Hum... the annoying thing now is that the burglar will be a hard Basic card to get ride of without a cost, you will have to discard a card to banish him :(
The burglar has always been annoying to me, I hate him. In addition to this stuff, he doesn't grant explores, and I get through barriers well enough with tools and Abadors.
I'm sure the answer is, 'Yes, of course' but I have to ask, just to get it out there:
Is it really that important that 'when you encounter' effects cannot be evaded? If you remove those from consideration, evading essentially allows you to ignore the card completely (except for 'cannot be evaded', which is, thankfully, quite explicit).
I just ask because the terminology seems to go against instinct. I'm reminded of the writings of Mark Rosewater, where he is fond of saying 'if you try to go against human nature, you will lose.' Rather than adjusting the rules text and terminology to make the rules work, would it be possible to just change the rules to match expectation.
Again, I'm sure there have been more discussions about this than I would even consider, but I find game design such as this fascinating, and would love to hear what thoughts and conclusions there were regarding this process.
It is important for blessing of the gods, to prevent their removal as a basic trait card. Also for the Warrens and Shrine to Lamashtu. There needs to be some effects too counterbalance evading, and when encountered serves that purpose.
Some if the confusion will go away in skull and shackles when Before The Encounter becomes Before You Act, etc.
Changing "before the encounter" to "before you act" will help a lot. At the moment, the implication is that "before the encounter" happens before "when encountering" which is then followed by "after the encounter." Especially since the rules don't call out exactly when a "when you encounter" effect takes place.
The implication is there because of English. I had been playing under the assumption that the Warrens effect didn't happen if you evade. I now know that it doesn't work that way and even if you evade you still encountered the card.
This post isn't saying anything new, but just letting you know I support the change to "before you act" and why.
It is important for blessing of the gods, to prevent their removal as a basic trait card. Also for the Warrens and Shrine to Lamashtu. There needs to be some effects too counterbalance evading, and when encountered serves that purpose.
Some if the confusion will go away in skull and shackles when Before The Encounter becomes Before You Act, etc.
Yeah, 'Before you Act' is going to make a big difference. And I understand the rules implementation, I guess I'm just underestimating Evasion, since I always found it a bit weak, and figured a buff like this wouldn't be the end of the world, or at least worth considering.
I too didn't always like evading, but there are different types of evades. Some (Enfeeble or Merisiel's role powers) can leave the evaded card on top of the location deck. That is huge if you find the villain and want to setup for the encounter. Or if you encounter a boon you can not reasonably acquire, but another character wants. Some (potion of ghostly form I believe) can evade barriers, which potentially are the card you are most likely to be unable to defeat.
So the right kind of evade can be awesome.
I too didn't always like evading, but there are different types of evades. Some (Enfeeble or Merisiel's role powers) can leave the evaded card on top of the location deck. That is huge if you find the villain and want to setup for the encounter. Or if you encounter a boon you can not reasonably acquire, but another character wants. Some (potion of ghostly form I believe) can evade barriers, which potentially are the card you are most likely to be unable to defeat.
So the right kind of evade can be awesome.
That is true. I love evade that goes to top or bottom (especially bottom, such as web). However, I only play 6-player games, where if you get unlucky shuffles the clock can start to be an issue, and evading uses one or two cards (the card to explore, and possibly the one used to evade) and doesn't get you any closer to closing the location. Also, it can mess up neatly scried (scryed?) piles.
I'm probably still underestimating, as I haven't played a dedicated evader (Illusionist/Acrobat e.g.), but it always seemed easier to just shoot 'em.
Evading boons and villains are the main ways to go. Otherwise just killing is generally better.
Also, Meri's evade-for-free ability makes a big difference - if you don't have to spend anything to evade, it's much better.
Evading boons and villains are the main ways to go. Otherwise just killing is generally better.
Also, Meri's evade-for-free ability makes a big difference - if you don't have to spend anything to evade, it's much better.
Yes, Meri's free evade is very nice, and I used it a lot in the first couple adventures. The problem I'm starting to have is that she needs to actually participate in combat to cycle her hand (by using sneak attack), or she runs out of explores quick. I'm probably not playing her all that well, but that might give context to why I don't evade much.
Sorry to ask a noob question about evade:
Can Merisiel(Acrobat) use her ability to evade a boon card then leave it on top for her teammate to acquire it next turn?Merisiel(Acrobat)
You may evade your encounter ( and may put the card on top of the deck).
Yes, indeed. It's a powerful feat combination, for leaving behind presents (both boons and banes) for your friends.