Here is another one of those "share your opinion" kind of thread. I'd like to know what ironically disappointing things happen. Specifically, something you did that you thought would be super useful, but ended up being nearly useless (i.e. situational irony). So we are talking about the outcome of how you played, not that something wasn't designed the way you'd have preferred.
For example: I'm always so disappointed when I play a card to examine and arrange the deck, only to discover that the top card was already the villain or henchman. It makes me feel like I wasted playing the card.
This was especially true last night when my wife played Revelation Quill to look at the last 5 cards in a location. We were thinking "We'll put all the great boons on top, then the henchman or villain." But when we examined the cards the henchman was already the top card and there were only 2 boons remaining and we didn't want either of them. It was like saying "Watch this villain, and tremble....oh, that didn't really do much, did it."
Another example: When I'm Ezren and I choose to not close the Academy so I can get the spells only to discover all the remaining spells are Divine spells.
So what are your stories?
I'm playing Ezren in a duo with Seelah. "Do you need a blessing on that check?" "Nah, you keep it for yourself. I can only fail on a one....rolls... That's a one." This happens more often than you'd statistically expect.
If roll isn't blessed, it usually ends up cursed. Luckily I find myself auto-succeeding often enough that the bad rolls can't kill me.
Also, using the Emerald Codex, I keep getting Raise Dead (3/4 times so far). Between the two of us, Ezren is the one more likely to die, so it's mildly frustrating.
Lini got her hands on a copy of Charm Person and kept drawing animals.
Lini was worried about doing 8 locations solo with a Wand of Scorching as her only way to defeat Tyrant Trolls. In one scenario that first card she saw was Amulet of Flaming Fists ... being banished before she got her first turn.
Solo Lini pulling two Mass Cures and a Mending on the Emerald Codex. (And Mending was actually useful.)
Control Freak Lini does so much Scrying and Magic Spyglassing that what Hawkmoon mentioned is quite normal.
Yesterday, at the Rusty Dragon, I decided to use Augury for allies - revealed a Henchman, a barrier and Dogslicer. Shuffled them all in, and never saw the Henchman again (although on the final turn of the game, after we'd resigned ourselves to replaying the scenario, we found the villain, who had escaped there earlier.)
Harsk carried the bird-cruncher crown all through Burnt offerings, and never fought a single Goblin whilst he had it in hand. He finally gave up on it, replacing it with a "more useful" item, then ran into 2 Goblin on his first 2 turns of the next game.
This probably isn't as ironic as the other things, but when I took Drunken Master for Sajan, which I had longed plan to do, I was thinking I'd primarily want to stock a couple Potions of Healing and a Potion of Glibness. Well, since the fourth scenario of Hook Mountain Massacre, when I started keeping potions I'd want if I acquired them, I've seen every potion except Potion of Glibness. Though Potion of Energy Resistance has been quite nice to have handy. And given how Sins of the Saviors has been shaping up, getting a Potion of Vision wouldn't be too bad either.
Our group seems to have the bad luck of always hitting the target number on the first die after we have thrown blessings in to help. Need a 9 on a check when you only have a d8+1? Let someone throw in a blessing to help and an 8 will be rolled first every time.
Even though Kyra's ability to put a blessing of Sarenrae at the top of her deck after using it is very powerful, after all 6 adventures, the two of us had yet to encounter a single one. Kyra has since converted to the dark side, and the only blessings she has now are of evil or neutral gods.
Oddly enough, when she removed the last good blessings from her deck (it was Torag I think), her next roll of 3d6 came up as 6 6 6. We decided that she has converted into a devout Lamashtu worshipper.
You might wanna advance your ODC up a few decades. These days it's perfectly fine to use terms as gender neutral (see: "actor" instead of "actress," see also in Pathfinder: Enchanter). A lot of people even prefer it! :D
Even though Kyra's ability to put a blessing of Sarenrae at the top of her deck after using it is very powerful, after all 6 adventures, the two of us had yet to encounter a single one. Kyra has since converted to the dark side, and the only blessings she has now are of evil or neutral gods.
Considering how crucial that power was to our Merisiel/Kyra duo, this is breaking my heart right now. :( Being able to toss Sararenraes at everything was totally fun.
Even though Kyra's ability to put a blessing of Sarenrae at the top of her deck after using it is very powerful, after all 6 adventures, the two of us had yet to encounter a single one. Kyra has since converted to the dark side, and the only blessings she has now are of evil or neutral gods.Considering how crucial that power was to our Merisiel/Kyra duo, this is breaking my heart right now. :( Being able to toss Sararenraes at everything was totally fun.
Turns out she's really good without that power too. It's a neat tactic, but sadly Sarenrae is one of the weaker blessings. I think what she ended up with was:
x2 blessing of Lamashtu
x2 blessing of Gozreh
x1 blessing of Gorum
x1 blessing of Abadar
x1 blessing of Norgorber
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Valeros needed a 9 on 8 dice to defeat a deck 1 monster somewhere around deck 5, everyone had thrown in a ton of blessings because it was going to be funny to blow the thing up so we could remove it from the game... and rolled 8, felt like shouting Yahtzee before I hid under the table in shame.
Is that really ironic, or Alanis Morissette ironic?
