Sanctuary is auto evade without attack or mental traits.Sanctuary has the mental trait.
I think you're mistaken. I could be wrong, I don't have the card in front of me, but I don't think it does. I think this because I seem to remember thinking I liked it for this very reason (I hate mental and poison traited cards because of undead - while I love incendiary cloud, I never keep toxic cloud in my deck).
But regardless, like Nondeskript said, it has downsides. I truly don't think it would be OP as a basic.
It does. Invisibility does not.
The thing is, even if it were OP as a Basic, it is pretty clearly UP as a deck 4 Loot card. It's a funny card and I thought it was an interesting way to use a Monster card to attack. I put it in Ezren's deck and used it one time, laughed at the crap card I drew and never bothered with it again.
Summon Monster feels like the designers playing around with ideas of how you can use cards in unexpected ways. It is an interesting idea, but I don't think it works particularly well. I think what they have done with Lini in S&S and Darago are better ways to accomplish something similar, though.
It's off topic of course, but I felt that way about most of the loot in Chapters 4 and 5. The most annoying for me were the items from the scenarios with the three villains. I don't remember the card names, but they were all items which didn't really seem to fit well for any of the particular characters. I remember getting really excited about one of them, thinking it would work really well in Seelah's deck, but then I remembered that Seelah has no items; then I though it could work alright in Kyra's deck, til I checked about found that the items she had were already working better than this one would for her. In short, I think Ezren got one of them, but only because half of its powers could be useful to him (the other half... not so much). I've since learned that the designers don't necessarily design weapons/items/etc. with which characters might use them as a primary consideration, so now I can at least understand how those loot card made it in to the set in the first place.
The staff of hungry shadows is amazing on Seoni or Ezren. Discarding a spell to drop another character's combat check by 1d12+6 can make even the most difficult fights trivial.
The staff of hungry shadows is amazing on Seoni or Ezren. Discarding a spell to drop another character's combat check by 1d12+6 can make even the most difficult fights trivial.
Yep, that was the only one I kept on any of my characters ;) But if no one in the party is playing either Seoni or Ezren (as has been the case in several of my groups), a whole lot of stuff in the game is almost completely wasted, including a lot of the loot cards.
I keep saying it is a Deck 4 Loot card, but that is because I have a bad memory :) It is a Deck 5 Loot card that you get on the 4th Scenario, so you have 1 Deck 5 Scenario and then Deck 6. It's really not a good card at that point.
Regardless, also just went through all the monsters in RotR and the ONLY ones that have powers that I feel could apply are the Veterans. The rest of the powers are either irrelevant (such as Immunities or restrictions on playing Attack spells), modifiers to the damage dealt by the monster, before the encounter powers or after the encounter powers. Since you aren't encountering that monster, those powers wouldn't matter.
As far as the usefulness of Deck 4 & 5 Loot, I strongly disagree. Emerald Codex was great for Merisiel. Revelation Quill was also pretty good. Staff of Hungry Shadows is so good I wasn't sure we were playing it right, even better when you have the Robe of Runes to take the discarded spell back to your hand.
|
Kyra kept the Emerald Codex and it has helped greatly, Harsk is adding to his scouting ability with the Revelation Quill, and Ezra is loving his Staff (and Robe) which has been reducing villains and henchmen left and right.
I'm not sure why you'd find this stuff useless for the most part. Maybe you didn't have a combo of characters that would use the stuff. Our core was those three. And we found the loot has been helping us a lot as we plow towards the end.
The only one that really got me was Ordikon's Staff. Kyra (or maybe Lini) is pretty much the only one that will get use out of it's "For your combat check" power, since it requires 4 things:
1. Proficiency with weapons.
2. Strength
3. Item in deck list.
4. Spells.
Seelah can't take it due to #2. Ezren and Seoni can't take it due to #1. Lem can't get good use out of it due to #2. (And Lini sort of the same thing.) And the non-spell casters likely don't have enough spells in their decks.
That is the only one that I often passed up on taking.
The only one that really got me was Ordikon's Staff. Kyra (or maybe Lini) is pretty much the only one that will get use out of it's "For your combat check" power, since it requires 4 things:
1. Proficiency with weapons.
2. Strength
3. Item in deck list.
4. Spells.Seelah can't take it due to #2. Ezren and Seoni can't take it due to #1. Lem can't get good use out of it due to #2. (And Lini sort of the same thing.) And the non-spell casters likely don't have enough spells in their decks.
That is the only one that I often passed up on taking.
Agreed on that one big time. It only even remotely made sense on Kyra in any of our groups, and she already had plenty of weapons... whereas she only ever gets 2 items max, so taking up a spot for this would be silly.
When I said my comment about loot, I included chapter 4, but I really shouldn't have. I like the loot in chapter 4 and used it right to the end, for the most part. More than one of the groups I played in never used an Arcane caster other than Lem, so those many loot rewards that leaned heavily towards increasing intelligence checks or using arcane dice often got tossed aside. Meanwhile our Harsk, Valeros and Seelah players were BEGGING for some useful loot, but those requests went largely unfulfilled. It is, of course, nice to have a decent arcane caster, but all the people in those groups picked their characters before we got to see the nicest of the arcane cards. In my most recent playthrough of the AP we had one character pick Ezren just because that group had never gotten to use the arcane stuff much, and another player picked Lem (again). We actually found that a lot of the arcane oriented loot still didn't work very well for Lem, and Ezren just could keep it all (some of it he certainly didn't want to keep, as having multiple items that add 2 to your intelligence check in your hand stopped being exciting at the point where he was holding all those cards and not drawing things like attack spells or allies).
The Emerald codex on Merisiel? I wouldn't have done that myself... it seems like such a no brainer for Lini or Kyra in our groups.
Should have said Seelah was #3 above.
Merisiel took it because she had the free item slot. Since the spells were getting banished anyway and there were so few divine attack spells we didn't see a good reason to give it to a divine caster. It let Meri cure or consecrate or whatever as well as any Divine caster.
It does. Invisibility does not.
THAT'S what it was. Sanctuary just doesn't care about the monster's difficulty and goes on a Divine character. Got them mixed up a bit. Can you tell I don't play evade spells much? XD
Invisibility, despite being basic, becomes perhaps one of the most powerful cards in the game for Illusionist Ezren. If you play him, you do like evading. But Summon Monster doesn't evade, so I didn't keep it long for Illusionist Ezren.
My typical outlook is "don't evade, just kill it."
It's worked so far.
Evading is for cowards. Like Rogues. ;)
My typical outlook is "don't evade, just kill it."
It's worked so far.
True. But evading a monster and putting it on the bottom of the deck (below the henchman or villain) is essentially the same as defeating it, is automatic, and avoids "before the encounter" and "after the encounter" nastiness. My illusionist Ezren carried Invisibility, Enfeeble, and couple of combat spells, and some Haste. If it found a villain or henchman, I could either play the combat spell or Enfeeble and leave them on top of the deck for Amiri, Merisiel or Sajan to come clean up. If I found another monster, I evaded them to the bottom of the deck. He feared no Enchanter nor any of those non-combat monsters because he never had to determine which skill he was using. Yes, occasionally there was a monster that could not be evaded (instead of just the usual Mental immunity that Invisibility worked around.) But that is what the combat spells or Medusa Mask were for.
In fact, our team was largely built around evading and moving, two things that I'd guess are often seen as the least useful actions. Merisiel took Acrobat to evade nice boons she couldn't acquire on top of her location. Ezren and Amiri kept others away from Merisiel on Merisiel's turn and avoided nasty "start of your turn" location powers (and abused the Mountain Peak). Sajan filled in as Drunken Master using all those potions that are generally not well received.
It was like they made use of everything that most others didn't want to use. And it was so much fun.
I'm also playing Evoker Ezren in another group, and blowing things to pieces is often just as fun.
My biggest problem with evading and putting it on bottom or scouting or whatever is when the decks get shuffled.
Any paragraph in the power section of a boon that doesn’t involve playing the card for a particular effect is not itself a power—it’s a mandatory action you must take when you play the card.It's possible a similar concept might need to exist for things other than boons.
Back to the original topic, so this basically means you do "scale up" the veterans that you summon, making Summon Monster more useful. Right? I mean, I know it isn't official and all, but in the intermediary time between the question being raised and an official ruling or FAQ, I'd say play it by scaling them up.
My biggest problem with evading and putting it on bottom or scouting or whatever is when the decks get shuffled.
Letting the deck get shuffled is a sign of weakness.
Seriously though, that didn't happen a lot to us that I recall. It is usually player actions that shuffle the location deck. Losing a check to defeat a bane, normal evading, not temporarily closing a location when you defeat the villain, or playing a card that shuffles the deck (Mayor Kendra Deverin for example). There was a scenario or two that had you move henchmen or villains and shuffle things, but they often went into locations we hadn't explored yet anyway. Am I forgetting some other shuffling mechanism that happened?
Sajan filled in as Drunken Master using all those potions that are generally not well received.
