs to kill weak monsters you're wasting time.
Spells are great for Seoni - I've used her other two card feats on them - but no matter what spell you're sitting on, even if you play super aggressively and discard all allies/blessings immediately, you'll see it maybe three times in the same game (and usually only twice). Keeping a weapon around gives you more breathing room for Auguries/Detect Magics. Right now I only have two attack spells in her deck, Scorching Ray and Incendiary Cloud. Those get used a couple times a game, the heavy crossbow a few times, and the rest is supplemented by fireballs from whatever I pick up, but that's becoming more rare with harder to acquire cards slotting into the decks, and basic cards getting removed.
Seoni also hangs with Lem, so d8+1+d10+d4+2 is enough to kill anything AP2 and below.
Chief Technical Officer
|
So, one of the new entries in the FAQ says:
What if a card tells me to do something impossible, like draw a card from an empty deck?
Ignore that part—and only that part—of the card.Resolution: On page 2 of the rulebook, at the end of the Golden Rule, add the following sentence:
If a card instructs you to do something impossible, like draw a card from an empty deck, ignore that instruction.
What if the impossible thing is needed to activate a cards power?
For example, can I play Vicious Trident + 1 if it is the only card in my hand? Its power says I have to discard another card to play it. I was assuming no. However, I assume I can play it with only two cards in my hand, discard it as well for the extra die, and ignore the instruction to take 1 Force Damage since I have no cards left.
You have assumed correctly... mostly.
On the first point, activating a power is something you *choose* to do or not do, not something you're being specifically *instructed* to do, so the "ignore it" rule doesn't apply.
As for the second part, taking damage with no cards in your hand is described in the Taking Damage rules: "If you don’t have enough cards in your hand, discard your entire hand and ignore the rest of the damage." (Nit-pickingly, you don't ignore the *instruction* to take damage because of the new rule, you ignore the *damage itself* because of the older rule.)
I can see your argument, to a certain extent. I -definitely- want more spells. I was a bit bewildered to see she only started with three, but once I got used to her insane cycling the mindset of playing her paired nicely with the mindset of playing my other character, Merisiel.
You talk about her massive deck rotation, but also cite Staff of Minor Healing. When you trash those maces, potions, and guards they clog your discard. I don't pick up junk boons, not with a Staff of Minor Healing in my deck, and especially not since Seoni's partied with Lem, who can heal just-about every turn if he wants. Seoni's deck has a plurality of explores, and mine has Shalelu on top of a Detect Magic and an Augury. I want to get at those cards, not draw recently-cured Potions of Hiding or a Short Swords.
Putting crap in your discard pile instead of leaving it tight (and guaranteeing a cure returns allies and blessings only) seems like would just-as-much, or worse, slow your explore rate as one weapon card in your hand. Note that the weapon can also be turned into a fireball, if things require a little more oomph. Last game we played I blew up her Crossbow, followed by her Ring of Protection to kill the villain. I've already said a weapon may apply to a Seoni/Lem team more than others, but with Lem adding a minimum of 3 (1d4+2) to Seoni's weaker checks (in addition to her 1 skill feat in Dex) means failing a combat check against a weak monster is statistically unlikely, and the risk of losing by 1 (against enemies that are usually summoned, and therefore it doesn't matter if you win or lose) is better than burning a junk card to clog up your discard pile, or a good card that could otherwise be used to push and explore.
For that matter, seriously considering 7 card hand for her because she seems pretty much invincible at this point. I understand this would leave her vulnerable -- 6 card hard really does seem like the ideal for all characters -- but taking damage is so extraordinarily unlikely in the majority of encounters. I kept the Amulet around for a while, but ditched it for RoP. RoP covers stuff like Scouts and, my most hated card, the Enchantress, who I run into seemingly every other game, while my wife has never encountered once. Of course, this changed a lot with monsters, henchmen, and villains, like the "Acrobatics 10 or 1d4 Elec" in AP3, and that slows my roll a bit. Still, it may just be my desire for more flavor, but 7 cards is more exciting than +2 on her fireball.
@Nathaniel, Why do you have to question/criticize how everyone plays their characters? Just because you wouldn't give Seoni a weapon or give Valeros a bow, doesn't mean it's bad idea. If there was one and only one way of playing these characters, they wouldn't give us the option, would they?
And how is 1d12+1d6+5 an auto-kill? That's only 7 guaranteed damage, with a maximum of 23.
You say that there is not one good strategy, that's false.
Really? I did? Funny, because that's not my point at all.
My point is this: If someone wants X card in their character's hand, even if it doesn't fit your calculation of "ideal", who cares? If it fits their play style, or if it fits their idea of what that character would use, or even if they just like that card's artwork... it's their character to play as they wish, not a math problem.
It's not about good/better/best strategy, it's about having fun. If someone has fun playing Valeros with 1-handed weapon and shields (less damage, better protection), 2-handed weapons (more damage, less protection), crossbows, or nothing but daggers... who cares as long they're having fun playing the game?
You know what's not fun though... being told your way of having fun is wrong.
Ezren (myself) came across it in our first scenario of Hook Mountain last night. Valeros immediately exclaimed in excitement, until I read out the requirements of said weapon. Needless to say he wasn't too pooped about it going back in the box :)
Its a strong weapon, but situational. We're still beating most mobs fairly comfortably, until we start losing we'll think about changing stuff up.