Anyone else disappointed by the level of character interaction?


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game General Discussion

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I played a few demo games of the Skull & Shackles PACG as our local game store was preparing for Organized play.

One of the elements that I was really disappointed in was the limited way in which characters are able to interact with each other. Sure, there are blessings to grant additional dice on rolls and abilities that will allow one character to give another character a small die buff (usually 1d4), but there is very little in the way rules that allows two (or more) characters to actually working together.

As someone who generally plays 'hero' characters in Pathfinder, I found the lack of this element a little disappointing...disappointing enough that I lost interest in doing organized play and possibly loosing interest in purchasing the game.

A good example occurred during one of the demos we were playing. The alchemist had gone to a location and got caught in an underwater spike trap. At the start of each turn, he had to discard the top card of his deck (he was basically bleeding to death). The difficulty to get out of it was something like a DC 9 Dexterity check and I believe his Dexterity die was a 1d4. At the time, there little to no way for him to succeed (even with blessings from the rest of us). However, there was this Goblin player (1d12 Dexterity die) at another location who could handily take care of such a trap, but the rules do not allow the Goblin to interact with the Alchemist's trap...so over the next three turns, the Alchemist slowly died.

I understand that the designers wanted to make sure that the game would be challenging for each player, but as it is based on a role playing game, I think that not having a stronger element of teamwork will turn people away. It certainly has done so for me.

Now, I do want to say that this post is not intended as a negative review of the game in as much as it is feedback about one aspect. The main reason I wanted to throw this out was to see if I am in the minority or are their many others who feel the same. If there are enough of the same opinion, it may prompt Paizo to brainstorm some additional rules to allow for more character interaction during events.


I think some of the characters are more able to assist than others. Compared to RotR, I'd say S&S has more characters whose "base" powers are able to help others.

In RotR you had Valeros, Lem, Harsk and Kyra (if you want to count her healing power).

In S&S you have Feiya, Oloch, Lirrian, Lem, Valeros, Damiel and Ranzak (if you want to count him as part of S&S and his ability to pass the encounter off to someone else as "helping".)

But yeah, there are some things that you can get stuck with, and with the faceup cards it seems like that is more likely to happen. And thinking about your post made me realize, it is all the more difficult since failing the first time might make it less possible the second time.

For example, last night my wife and I were playing and Jirelle got hit with the Man Overboard barrier. She failed to defeat it. So at the start of every turn after that she had to attempt Constitution or Fortitude 7 check to banish it. I now realize that, strictly speaking, that is a check to banish a barrier, but not necessarily a check to defeat a barrier. We didn't have any such cards to help, but that seems to mean things like Masterwork Tools or Blessing of Abadar's 2 dice power wouldn't have applied.

Though you could pass the player a statstone or something to help.

Very interesting...


The only d4 die the Alchemist has is Charisma. The only d12 die the goblin has is Constitution. They have a d8 and d10 Dexterity respectively. Also, Underwater Spike Trap? I'm thinking you mean Drowning Spikes Trap?

First off, that's an Adventure 1 bane, so if you were playing a demo, you shouldn't have seen it. You should never jump into Adventure 1 for a demo and I'd highly recommend not jumping into Adventure 1 ever without experienced characters (play the five introductory scenarios first to get some upgrades.

Second, it has a Dexterity/Disable 7 to defeat it initially, which the Alchemist shouldn't have had too much trouble with if he got a little help since he has a d8+2 in the check naturally. Then, the DC 9 check is Dexterity/Acrobatics/Strength. Most characters, if they're unlucky enough to fall, should have a die that is least a d6 between those abilities/skills unless they're really, really weak. The Oracle is the only character in the base set and add-on deck that has a d4 in both Dexterity and Strength, so maybe you're misremembering the situation and that's who actually got caught in the trap?

And lastly, traps suck and they should suck, just as they should in the RPG. Typically, taking care of traps is not a team effort.

