We each play 2 characters, and one of hers is Merisiel. What we ended up doing was having Merisiel evade the first villain she found.I thought that Villains could not be evaded? Or does Merisiels power trump that?
Villains can be evaded, unless the powers of the villain say they can't. The rules themselves don't prevent anything from being evaded. The power that does the evading might, as might the card being encountered or a location or scenario power, but in general no type of card is immune to evading.
We each play 2 characters, and one of hers is Merisiel. What we ended up doing was having Merisiel evade the first villain she found.I thought that Villains could not be evaded? Or does Merisiels power trump that?
Villains can be evaded, unless the villain says otherwise.
Edit: of course, ninja'd by Hawkmoon
You might be confusing Merisiel's power with evasion spells and powers that specify a "non-villain monster." Merisiel's power has no restrictions. As long as the card she's evading doesn't say "may not be evaded," she can skip right by it. :DBut doesnt the rule book state that villains may not be evaded?
No.
Don't worry, you're just part of a very inclusive club of "Wait... it DOESN'T work like that?" Pathfinder players. Happens (a half-dozen times or so...) to everyone on this board. :D
Yeah. You haven't really played until you've realized you've played part of it wrong. That is when you know you are really starting to understand the game.
In this case, though, I can't really think of any single other card in the game I'd be more willing to keep around. Reveal for a free reroll of two dice on literally any check? Yes, please. I'm not statistically-minded enough to do the math on that, but I'm sure it's similarly effective as a blessing on checks where you just have to beat the average (if we're rolling 1d8 to get a 4, we'll use a blessing if it's even a semi-important roll), saving your blessings for other, better things.
Yeah, but how often would you have been without the SB trait without it? Lots of weapons have Swashbuckling, lots of allies provide it when you explore, and several cards provide it with other benefits (like the awesome eyepatch).
I haven't played Jirelle yet, so IDK if I'd like it or not, but it seems like it could be dead weight.
It's why I prefer the eyepatch. Half of her checks usually involve the SB trait anyway (and I take the power feat allowing her to roll twice on all ship checks) thanks to her weapons and allies. And a lot of the non-combat checks aren't really that important to make (like acquiring a weapon or spell that's useless for you). The eyepatch lets you pick exactly when you need the SB trait, gives you an additional bonus to the check, then recharges. You can also recharge it on practically any check if you feel like it's taking up space.
It's why I prefer the eyepatch. Half of her checks usually involve the SB trait anyway (and I take the power feat allowing her to roll twice on all ship checks) thanks to her weapons and allies. And a lot of the non-combat checks aren't really that important to make (like acquiring a weapon or spell that's useless for you). The eyepatch lets you pick exactly when you need the SB trait, gives you an additional bonus to the check, then recharges. You can also recharge it on practically any check if you feel like it's taking up space.
Yeah, I love the Eyepatch even on other characters. Lini ran two until I found the Haversack and then I dropped the second one for... I forget the name. It's a loot that recharges to scout one card or help with checks on a ship.
It's why I prefer the eyepatch. Half of her checks usually involve the SB trait anyway (and I take the power feat allowing her to roll twice on all ship checks) thanks to her weapons and allies. And a lot of the non-combat checks aren't really that important to make (like acquiring a weapon or spell that's useless for you). The eyepatch lets you pick exactly when you need the SB trait, gives you an additional bonus to the check, then recharges. You can also recharge it on practically any check if you feel like it's taking up space.
Personally, I find the power to reroll against ships a wasted feat, assuming you want to become a Pirate Queen. Pick up the power to "reveal a card that has the Swashbuckling trait to add the Swashbuckling trait to your check" after AP3 and you will be in a much better position.