Are you saying you rolled eight dice and got all ones? The odds of that are...quite low. What where the dice, exactly?Valeros needed a 9 on 8 dice to defeat a deck 1 monster somewhere around deck 5, everyone had thrown in a ton of blessings because it was going to be funny to blow the thing up so we could remove it from the game... and rolled 8, felt like shouting Yahtzee before I hid under the table in shame.
Is that really ironic, or Alanis Morissette ironic?
They were cursed, it would seem.
|
|
Are you saying you rolled eight dice and got all ones? The odds of that are...quite low. What where the dice, exactly?Valeros needed a 9 on 8 dice to defeat a deck 1 monster somewhere around deck 5, everyone had thrown in a ton of blessings because it was going to be funny to blow the thing up so we could remove it from the game... and rolled 8, felt like shouting Yahtzee before I hid under the table in shame.
Is that really ironic, or Alanis Morissette ironic?
We should have calculated the odds, like 5d10, 2d8, and 1d4 or some such. Difficulty was a 12, and I had a +3.
|
We should have calculated the odds, like 5d10, 2d8, and 1d4 or some such. Difficulty was a 12, and I had a +3.Are you saying you rolled eight dice and got all ones? The odds of that are...quite low. What where the dice, exactly?Valeros needed a 9 on 8 dice to defeat a deck 1 monster somewhere around deck 5, everyone had thrown in a ton of blessings because it was going to be funny to blow the thing up so we could remove it from the game... and rolled 8, felt like shouting Yahtzee before I hid under the table in shame.
Is that really ironic, or Alanis Morissette ironic?
Hitting those odds. Did you buy a lottery Ticket afterwards?
You might wanna advance your ODC up a few decades. These days it's perfectly fine to use terms as gender neutral (see: "actor" instead of "actress," see also in Pathfinder: Enchanter). A lot of people even prefer it! :DI think it's actually a rule of English, though; certain archaic terms like gender-specific nouns (waiter, waitress, stewart, stewardess, butler, maid) are supposed to retain their "gender", so to speak, even in modern usage.
Off topic, but linguistics major here. In both prescriptive and descriptive grammar it is perfectly valid to use "actor, sorcerer, waiter, etc." as gender-neutral terms. As far as I'm aware it's never been a rule of English, but even if it were, modern usage ends up trumping old rules like that.
It's also fine to end sentences with prepositions, but that's another beast :P
Since you're an English Major, and since we are off-topic, maybe you could help settle an argument: "one less" or "one fewer"?You might wanna advance your ODC up a few decades. These days it's perfectly fine to use terms as gender neutral (see: "actor" instead of "actress," see also in Pathfinder: Enchanter). A lot of people even prefer it! :DI think it's actually a rule of English, though; certain archaic terms like gender-specific nouns (waiter, waitress, stewart, stewardess, butler, maid) are supposed to retain their "gender", so to speak, even in modern usage.Off topic, but linguistics major here. In both prescriptive and descriptive grammar it is perfectly valid to use "actor, sorcerer, waiter, etc." as gender-neutral terms. As far as I'm aware it's never been a rule of English, but even if it were, modern usage ends up trumping old rules like that.
It's also fine to end sentences with prepositions, but that's another beast :P
In every day speech, no one really cares, so either is okay to use. There are a few people who might make a fuss over the difference in formal writing, but that's dying out.
In every day speech, no one really cares, so either is okay to use. There are a few people who might make a fuss over the difference in formal writing, but that's dying out.Since you're an English Major, and since we are off-topic, maybe you could help settle an argument: "one less" or "one fewer"?You might wanna advance your ODC up a few decades. These days it's perfectly fine to use terms as gender neutral (see: "actor" instead of "actress," see also in Pathfinder: Enchanter). A lot of people even prefer it! :DI think it's actually a rule of English, though; certain archaic terms like gender-specific nouns (waiter, waitress, stewart, stewardess, butler, maid) are supposed to retain their "gender", so to speak, even in modern usage.Off topic, but linguistics major here. In both prescriptive and descriptive grammar it is perfectly valid to use "actor, sorcerer, waiter, etc." as gender-neutral terms. As far as I'm aware it's never been a rule of English, but even if it were, modern usage ends up trumping old rules like that.
It's also fine to end sentences with prepositions, but that's another beast :P
Couldn't disagree more. It's not a complicated rule, and I'm afraid using the incorrect one sounds just wrong to a lot of people, myself included.
Less is for things that are not quantifiable, fewer is for things that are:
'Less sand' vs. 'fewer grains of sand'
'Less beer' vs. 'fewer bottles of beer'
etc
From doing a Google search, the consensus seems to be that neither is strictly incorrect, but "one less" seems to be what sounds right to the great majority. The idea being that "fewer" is used before a plural noun and "one" of something is not plural. So what seems to be considered correct, by a large margin, is "two (or more) fewer" and "one less".
Then I'm genuinely surprised - 'one fewer' sounds absolutely fine to me. Maybe I'm overly old-school with the grammar... Think I'll stick to what I was taught though
Anyway, on topic, I just had a game where Seelah used her character power to examine the top card of a location deck. It was the giantbane dagger (one that Merisiel could have used), and she was forced to move it to the bottom since it was a boon. The next card she encountered was a hill giant.