There is a lot of character interaction in the game, but most of it is not as obvious as things like helping a friend out of a trap. Most of it deals with working together to develop a strategy to reach your goal.

Sovereign Court

Also, and I only mention this because your post sounds like you think only blessings can assist other players, there are many non-blessings that can assist other players. As long as it isn't an auto-succeed/evade/etc, and doesn't specify you can only play it on yourself, you can play it on any player (some cards do still limit it to characters at your location).

As Pluvia mentioned, it looks like you were demoing at Adventure 1 level, which definitely is a problem if the characters haven't been upgraded from earlier scenarios. There is a lot of interaction in this game, but not if you don't have access to the cards you should.


RedDogMT wrote:

I played a few demo games of the Skull & Shackles PACG as our local game store was preparing for Organized play.

One of the elements that I was really disappointed in was the limited way in which characters are able to interact with each other. play and possibly loosing interest in purchasing the game.

A good example occurred during one of the demos we were playing. The alchemist had gone to a location and got caught in an underwater spike trap. At the start of each turn, he had to discard the top card of his deck (he was basically bleeding to death). The difficulty to get out of it was something like a DC 9 Dexterity check and I believe his Dexterity die was a 1d4. At the time, there little to no way for him to succeed (even with blessings from the rest of us). However, there was this Goblin player (1d12 Dexterity die) at another location who could handily take care of such a trap, but the rules do not allow the Goblin to interact with the Alchemist's trap...so over the next three turns, the Alchemist slowly died.

Hmm, I kinda thought the opposite. This game is very geared towards team play rather than each person getting to a location encountering and closing it. I find many times it is very helpful to go to a location with another person. That allows the giving of cards, and better synergy of powers. Now I will agree S&S it seems you can get into more trouble traveling together, but based on the amount I have played I don't think it's overwhelming.

However I have lost a few games or spent time "curing"/healing a toon to keep them out of deaths hands until the deck ran out. In our group we consider that if we get stuck like you did, and we run out the clock it is the same as the party coming together to save their party member. Then we try the scenario again.

I may not be reciting the rule correctly, but I recall that when a person encounters a bane they only have to succeed at one check. Others at the same location can help with other checks (if I read it correctly). May not get you out of the trap or that specific example, but sure is helpful taking out a villian every now and them.


Isn't it the case that if a character fails on one of those barriers that are left face-up then on the next character's turn that she could move to that location and attempt to defeat the barrier? Damiel might have sprung the trap and lost a card but I don't think you're playing it right that no one else on their turn can try to defeat that trap. Maybe the party might have a more pressing job and left Damiel to deal with it but they do have a choice, I think.


Some of them yes. Those ones say each character at the location encounters it as their first exploration. But others are stuck on a certain character. Man Overboard, for example.


Ah, right, I wasn't looking at the cards. We haven't finished the base set scenarios, so is the underwater spike trap attached to a character or left as a first card to encounter type?

Sovereign Court

Spike trap is a specific character.


Concerning the OP's comment specifically about the trap and other things:

It sounds like you're trying to draw in interaction between characters like it's the RPG. But do keep in mind, even in the RPG, when a character gets into some situations, all other character can do is look on because they may not be able to get to them or assist them in any way, so all they can do is pray.

When someone's in an underwater spike trap, it's that character in the underwater spike trap that has to deal with it and get out. They can't suddenly switch places with someone else that has more chance of being able to get free.

--

Sadly, it IS a card game and not the RPG, so there are some things that had to be simplified and smoothed over in order to make it playable as a card game. Two characters at the same location cannot fight the same encounter at the same time for the same check, for example, however, some characters can assist directly through abilities or indirectly through other cards such as blessings or weapons.

If it was possible for characters to fight together for the same check (like it is in the RPG, multiple heroes fight a single enemy and groups of enemies at the same time), other rules would also have to be changed to deal with the new balance issue. Pretty much, it'd be an almost entirely different game because the encounters and tactics would be drastically altered from what they are now.