Constantly, Orbis. For one, having the Old Salt's Bandana means you never need to check the "against a ship" power on her card, which means you can take Hand Size 7, which means you're not sweating that reserved spot in your hand so much in the first place. :D Allies to giving you swashbuckling can be nice, but that's unreliable without scouting, which is rarer and less potent in S&S. At best it's for one explore, then you have to wait until they're healed back into your deck and then into your hand. So maybe two or three checks per game? Eyepatch can do it on the fly, but only against certain cards--checks to defeat banes, mostly, which nixes pre-encounter damage and "At the start of your turn" checks--and only once before it's recharged.
Meanwhile, Old Salt's just chills in your hand, helping against every check against a ship, against a barrier, against an ally or weapon or armor or spell you want to acquire, against a monster's pre-combat Fortitude role, and so on. It severely reduces the need to play blessings on Jirelle's checks "just in case." It's as universal a power as you can get that costs you nothing but the hand size for a blessing or ally you would've used on a single check and then discarded. It's insurance for everything you do, passively, always. Of course, now that we've finished AP3 Jirelle's got a power that does the same thing with anything Swashbuckling. Since all her weapons are Swashbuckling, and probably will forever be, having that power attached to a weapon that's gonna be in your hand anyway is default better, but our only regret with the Old Salt's is that we didn't get it earlier.
My wife plays Jirelle, and I'd say she has gotten the trait from Old Salt's Bandanna on lots and lots of checks. Any time her first exploration isn't a combat check, anytime the ally she played added the trait, but to the wrong kind of check, anytime she'd had to attempt a non-combat check on another player's turn. She uses it a lot.
...Allies to giving you swashbuckling can be nice, but that's unreliable without scouting...
You don't need scouting on the allies - just use the ones that say "non-combat check" and rely on Swashbuckling weapons if it's a combat check.
EDIT: Of course, like I said, I haven't played her (or with her for more than one scenario), so I don't have a true opinion on the matter yet.
It's why I prefer the eyepatch. Half of her checks usually involve the SB trait anyway (and I take the power feat allowing her to roll twice on all ship checks) thanks to her weapons and allies. And a lot of the non-combat checks aren't really that important to make (like acquiring a weapon or spell that's useless for you). The eyepatch lets you pick exactly when you need the SB trait, gives you an additional bonus to the check, then recharges. You can also recharge it on practically any check if you feel like it's taking up space.Personally, I find the power to reroll against ships a wasted feat, assuming you want to become a Pirate Queen. Pick up the power to "reveal a card that has the Swashbuckling trait to add the Swashbuckling trait to your check" after AP3 and you will be in a much better position.
My Jirelle is going for Duelist, actually, but I can definitely see how Pirate Queen could be amazing.
Edit: I actually do think Pirate Queen is better, for what it's worth. I just wanted to go for Duelist.
Nothing wrong with Duelist, and your power feat pick makes sense if you don't have the Pirate Queen power.
You don't need scouting on the allies - just use the ones that say "non-combat check" and rely on Swashbuckling weapons if it's a combat check.
EDIT: Of course, like I said, I haven't played her (or with her for more than one scenario), so I don't have a true opinion on the matter yet.
Sorry, I meant it's unreliable in the sense that, without scouting, you have no idea if you're going to have Swashbuckling on your check to "acquire a Dagger" or your "Fortitude 9 or bury 1d4 cards" checks. At that point, using a Swashbuckling ally to explore is basically arbitrary. You're just hoping to get lucky.
And hey man, I'm not gonna force nobody to do nothing, but in my "mostly good, but universal trumps amazing, but situational" mentality, that Bandana ranks mega high on the list. :D I probably wouldn't choose Duelist for my own Jirelle, but I can see the case for it because her add a d4 power is just plain neat. It's nice to have substantive options like that! Where with Damiel, I almost could've just flipped the Role Card like a coin and chosen whatever role landed face-up, for how much I care about his upcoming powers.
I played this Saturday for the first time and found it simple.
With three Villains, locations get closed rather quickly (assuming, of course, you don't fail the villains' checks), and the villains naturally funneled themselves to the same location. It only took us twenty minutes or so (two player game, though, so YMMV - I understand that things would be different with villains at 3 out of 6 locations instead of 3 out of 4).