I tried that with my Sajan and didn't really get much use from the potions. I tried to keep something like 2 healings & 1 ghostly form.. and I think that was it. And very little luck on the recharge so they were getting banished half the time. I regretted not going Zen Archer once I saw that there weren't any awesome potions in the later decks.
My biggest problem with evading and putting it on bottom or scouting or whatever is when the decks get shuffled.Letting the deck get shuffled is a sign of weakness.
Seriously though, that didn't happen a lot to us that I recall. It is usually player actions that shuffle the location deck. Losing a check to defeat a bane, normal evading, not temporarily closing a location when you defeat the villain, or playing a card that shuffles the deck (Mayor Kendra Deverin for example). There was a scenario or two that had you move henchmen or villains and shuffle things, but they often went into locations we hadn't explored yet anyway. Am I forgetting some other shuffling mechanism that happened?
The big ones that bother me are the Auguries and Villains.
If you cast Augury or Scrying you get to mess with whatever cards are in those three cards you looked at that match the card type you called (if any). The rest of the location deck gets shuffled.
If you don't evade a villain, any locations that don't get temporary closed get shuffled. This can intorduce all sorts of problems, from having to banish extra cards to spending extra resources on passing the closing check. You can't ALWAYS be at a location that's trivial to close.
Not that scouting or place-evading can't be useful or a valid tactic. I just don't like it.
Sajan filled in as Drunken Master using all those potions that are generally not well received.I tried that with my Sajan and didn't really get much use from the potions. I tried to keep something like 2 healings & 1 ghostly form.. and I think that was it. And very little luck on the recharge so they were getting banished half the time. I regretted not going Zen Archer once I saw that there weren't any awesome potions in the later decks.
I filled in all the feats in Constitution. I also carried an Amulet of Fortitude (revealing it with his skill feats and Fortitude bonus made the check impossible to fail). Later when I picked up the Belt of Physical Might, I eventually dropped the Amulet.
I carried two Potions of Healing, a Potion of Energy Resistance, and later (after finally encountering it) a Potion of Glibness. I think for a while I had a Potion of Ruggedness too for all those survival checks required in the late adventures.
I also had Poog and Father Zantus. So I could sling blessings for others like there was no tomorrow and heal them back into my deck.
My biggest problem with evading and putting it on bottom or scouting or whatever is when the decks get shuffled.Letting the deck get shuffled is a sign of weakness.
Seriously though, that didn't happen a lot to us that I recall. It is usually player actions that shuffle the location deck. Losing a check to defeat a bane, normal evading, not temporarily closing a location when you defeat the villain, or playing a card that shuffles the deck (Mayor Kendra Deverin for example). There was a scenario or two that had you move henchmen or villains and shuffle things, but they often went into locations we hadn't explored yet anyway. Am I forgetting some other shuffling mechanism that happened?
The big ones that bother me are the Auguries and Villains.
If you cast Augury or Scrying you get to mess with whatever cards are in those three cards you looked at that match the card type you called (if any). The rest of the location deck gets shuffled.
If you don't evade a villain, any locations that don't get temporary closed get shuffled. This can intorduce all sorts of problems, from having to banish extra cards to spending extra resources on passing the closing check. You can't ALWAYS be at a location that's trivial to close.
Not that scouting or place-evading can't be useful or a valid tactic. I just don't like it.
Ah. See, I dropped Augury, and Scryed other locations. That meant I didn't mess up Ezren's location. (I would Scry his location if it was in my hand before I had evaded anything.)
And while you can't always be at a location that is trivial to close, with two of your 4 characters being able to potentially evade the villain and leave him on top, you can often encounter the villain on your own terms.
I definitely found it fun. While, and make sure you are sitting down for this, I generally didn't find Lini very fun. So just different things we enjoyed I think.
I filled in all the feats in Constitution. I also carried an Amulet of Fortitude (revealing it with his skill feats and Fortitude bonus made the check impossible to fail). Later when I picked up the Belt of Physical Might, I eventually dropped the Amulet.
I carried two Potions of Healing, a Potion of Energy Resistance, and later (after finally encountering it) a Potion of Glibness. I think for a while I had a Potion of Ruggedness too for all those survival checks required in the late adventures.
I also had Poog and Father Zantus. So I could sling blessings for others like there was no tomorrow and heal them back into my deck.
Yeah, I felt that part of the problem I had with Sajan was that during the first half of the game I couldn't decide which way I wanted to go so I just kept dumping all my skills in Dex, since I used that for every combat check. So by the time I got my role, I wasn't specced for it very well. I would have been specced will for Zen Archer, though :) But Drunken Master just sounds more fun.
I definitely found it fun. While, and make sure you are sitting down for this, I generally didn't find Lini very fun. So just different things we enjoyed I think.
Lol.
I get a kick out of building up something to be very efficient and powerful - to optimizing my character as much as possible through my own customization. Whether it's a character or a party in an RPG video game, a deck in a collectable/trading card game, and army list in a miniatures game, or my character/party in the PACG, building the character to match my play style and be absolute boss is where I find the greatest joy.
I can see how playing Lini can be boring - indeed, auto-acquiring AP 1 stuff I wanted was kind of dumb. But building a character with such a finely tuned deck that I only acquired maybe ten percent of the boons I found because I didn't want the chaff in my hand (this includes allies theat let you explore - I gave up the "free" explore because I didn't want them in my deck at all) and buried intentionally some of my cards... getting to play with 8 spells (my favorite card type) and being able to handle any situation the game could throw at me... Self healing, barriers, closing checks, combat, friends' checks, and even, to an extent, bad dice rolls... It's exhilerating.
It should be noted that my two favorite things about Lini do not include her power level. I love that she's a strong Divine caster with 6-8 spells, and that her reveal ability keeps her consistant - I will take 2d4 over a d10. I like that it keeps her from having nightmarishly bad checks and can deal with Non-combat checks with a little help or luck instead of a lot of help or luck. The fact that she is really powerful is a side-effect.
I definitely found it fun. While, and make sure you are sitting down for this, I generally didn't find Lini very fun. So just different things we enjoyed I think.Lol.
I get a kick out of building up something to be very efficient and powerful - to optimizing my character as much as possible through my own customization. Whether it's a character or a party in an RPG video game, a deck in a collectable/trading card game, and army list in a miniatures game, or my character/party in the PACG, building the character to match my play style and be absolute boss is where I find the greatest joy.
I can see how playing Lini can be boring - indeed, auto-acquiring AP 1 stuff I wanted was kind of dumb. But building a character with such a finely tuned deck that I only acquired maybe ten percent of the boons I found because I didn't want the chaff in my hand (this includes allies theat let you explore - I gave up the "free" explore because I didn't want them in my deck at all) and buried intentionally some of my cards... getting to play with 8 spells (my favorite card type) and being able to handle any situation the game could throw at me... Self healing, barriers, closing checks, combat, friends' checks, and even, to an extent, bad dice rolls... It's exhilerating.
It should be noted that my two favorite things about Lini do not include her power level. I love that she's a strong Divine caster with 6-8 spells, and that her reveal ability keeps her consistant - I will take 2d4 over a d10. I like that it keeps her from having nightmarishly bad checks and can deal with Non-combat checks with a little help or luck instead of a lot of help or luck. The fact that she is really powerful is a side-effect.
Oh yeah. I've never gotten the impression you liked Lini because she was "easy to make powerful". I get the impression that you like powerful things, but that you like to sort of have to make them powerful, by choosing particular cards or feats or other combinations of things. Which is sort of what I like too. So our difference of preference is probably more with the other things you feel about her. I prefer Arcane spells and generally don't like the Divine stuff.
Oh yeah. I've never gotten the impression you liked Lini because she was "easy to make powerful". I get the impression that you like powerful things, but that you like to sort of have to make them powerful, by choosing particular cards or feats or other combinations of things. Which is sort of what I like too. So our difference of preference is probably more with the other things you feel about her. I prefer Arcane spells and generally don't like the Divine stuff.
That's a good way of putting it.
My favorite thing about Divine is the flexibility. I like "toolboxes,*" a term you may be aware of from other games, and therefore I like how Divine can allow me to heal myself to be self reliant, as well as heal others if needed or help any check (Aid as opposed to Cloud Spells).
*Toolbox builds are ones that have a tool for any situation. Someone like Seltiel who can only do combat, however well he does it, is the opposite of a toolbox, whereas a character that can handle ANY situation, any possible combination of cards that can come up, is the ultimate toolbox (like the build I tried to come up with in the Restoartion Errata thread - the game could not have a single situation it couldn't handle). RotR Lini can be the most toolboxy of any of the characters I've played so far. Damiel shows promise as well.
Oh yeah. I've never gotten the impression you liked Lini because she was "easy to make powerful". I get the impression that you like powerful things, but that you like to sort of have to make them powerful, by choosing particular cards or feats or other combinations of things. Which is sort of what I like too. So our difference of preference is probably more with the other things you feel about her. I prefer Arcane spells and generally don't like the Divine stuff.
That's a good way of putting it.
My favorite thing about Divine is the flexibility. I like "toolboxes,*" a term you may be aware of from other games, and therefore I like how Divine can allow me to heal myself to be self reliant, as well as heal others if needed or help any check (Aid as opposed to Cloud Spells).
*Toolbox builds are ones that have a tool for any situation. Someone like Seltiel who can only do combat, however well he does it, is the opposite of a toolbox, whereas a character that can handle ANY situation, any possible combination of cards that can come up, is the ultimate toolbox (like the build I tried to come up with in the Restoartion Errata thread - the game could not have a single situation it couldn't handle). RotR Lini can be the most toolboxy of any of the characters I've played so far. Damiel shows promise as well.
I myself prefer the term "utility belt" over toolbox, as one conjures up images of a heroic figure, while the other conjures images of my garage ;)
Chief Technical Officer
|
Back to the original topic, so this basically means you do "scale up" the veterans that you summon, making Summon Monster more useful. Right? I mean, I know it isn't official and all, but in the intermediary time between the question being raised and an official ruling or FAQ, I'd say play it by scaling them up.Any paragraph in the power section of a boon that doesn’t involve playing the card for a particular effect is not itself a power—it’s a mandatory action you must take when you play the card.It's possible a similar concept might need to exist for things other than boons.
We don't know the answer yet; if I picked one, there's a 50% chance I'll have to reverse it. I will say that I don't think anyone thinks it's too powerful if you scale up the veterans, though.
(sidenote: is there really anyone like Mike who's not Mike?)Ahem.
If it were only possible to get a pair of Air Selinkers without having to import them from Japan.
We have been struggling with the main question of this thread for a month, and haven't been able to figure out an answer for it. Basically, our answer is going to have to be "no" unless we can figure out what makes it a "yes." And we would like to figure that out if possible.
So here's the thing: There's a sliding scale to what we want people to apply. We definitely think a summoned Veteran card's difficulty is modded by the adventure deck number. That makes sense to everyone. A summoned Goblin should also care whether it's summoned during Approach to Thistletop. These are things outside the card itself, functioning off key rules of the game. No one disputes the desire to have these function.
But it gets murky from there.
It makes sense to us that summoned Lycanthropes should care whether the top card of the blessings discard pile is a Blessing of the Gods. It either is or it isn't a Blessing of the Gods, so that wants to apply. But it's during a "before the encounter" power, so it's unclear whether you can.
We're pretty sure we don't want you making a check in the middle of this process. The Tickwood Boar wants you to make a Wisdom or Survival check or raise its difficulty by 2. We know you haven't encountered the boar, and making you make a check inside the process of making a check is terrible.
We sure don't want to know what kinds of traits your check to defeat has, because that's not the monster you're trying to defeat. If you summon a Skeleton, we don't care that your check to defeat whatever you encountered has the Piercing or Slashing trait.
Ideally, this process would be settled by altering the definition of what the highest difficulty of a card really is. We haven't been able to settle on a wording for that. Anybody have any ideas?
Ideally, this process would be settled by altering the definition of what the highest difficulty of a card really is. We haven't been able to settle on a wording for that. Anybody have any ideas?
Well I gave some thought to it. Assuming this is a definition for the rule book and not a card.
Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When required to determine a card’s highest Difficulty to Defeat, consider a character encountering the card and establish the highest possible difficulty number in the current scenario. If a failed check while encountering a card would increase its Difficulty to Defeat then apply the increase as though the check were failed. If a successful check while encounter a card would decrease its Difficulty to Defeat then consider the check failed. If using or not using a specific trait would increase the card’s Difficulty to Defeat then apply the increase as if the trait were or weren’t present. If a scenario or location card’s text would adjust the Difficulty to Defeat apply the adjustment. Determine the highest possible Difficulty to Defeat for a character encountering the card in the current scenario.
Ideally, this process would be settled by altering the definition of what the highest difficulty of a card really is. We haven't been able to settle on a wording for that. Anybody have any ideas?Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When ...
Good first try Shade, allow me to try a simpler and more complete version.
"Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When required to determine a card’s highest Difficulty to Defeat, add to the check value printed on the card any modification from powers printed on that card that would apply without requiring a check. Do not add any other modification (for example you cannot play cards or use powers to modify a card’s highest Difficulty to Defeat).
If the card has different checks to defeat (whether separated by "or", "then" or other separators), calculate the Highest Difficulty to Defeat for each check independently and use the highest of those."
This way, veterans or lycanthropes get their boost, but not the boar. Furthermore, other cards/powers do not impact Highest Difficulty to Defeat - so to avoid long debates (example, if you are at a location where monsters have a +3 to defeat, that wouldn't apply to your summoned monster - and you cannot play with traits or other gimmiks of the game).
I feel it's at the same time simple, game balancing, and somehow thematically logic (a veteran avoids caltrops, and so on).
Anyway, just my €0.02 (yes we have cents of frenchy euros here on the other side of the pound).
Mike, in the Lycanthrope example, do you want the HDtD to always assume that there's a BotG, or check to see if there's one? Is the Werewolf always a 16 on it's HDtD, or is it sometimes a 13 (I think I remembered the numbers right)?
|
|
Mike, in the Lycanthrope example, do you want the HDtD to always assume that there's a BotG, or check to see if there's one? Is the Werewolf always a 16 on it's HDtD, or is it sometimes a 13 (I think I remembered the numbers right)?
From Mike's post, he said he wants the lycanthrope to care what's on the blessings deck.
It makes sense to us that summoned Lycanthropes should care whether the top card of the blessings discard pile is a Blessing of the Gods. It either is or it isn't a Blessing of the Gods, so that wants to apply.
Not to assume that it is there.
Assuming that's the case (I think so too, just wanted to be sure), then I think Frencois' wording works pretty well. I'd tweak it some, though.
"Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When required to determine a card’s highest difficulty to defeat, add to the highest check value printed on the card any modifications from powers printed on that card that would apply without involving a check. Do not add any modifications that are not on the card itself, such as playing cards to modify a check, or the effects of locations.
Example: Eric explores his location and encounters the monster "Werewolf." Since Eric is out of spells to fight with, he decides that he would like to evade the Werewolf using his Caltrops card, which lets him evade any monster whose highest difficulty to defeat is 14 or lower. However, even though the printed value on the Werewolf's card is 13, the Werewolf's powers indicate that the top card of the Blessing Discard pile should be checked, and the difficulty of the check increased by 3 if that card is a Blessing of the Gods. Since it is, the Werewolf's highest difficulty to defeat is 16, not 13, and so Eric cannot play his Caltrops.
Example: Eric explores his location and encounters the monster "Tickwood Boar." Since Eric is out of spells to fight with, he decides that he would like to defeat the Boar using his Caltrops card, which lets him defeat any monster whose highest difficulty to defeat is 9 or lower. The printed value on the Tickwood Boar's card is an 8, which looks good for Eric. Better yet, the Boar's power that would make it more difficult to defeat requires a check to be made, which does not count towards the highest difficulty to defeat, so Eric happily defeats the Boar using his Caltrops.
---
I think I got the Werewolf right in my example. Still, it should be clear to *us* which is all that matters since I don't have to actually right the official thing. XD
You guys all keep saying "printed on that card" but that exclude Goblin Fortress, which I think Mike was saying they wanted in play.
I have to suggestions in my mind. Let me give some background on how I think about this. The important thing in my mind is that some of these effects are "universal" like the veteran power and the Goblin Fortress. They make no mention of being tied to a step of the encounter or a part of the check. Others use words that are signals they are associated with steps of the encounter or a part of the check.
Suggestion 1 Just "universal" difficulty modifiers apply. (And maybe change some cards.)
Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When determining a card's highest difficulty to defeat, apply any effects or power to its check to defeat that relate to the card at that time. If you are not encountering the card, but are only using the difficulty on it for a purpose other than defeating it, you can not apply any effects or powers that relate to encountering the card. If the card has multiple checks to defeat, use the highest modified result.
Something like that would seem to say things worded like veteran or the Goblin Fortress apply for Summon Monster, but things related to making a check or a step of the encounter don't.
The problem with that is the Lycanthrope. It is tied to a step of the encounter. (There is a minor issue with traits of the check, but I'll get to that in a second.) And you want it to apply. I'm reminded however, that the Lyncanthrope's "Before the encounter" text is a hold over from the original printing and original rulebook. So, I ask, is there a reason that still needs to be tied to a step of the encounter? In other words, can "Before the encounter" (or "Before you act" for the Werecrocodile) just be removed so that it simply says "If the top blessing of the blessings discard pile is blessing of the cards, the difficulty is increased by 3."
What that would change is evasion effects that are also tied to difficulty. Caltrops, for example, might be able to evade something if the difficulty doesn't increase until "Before you act" but if the difficulty increases immediately, you can't evade it.
So basically, I'm saying would it be easier to just change the Lycanthrope to a more "universal" wording. Granted, you might not want to do that. So...
Suggestion 2 Say that you can't make checks or play cards.
Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When determining a card's highest difficulty to defeat apply any effects or powers to its checks to defeat that would adjust the difficulty to defeat, but while doing so you may not make any checks, play cards or use a character's powers. Do not apply any effects that require you to make a check. If the card has multiple checks to defeat, use the highest modified result.
That would seem to mean Lycanthrope is upped by 3, but Tickwood Boar doesn't increase by 2 (at least in relation to cards that care about its "highest difficulty to defeat". Goblin Fortress applies now too. This means you can leave stuff "Before you act" as long as it doesn't mean you make a check, but rather meets some other game state condition. That actually leaves you design space. You can still have the difficulty scale up or down after the evasion step, but can also determine whether that scaling should be useful for Summon Monster or other similar things.
Now, for the issue related to traits of the check, I think that is covered in how these seem to be usually worded:
If your check to defeat the Skeleton has the Slashing or Piercing trait, the difficulty to defeat the Skeleton is increased by 3.
It says you check to defeat the Skeleton. With Summon Monster you aren't making a check to defeat the Skeleton. So I don't see how that would ever apply, in either of my suggestions or in virtually any situation. In fact, if you told me it did I'd say that was crazy. If the Skeleton was missing, I could see someone arguing that it should apply, but if it say the Skeleton I don't see how you can claim you are making a check to defeat the Skeleton. You are using it to defeat something else.
EDIT: Suggestion 2 might be clearer as something like:
Suggestion 2, Alternate Wording Say that you don't apply checks or play cards.
Highest Difficulty to Defeat: When determining a card's highest difficulty to defeat apply any effects or powers to its checks to defeat that would adjust the difficulty to defeat, except those related to making check, playing cards or using a character's powers. If the card has multiple checks to defeat, use the highest modified result.
Potentially you don't need "character's powers" and I'm not totally sure why I put it in there other than "play card and use powers" always seem to go together in the rulebook and I wanted to clarify that the powers of some things applied, but not others. So the question there is: Should Feiya's power make Caltrops apply to more monsters?
The problem is that the Boar's increase power happens before you can play Caltrops, so there's no reason it shouldn't be included.
Remember, Caltrops can be used to evade or defeat. So the Boar's increase applies to Caltrops defeating, but not to Caltrops evading.
Before the encounter, succeed at a Wisdom or Survival 7 check or the difficulty to defeat the Tickwood Boar is increased by 2.
Encountering a Card
Evade the card (optional).
Apply any effects that happen before the encounter, if needed.
Attempt the check.
Attempt the next check, if needed.
Apply any effects that happen after the encounter, if needed.
Resolve the encounter.
I guess the difference is whether or not they want other cards (like Goblin Fortress or scenarios) to be able to modify the HDtD. I was under the impression they did not.
I just added this in an edit to mine, because it relates to my wording and it may not relate to other suggestions, but one thing to keep in mind is Feiya. Should her power adjust the highest difficulty to defeat? It doesn't trigger until someone is making a check, so it is again something related to a step of the encounter.
I guess what I'm asking Mike is, would you ever want to have a character who had a power that would make things like Caltrops and other auto-succeed cards work for slightly higher difficulties? That wouldn't mean they couldn't change what the total you need to roll is, just whether or not you want the design space to say "When this guy tries to decide whether she can play Caltrops or use Masterwork Tools, he gets to use them on monsters 2 higher than normal."
I'm going to guess you don't want that because you like to have those things phase out and even a small bonus to that would mean they'd be auto-succeeding well into deck 6. But I just thought about it and wanted to bring it up.
In my "yes" camp: Giant Lair, Goblin Fortress, Approach to Thistletop, Lycanthropes.
In my "no" camp: Tickwood Boar, Skeleton.
So if cards have to change to make it work, that may have to happen.
The problem with that is the Lycanthrope. It is tied to a step of the encounter. (There is a minor issue with traits of the check, but I'll get to that in a second.) And you want it to apply. I'm reminded however, that the Lyncanthrope's "Before the encounter" text is a hold over from the original printing and original rulebook. So, I ask, is there a reason that still needs to be tied to a step of the encounter? In other words, can "Before the encounter" (or "Before you act" for the Werecrocodile) just be removed so that it simply says "If the top blessing of the blessings discard pile is blessing of the cards, the difficulty is increased by 3."
The only potential problem with that is if you have a card or power that affects your check by discarding blessings from the blessing deck (like the Shackles Pirate Ship does for ship combat with the swashbuckling trait) how would that affect the difficulty of lycanthoropes?
Once could argue that this is in the "Play cards & use powers that affect the check" step, which is after "Determine the difficulty" so it wouldn't matter, but the problem with that is that if Agna is encountering a Skeleton, and recharges an card with the offhand trait and the slashing or piercing trait (such as the Main Gauche), that would still affect the DC of her check, right? So, in theory, a character could use a power to change the blessing (and get some other benefit that is relevant to the encounter) and then change the difficulty. Maybe not a bad thing, but feels off to me.
Perhaps not the best solution, but a keyword of some kind could be added to card effects. That keyword could be used to specify whcich effects count and which don't. Just an alternate idea.
The problem with that is the Lycanthrope. It is tied to a step of the encounter. (There is a minor issue with traits of the check, but I'll get to that in a second.) And you want it to apply. I'm reminded however, that the Lyncanthrope's "Before the encounter" text is a hold over from the original printing and original rulebook. So, I ask, is there a reason that still needs to be tied to a step of the encounter? In other words, can "Before the encounter" (or "Before you act" for the Werecrocodile) just be removed so that it simply says "If the top blessing of the blessings discard pile is blessing of the cards, the difficulty is increased by 3."The only potential problem with that is if you have a card or power that affects your check by discarding blessings from the blessing deck (like the Shackles Pirate Ship does for ship combat with the swashbuckling trait) how would that affect the difficulty of lycanthoropes?
Once could argue that this is in the "Play cards & use powers that affect the check" step, which is after "Determine the difficulty" so it wouldn't matter, but the problem with that is that if Agna is encountering a Skeleton, and recharges an card with the offhand trait and the slashing or piercing trait (such as the Main Gauche), that would still affect the DC of her check, right? So, in theory, a character could use a power to change the blessing (and get some other benefit that is relevant to the encounter) and then change the difficulty. Maybe not a bad thing, but feels off to me.
I think you need to determine the difficulty when you need to know the difficulty. Want to play Caltrops to evade? What is the difficulty at the evasion step? Want to play Caltrops to defeat? What is the difficulty at the Attempt a Check step (specifically Play Cards and Use Powers).
So when you determine the difficulty (a separate issue than how) is when you need to know the difficulty. So yeah, potentially you can do somethings to wiggle with it. But that doesn't change how you determine it. Let's get some hypothetical cards on the board here since Shackles Pirate Ship only helps with defeating ships.
Discard this card to defeat a ship whose highest difficulty to defeat is 10 or lower.
And we've got the Shackles Pirate Ship.
And we encounter:
Check to Defeat: Wisdom/Survival 9.
When Encountering This Ship: If the top card of the blessings discard pile is Blessing of the Gods, the difficulty to defeat this ship is increased by 3.Before you act, summon a Werecrocodile and draw a hat and mittens on it. Then banish the Werecrocodile.
So, now we encounter the Werecroc Ice Cutter. The top card is BotG, so difficulty is 12. But during the check we activate the Shackles Pirate Ship power and discard a blessing. Now it is Blessing of Milani. What happens if I play Ship's Cannon? What happens if I don't?
If you don't play ship's cannon, I think you still need to get an 11. You already determined the difficulty for the check and that remains the target number you need to roll.
So, can you play ship's cannon? Well, before we answer that, lets pretend for a second that the original blessing was Milani and the new blessing was also Milani. So nothing changes. Can I use Shackles Pirate Ship during "Play cards and use power" and still play an auto defeat card like Ship's Cannon? Or put another way, If you were attempting a Diplomacy check to acquire an ally, can you play a BotG to add a die to a check and then play Crown of Charisma? I think I'd say no. If you are going to play an auto-defeat, then you are making cards that add dice not apply to the check. Its sort of like the Rage question.
So, going back to our ship, I'd say you can't auto-defeat it after changing the blessing. I'd probably argue that during a check once you determine the difficulty that number has to be some how included in what "highest difficulty" means. But more importantly, I'd argue you can't use Shackle Pirate Ship and an auto-defeat on the same check.
Just my opinion of course.
Would it make sense to add a step to the "Encountering a Card" process, just before "Evade a Card" that is "Determine the Difficulties to Defeat"? That provides a single place where the increases/decreases can occur.
It would potentially allow Ezren to use two magical items against a monster (Wand of Enervation(?) during the Difficulties step, then another Staff during the combat check...).
Summon Monster could then say "When Determining the Difficulty to Defeat of the monster, treat all checks as failed". Also, you could have something along the lines of "While Determining the Difficulties to Defeat, the monster/barrier is unaffected by traits" (would this be necessary, though?).
(Sorry, trying to think if there's a "Determine the Difficulty" step during the "Make a Check" process - my head's foggy, and I can't get to the rulebook right now.)
Um, anyways, this is irrelevant to all that was said (I'll deal with that later) but because cards don't have any memory, your Werecrocodile will forget that it had a hat and mittens drawn on it when it gets banished.