Sadly, if you're trying to approach the card game like it's supposed to be an RPG and have all of the character interaction that the RPG has, you'll end up disappointing yourself (and it sounds like you may have), as it's not an RPG, it's a card game based on the same setting as an RPG and has some (but not all) mechanics and parallels from that RPG.

--

So, all that being said, there ARE plenty of variants both here at Paizo and over at BGG that allow for more character interaction and do change the rules of the game in different ways. If the base rules aren't for you and you're not having much fun with the game, I highly suggest checking out all the variants so you can try to enjoy a game you purchased more, even if it's not using the rules as written.

The designers want you to enjoy their game as they intended, but as both Mike and Vic has said before, it's your game and you're supposed to be having fun, so you should do what you want and need to in order to make it fun for you.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Firedale2002 wrote:
When someone's in an underwater spike trap, it's that character in the underwater spike trap that has to deal with it and get out. They can't suddenly switch places with someone else that has more chance of being able to get free.

Having just run the Wormwood Mutiny RPG, I can understand the OPs issue when comparing it to the RPG. The person under a spike trap isn't just there with no option of help for others. The other players can make strength character checks to try and lift the trap. So, while connections shouldn't made between the gameplay of the two, for a new ACG player that comes from the RPG, like RedDog, his confusion did make sense.


Yep, I can totally understand, and many situations in the RPGs do have other options for the characters in those situations. I have an RPG background as well, and it did cause some issues with PACG starting off, but once you kind of separate them out, it gets easier.

Some things just don't translate well from the RPG to the card game, like those types of character interactions, since it has to limit the available options to what are on the cards.

Sovereign Court

On the plus side, we get to try and explain why a bell is falling in the woods :)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew K wrote:
Having just run the Wormwood Mutiny RPG, I can understand the OPs issue when comparing it to the RPG. The person under a spike trap isn't just there with no option of help for others. The other players can make strength character checks to try and lift the trap. So, while connections shouldn't made between the gameplay of the two, for a new ACG player that comes from the RPG, like RedDog, his confusion did make sense.

Perhaps that was the problem. As new players, we asked the person putting on the event what we could do to help the poor Alchemist and he said that there was very little we could do except for using cards that gave him a check bonus. We may all have overlooked something on the trap card.

Some of you are right in that my expectation for the card game may have been a little off; however, I also do not think it is unreasonable to have such an expectation when the game is marketed as a Pathfinder product where you create a character and go on adventures with other players. It sounds a lot like the Pathfinder RPG in card-game form. Until you have played it enough, you can't fully understand how the game truly works.

The game has earned some good ratings, so obviously there are plenty of people who like it. It just may not have everything I am looking for in a coop game.

Sovereign Court

RedDogMT wrote:
Andrew K wrote:
Having just run the Wormwood Mutiny RPG, I can understand the OPs issue when comparing it to the RPG. The person under a spike trap isn't just there with no option of help for others. The other players can make strength character checks to try and lift the trap. So, while connections shouldn't made between the gameplay of the two, for a new ACG player that comes from the RPG, like RedDog, his confusion did make sense.

Perhaps that was the problem. As new players, we asked the person putting on the event what we could do to help the poor Alchemist and he said that there was very little we could do except for using cards that gave him a check bonus. We may all have overlooked something on the trap card.

Some of you are right in that my expectation for the card game may have been a little off; however, I also do not think it is unreasonable to have such an expectation when the game is marketed as a Pathfinder product where you create a character and go on adventures with other players. It sounds a lot like the Pathfinder RPG in card-game form. Until you have played it enough, you can't fully understand how the game truly works.

The game has earned some good ratings, so obviously there are plenty of people who like it. It just may not have everything I am looking for in a coop game.