You know, I just realized, this doesn't work, does it? If the villains aren't in the same location, then they count as undefeated, which means you don't get to close the location they came from, right?
And suddenly this is so much easier. Awesome, thanks Hawkmoon.
Don't worry, you're just part of a very inclusive club of "Wait... it DOESN'T work like that?" Pathfinder players. Happens (a half-dozen times or so...) to everyone on this board. :D
Yeah, we played all of RotRL thinking that Merisiel's evade power only worked on Monsters. There were definitely a few Barrier's we would have loved to not deal with.
Chief Technical Officer
|
I think for clarity's sake I would also add:
"To win the scenario, defeat any villain while the other two villains are in the same location deck AS THE VILLAIN BEING ENCOUNTERED."
The other could be interpreted as so long as 2 of the three villains are in the same location deck when the other villain is encountered at a completely different location deck, the scenario is defeated.
Additionally, I read the FAQ entry for this fix, and it's a bit confusing. Is there any way to clarify it?
Where with Damiel, I almost could've just flipped the Role Card like a coin and chosen whatever role landed face-up, for how much I care about his upcoming powers.
Grenadier doesn't seem appealing? I don't have the role card in front of me, but from memory it seemed like the superior option. With the way I play him, Damiel very rarely ends up discarding things, so the option to discard 1 card to add 1d6+3+1d12 (and potentially typed damage that a bane is weak to) to any combat check at your location is pretty appealing. He's almost always at a location with another character anyway in order to can chuck potions and grenades at them.
He's usually hard up for additional explores, so the free explore on "when you acquire an item with the liquid or alchemical trait" is mighty tempting. I'm going through AP3 right now and I did a quick check of the item deck; roughly 30% of the items have either the liquid or alchemical trait. But I'm playing with the rogue class deck, so the poisons there might skew my deck more than yours.
Also the "when you succeed at a craft check" power at first seems like it would rarely come up, but I currently carry 2 tot flasks, a liquid ice, and the loot ally who adds to your craft check, so...
I'm also curious if you ever do the Potion of Healing + Tot Flask trick? Basically if I ever have a Tot Flask in my hand and a few discarded cards, I use it to grab a PoHealing before I reset my hand. With the way I read it, you can use your Tot Flask to get a PoHealing, (almost always) recharge the Tot Flask, use your PoHealing to heal 1d4 random cards, and shuffle your deck (including the recharged Tot Flask and PoHealing). Because the specific order of events listed on the card, you recharge your PoHealing before you heal and shuffle your deck, thus giving you a very good chance of getting back your Tot Flask and/or PoHealing when you reset your hand.
Yeah, I was being a little glib. :D It's not like I feel either of those roles are worthless, there's just nothing on them as exciting as his base recharge power. I was looking forward to the "recharge for a d4" one, but the more I thought about it, the more I had to ask myself why I would keep an alchemical item in my hand for a piddly d4 when I could just use it's much better actual power (Potion of Heroism is better than a d6 already, Potion of Flying is not worth wasting for a d4, and so on).
I see the point in the discard power upgrade. I mean, it makes it a little more exciting to encounter a crocodile and actually be able to apply the Cold trait to the check instead of just ignoring that box as we almost always do. But the reverse of that is I discard for that power pretty rarely, and only if things are going swimmingly. Damiel's got a pretty slim deck. Almost everything I've got in mine has an immediate use case that's better than a d6 on a combat check that standard +s will win anyway. Again, I'd rather use those cards for their intended purpose.
I can see what you're saying about lack of explores. Still, I haven't really felt the crush with him, not with 5 blessings and Potion of Healing/Tot Flask constantly cycling those 5 blessings back into his deck. I do the same Tot thing, for a while I was doing it with two, and with it I'm usually clocking 2 or 3 explorations a turn. Not bad! I just question it'll come up more than once or twice a game. A free explore is a free explore, it just doesn't have the same panache of Ezren clearing the Academy in one turn.
We haven't gone through AP4 with Damiel/Jirelle yet, so I don't remember what power I took. I assume it's the Craft check/draw a card one. I only ever do it when Totting, we've let our ship get wrecked like once ever, and I don't use the bomb items. So it's really exceedingly rare it comes up, but deck manipulation's my favorite thing, so that's what feels right. I suppose having a power that makes it more likely to get that Bomb/PoH/Tot Flask back after I use them would make me more amendable to keeping a bomb around for big plays, but the reason I don't use them is how rarely those big plays come along. If Vindictive Harpoon is still handling every monster I encounter, the Liquid Ice I'm sitting on is just wasted space while I wait for something "just in case."
I don't want to sound like I'm hating. Damiel's one of my favorite Pathfinder checkers! It's more like neither of his roles have a "how could I possibly live without that?" power on 'em. I really like stuff like Merisiel's evade to the top of deck, Lem's self-use d4, Jirelle applying Swashbuckling to anything she wants, Seelah's putting peeked cards beneath the top card if she wants instead of the bottom of the deck, and so no. Nothing on either of Damiel's role card feels like a fundamental explosion of how I've been playing my character. Instead it's like "Oh, d12 instead of d6? I guess that's nice." He's just a really frontloaded character. Most of what's awesome about him is awesome from the start (or it's a Potion of Flying you get in AP3 :D).
I recently beat Bizarre Love Triangle on my third attempt (with four characters), and I have to say it's been one of my favourite scenarios so far. The need to coordinate characters and plan out how you explore really brings out the feeling of hunting down and cornering the villains, more than any other scenario I've played (including all of RotR). It's a strong contrast with the usual "spread out, plug away and hope for the best" approach.
On my first try, I did try the usual approach; not only did I fall far short on time, two characters nearly died (Alahazra was miraculously saved when the closing effect of the Beach returned a single item card to her deck, allowing her to draw back to her hand size). After that I formed a plan...
Early in the game I spread the characters out, so that sooner or later one of them would run into a villain. On encountering the first one, temp close as much as possible, so that it runs to the two remaining open locations. Then send the two best characters for beating that villain (e.g. the two with the best Intelligence) to those locations, and carry on. The next time you encounter a villain, temp close again to channel it to one known location.
From that point on, it becomes a matter of keeping track of which villain is where, and deciding whether to (a) chase a villain to a (probably) villain-less location in order to close it, or (b) start herding them together. But the key thing is not to fall into the trap of having two villains at one location while searching for the third across two or three open locations - that takes too long. Only herd them when you definitely know where they are.
On my second attempt, I followed more or less this plan but I was unlucky. I didn't find the first villain until about halfway through, and even then, on turn 30 I had all three at the same location (couldn't be sure of it, but they were) and then Seltyiel, with his d4 Wisdom, encountered the Wisdom villain. Either of the other two would have given me a solid chance!
My third attempt was a win on turn 28 - same plan, better executed (and I daresay a bit more luck).
I recently beat Bizarre Love Triangle on my third attempt (with four characters), and I have to say it's been one of my favourite scenarios so far. The need to coordinate characters and plan out how you explore really brings out the feeling of hunting down and cornering the villains, more than any other scenario I've played (including all of RotR). It's a strong contrast with the usual "spread out, plug away and hope for the best" approach.
On my first try, I did try the usual approach; not only did I fall far short on time, two characters nearly died (Alahazra was miraculously saved when the closing effect of the Beach returned a single item card to her deck, allowing her to draw back to her hand size). After that I formed a plan...
** spoiler omitted **...
I am glad you are seeing it that way. Some people see failing 2 times in a scenario a bit too harsh and unenjoyable. In my opinion diving in to a scenario with not a lot of concern for the objective and just exploring for the sake of it and then succeed at the scenario is a bit too easy. That's what happened in RotR. Half the time you didn't even need to worry about time or coordinating because the scenario would be defeated regardless.
However in S&S if you slack off you will more than likely fail your scenario. And sometimes, even with the objective focused on and having clear party coordination you can still fail. In my opinion that's not nearly as bad as RotR's you can clear it with your eyes closed.
For me, the best scenarios are the ones where you win by the last 1-3 turns. The first attempt at a scenario should be just to get a feel of the objective, not try hard as much. If there's a chance you can finish in the first try then please do so. But you obviously can't expect to win it that way all the time.
Anyway I am patiently waiting for Adventure 6, so I can start a new thread asking everyone's opinion and experience with S&S's difficulty in comparison to RotR.
|
I obviously don't like losing, but I'm fine with it. This one really upset us losing twice though. Not because we lost, but because we lost twice and almost died multiple times in a scenario that seems borderline impossible.
We played before the FAQ that the villains aren't actually undefeated. With that FAQ though, I see this one as a fun challenge.
Anybody beat this one with a party of 6?
We are a group of 3 playing each 2 characters and after 4 cruel defeats, we decided to try it with only 1 character per player... What a difference it made and we easily beat it.
So, back to the question, anybody beat it with a party of 6?
I've beaten it a couple times with 6 characters (2 players, 3 characters each). I believe the first group barely won on the first try, and the second won on the second try with a bit to spare. There is definitely a luck component with this one, since there's no Henchman, so you're actually really hoping to find a Villain in the first few turns. Since there are so many Villains, they're going to be the primary closing method for you, and they star to cascade, as the more you've beaten, the more likely you are to find them in other locations. Early on, don't worry about trying to temp close locations that aren't easy to close, or which require resources to close, since odds are you're going to have to close it a lot more before all is said and done. One big advantage is that because there are no henchman, you know exactly when you're going to have to make a permanent close check, which is when the pile is empty. Therefore, you can stick people in locations they'd otherwise be good at, but can't close without concern about what happens if they hit a henchman. Make sure you never fail a check against a Villain. It's a double-whammy of losing turns and not being able to close the location. It's worth spending a ton of resources to ensure that you win. Grouping up heavily often helps, since you can take advantage of at-location effects (Feiya and Lem especially) more often. Only once you have 4 or 5 locations closed should you start worrying about spreading out.
Hope that helps.
It's also helpful to pay very close attention to the number of monsters in each location when playing in a large group. I've managed to pass this scenario by grouping up at a location until we either find a villain or run out of monsters. Once we know there isn't a villain at a given location, we ignore it until we've closed enough locations to start spreading out to corral the villains.
0-3 so far with a party that really can't get together very often to play. Miserable. I reserve unpleasant words for whoever decided this scenario would work well with no less than three locations with the delightful ability to shuffle extra banes into other decks. That really puts the cherry on the cake.
Yes. There are no henchman in this scenario. Instead use random monsters like your would henchmen. 3 random locations will have villains in them. The rest will ask have an extra monster.
We ended up winning this one 3 turns from the end of the deck (which, I agree with bbKabag, is the most satisfying resolution) thanks to Lini + luck.
4 player game, Valeros/Lini/Damiel/Jirelle. Damiel spotted one of the villains in the Hatchery using the Farglass and left it on top of the deck. From that point on, we played relatively normally, but left the Hatchery alone. A villain actually popped up in another location before Damiel moved away from the Hatchery, and he chose not to temporarily close it.
If you always leave a location open, the villains will never scatter into random locations. So we temp closed as much as possible when encountering villains through the rest of the game, but always left the Hatchery open so they'd gradually accumulate there. It was close -- the Hatchery accumulated a lot of cards before we were ready to tackle it, and we weren't sure we'd have time to dig down to a villain. But we had Lini to cycle through allies -- sometimes tearing through five cards in one turn.