There is definitely little help that can be given past cards that help checks, but that's a lot, remember that each player can play one of each type during a check. So, in a 4 player game, 2 people playing blessings would have the Alchemist rolling 3d8 to pass the Dex 9 check to get rid of the barrier if he failed it initially. That's pretty decent odds, and doesn't even account for character powers, items, or allies. If there was that much trouble, it sounds less like a lack of interaction options and more like maybe the person running it was doing something wrong. Even with no feats or card upgrades (which you definitely should have had since you guys were running at Adventure 1 level), a Dex 9 check in any group of 3+ shouldn't be too bad for Damiel the Alchemist.

Like you said, it may just not be the level of teamwork that you were expecting, coming from the RPG. That's understandable, and as fantastic as I think the game is, I know some people just want a much higher amount of player interactions. I wouldn't say it's unreasonable to expect that from something in the Pathfinder line, but I do think it's important to realize that while it is Pathfinder, it isn't Pathfinder RPG, and no matter what franchise you make a game for, certain types of games just don't allow for certain aspects to the level that they are found in others. In a deck building game, you have to take into account that while you want their to be teamwork, you also want the characters to actually do some deck building if they are to succeed.


Just played through the Toll of the Bell with Lem and Freiya. I was Lem, and spent a bunch of turns doing nothing but letting my hand fill up, since I'd spent it all on blessings and recharges for Freiya. It was actually really cool! Since the villain doesn't go away until his location deck is empty we encountered him a bunch of times. Freiya having Besmara's Tricorne in hand, I was basically there to provide 1d4+1s (and the occassional Mogmurch) until the cows came home. Sometimes my hand was empty by the time the villain's Divine check to defeat came up, but since my hand was empty and there were only two locations, we didn't really sweat it. We encountered him so many times we ended up with 13 plunder cards (though 5 were from a Goblin Keelhauling) and some of them were actually useful!

...though the four armors among them were not...

This is the third time in a row we've finished a scenario on the final card of the blessings deck. Things were so crazy intense I didn't even mind essentially skipping turns as Lem to fill up my empty hands. I was pleased just to recharge my cards, provide Cures when necessarily, and take my Divine checks against the boss. So "support" roles may be reliant on the right character, and the right player.


I finished one last night on the last card of the blessing deck. Last turn, 3 cards in the deck, one of which has to be the villain because all other locations are closed. 1 blessing for exploring. First card is a monster. Blessing explores. Second card is a barrier. "Oh no!" we say. Only that barrier is Ambush! So fail or succeed against the barrier, we are encountering the villain. It was awesome.

Sovereign Court

I always have good enough cards in my hand that I never try to defeat Ambush, unless there is some outside effect that would happen besides the Ambush effect.


Andrew K wrote:
I always have good enough cards in my hand that I never try to defeat Ambush, unless there is some outside effect that would happen besides the Ambush effect.

Eh, the check is usually so high that I fail ambush anyway, but I'd rather succeed than fail for two reasons:

1. Succeeding gets you a free explore. That means beating ambush is 2 explorations for the turn, while failing is a net of 1 exploration (you fight a monster, but put ambush back in. [Edit: That is how it works right? I don't have the cards on me right now]

2. It may force you to fight the villain early and close the location off, restricting access to boons that you might want to acquire first.


Ambush is actually banished. It is in the FAQ.

The other really good reason to not fail is that there might not be a monster. A free explore doesn't care what card you encounter, but if there are no monsters left you aren't getting to encounter another card.

Plus, you no, not having to subtract 1 from all your dice. I mean, I won't go crazy trying to beat it, but its definitely better to defeat it than to fail.

Sovereign Court

Eh, if the henchman or villain hasn't been found in the deck, we'd rather close it out. As rare as the barrier comes up (once every few scenarios maybe), the one early close rarely, if ever, loses us anything good. If we find a regular monster, then we at least got it out of the way.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Ambush is actually banished. It is in the FAQ.

Oh, so it was ambiguous before. Good to know!

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / General Discussion / Anyone else disappointed by the level of character interaction? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion