Alahazra is encountering a boon remotely and wishes to add a blessing to the check; she's got one on top of her deck. Can she cast Detect Evil to encounter Koko from her current location, take 1 Ranged Combat damage Before You Act, use Stanching Buckler to draw the blessing, do the check for the boon and then do the delayed combat check with Koko?
Short answer: Balazar can't discard a spell to gain a monster while he acts, because that would be a nice thing, and we can't have nice things.
-----
I think we can agree that the KEEP IT SIMPLE, SELTYIEL here is that you can:
-Play a legal card that is pertinent to the situation;
-Play a legal card that is pertinent to another legal card that is pertinent to the situation.
It doesn't need to extend beyond that point. Certainly not to inserting half of a different encounter into your while-you-act step.
The Alahazra example seems like a check inside a check, so it's a no go. Otherwise you might want something to help you with your check against Koko and set up more checks.
Alahazra is encountering a boon remotely and wishes to add a blessing to the check; she's got one on top of her deck. Can she cast Detect Evil to encounter Koko from her current location, take 1 Ranged Combat damage Before You Act, use Stanching Buckler to draw the blessing, do the check for the boon and then do the delayed combat check with Koko?
No checks within a check. You can't use Detect -whatever- or Alahazra's ability in the midst of a check.
So as it stands now, as I start playing Balazar, I have the option of discarding a spell for a monster at the beginning of an encounter as long as im using the monster to fuel Padrig to kill the bane Im facing, correct?
So as it stands now, as I start playing Balazar, I have the option of discarding a spell for a monster at the beginning of an encounter as long as im using the monster to fuel Padrig to kill the bane Im facing, correct?
Technically, you have to discard it during a check (and use the monster on the check), rather than at the beginning of an encounter.
So as it stands now, as I start playing Balazar, I have the option of discarding a spell for a monster at the beginning of an encounter as long as im using the monster to fuel Padrig to kill the bane Im facing, correct?
Sort of. You have that option during the attempt the check step, specifically during the "Play cards and use powers that affect the check" part of that step. And you repeat that step for each check you make, so you can use it again for a second check.
I was thinking last night that this probably makes thematic sense for Balazar, since he'd summon something up when fighting a monster if he needed to. I just think that the idea creates a bunch of other funny situations and grey areas and nuances. I think I'd prefer it if there was just a much more limited understanding of what "affect the check" means, and that powers like Balazar's and others that should be playable during an encounter would simply say "You may use this power while attempting a check" or something like that. Even then, Powder Horn and Call Weapon are still weird since they depend on knowing you can find the card that will affect the check.
Which also had me thinking, what would happen if Sacred Weapon drew a weapon like the one in S&S that doesn't make a combat check, but lets you evade? Perhaps there are probably no such cards in WotR, so it doesn't matter unless you are mixing sets. (Personally, I'd say you draw again to get one that could be played.)
Alahazra is encountering a boon remotely and wishes to add a blessing to the check; she's got one on top of her deck. Can she cast Detect Evil to encounter Koko from her current location, take 1 Ranged Combat damage Before You Act, use Stanching Buckler to draw the blessing, do the check for the boon and then do the delayed combat check with Koko?No checks within a check. You can't use Detect -whatever- or Alahazra's ability in the midst of a check.
The point was that you can get a benefit (draw a card) without a check. The rules don't say that you can't play a card that will cause a check, just that the check is delayed until later -- otherwise you wouldn't be able to play spells. You usually can't Detect X because you don't get a benefit which applies to the current check until after a check on the card that you encounter. I'm pointing out that Before You Act text and acquiring BotG would be exceptions to this. There could also be cases where evasion powers did something useful when encountering a card.
So as it stands now, as I start playing Balazar, I have the option of discarding a spell for a monster at the beginning of an encounter as long as im using the monster to fuel Padrig to kill the bane Im facing, correct?
Sort of. You have that option during the attempt the check step, specifically during the "Play cards and use powers that affect the check" part of that step. And you repeat that step for each check you make, so you can use it again for a second check.
I was thinking last night that this probably makes thematic sense for Balazar, since he'd summon something up when fighting a monster if he needed to. I just think that the idea creates a bunch of other funny situations and grey areas and nuances. I think I'd prefer it if there was just a much more limited understanding of what "affect the check" means, and that powers like Balazar's and others that should be playable during an encounter would simply say "You may use this power while attempting a check" or something like that. Even then, Powder Horn and Call Weapon are still weird since they depend on knowing you can find the card that will affect the check.
Which also had me thinking, what would happen if Sacred Weapon drew a weapon like the one in S&S that doesn't make a combat check, but lets you evade? Perhaps there are probably no such cards in WotR, so it doesn't matter unless you are mixing sets. (Personally, I'd say you draw again to get one that could be played.)
If Sacred Weapon draws an evade weapon, then you play it and evade. Even though the timing is "wrong" for the weapon's normal use, nothing (save for evasion blocking effect) prevents you from gaining a chance to evade due to a power that comes into play while you act.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obsidian must be having fits with this. More coherent timing rules for when you should play things should be a high priority.
The point was that you can get a benefit (draw a card) without a check. The rules don't say that you can't play a card that will cause a check, just that the check is delayed until later -- otherwise you wouldn't be able to play spells. You usually can't Detect X because you don't get a benefit which applies to the current check until after a check on the card that you encounter. I'm pointing out that Before You Act text and acquiring BotG would be exceptions to this. There could also be cases where evasion powers did something useful when encountering a card.Alahazra is encountering a boon remotely and wishes to add a blessing to the check; she's got one on top of her deck. Can she cast Detect Evil to encounter Koko from her current location, take 1 Ranged Combat damage Before You Act, use Stanching Buckler to draw the blessing, do the check for the boon and then do the delayed combat check with Koko?No checks within a check. You can't use Detect -whatever- or Alahazra's ability in the midst of a check.
I don't agree. Especially since I think that, in your example (were it legal), you would fight the monster as part of Detect Evil before you got the blessing. It looks to me to be no different than using Alahazra's ability to acquire BotG to use on a check.
Before You Act, Koko deals 1 Ranged Combat damage, which is not part of a check. 1 card is discarded as damage. The Stanching Buckler then allows you to draw one card. No checks have happened yet. You aren't allowed to do the combat check until the remote encounter is over, hopefully acquiring you a nice Magic Axe of Koko-Slaying.
You can definitely have a new encounter during Before You Act (all those henchmen and villains that summon creatures for you to fight), so why can't you Before You Act during an encounter?
I think that allowing indirect card plays to resolve an encounter allows you to do pretty much anything (given the right combination of known cards and powers) that isn't explicitly prohibited. That you can do this is pretty much implied by Restoration's 'You cannot play this during an encounter'. I assume that we are going to be told to play like we used to; if not, I look forward to submitting written proofs that my planned card play is legal.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Trying to push the rules past the breaking point is *not* making the game better. It's just frustrating players and designers alike. Games with thousands of card interactions do *not* benefit from making us dictate the outcome of each and every possible interaction—that just makes the game harder to approach and a whole lot less fun.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can definitely have a new encounter during Before You Act (all those henchmen and villains that summon creatures for you to fight), so why can't you Before You Act during an encounter?
Before You Act specifically happens before a check, where it's safe. If you try to make a check happen *within* a check, the game will break, because even basic questions don't have answers. For example, if I played a blessing on the *outside* check, can I play a blessing on the *inside* check?
NO NESTED CHECKS. "Finish one thing before you start something else" isn't just a good idea—it's the law.
Vic, you deserve a medal for your capacity to make short, clear, obvious and just plain perfect interventions.
... This said I'm still a bit frustrated because I play Balazar in a large group and have no time to play more than one character.
So I was expecting "Tips on using Balazar please", especially while struggling so much during AP0 to get things right for me and my new players.
There have been many interestning comments and news in that thread (including from Mike and Vic), but I'm still missing some basic tips to better play Balazar.
It seems there is absolutely no clear tactic on how/when to play his different powers, what cards to keep in deck, what to do really with Padrig (out of plain Strength checks), and so on.
Or is it me becoming really tired/bored after too many failures on AP0?
... This said I'm still a bit frustrated because I play Balazar in a large group and have no time to play more than one character.
So I was expecting "Tips on using Balazar please", especially while struggling so much during AP0 to get things right for me and my new players.
There have been many interestning comments and news in that thread (including from Mike and Vic), but I'm still missing some basic tips to better play Balazar.
It seems there is absolutely no clear tactic on how/when to play his different powers, what cards to keep in deck, what to do really with Padrig (out of plain Strength checks), and so on.
Or is it me becoming really tired/bored after too many failures on AP0?
Okay, here's what I can give from what I know:
Play Padrig asap. Combat checks should always involve using Padrig's ability, since your spell casting is terrible. Make sure before you explore that you have a way of activating his power.Spells should be focused on buffing abilities. These should be used either to get monsters or to allow you to succeed at non-combat checks you'd otherwise have issues with (maybe a check to acquire a spell?)
I play in large scale games, so allies and blessings generally only have 'discard to explore' text on them to me, so I can't help you there.
I'm not sure how much that added, but it's what I know. Also, if you're frustrated with the B scenarios, I'd recommend jumping to AD1 and getting back to the B set.
Not just for Balazar, Frencois, but arcane casters in general need to find Mirror Image as soon as possible. This makes dealing with before you act/combat/after you act damage a lot more manageable (at least for that turn you have the spell active). It's saved my bacon for Enora more than once with the Arboreal blights and mongrel monsters.
Balazar has a better time than any other caster at dealing with Carrion golems (hunt them down for your friends). They have beaten the snot out of my Enora and Shardra. On occasion, with those characters, I've had to beat them up with a d6 for strength, no weapons and a few blessings. He probably needs less help from other people on combat checks than anyone since his spoils (monsters) can give him a stacking bonus.
It's wacky, but you could give Balazar one cure spell. You can discard spells for monsters in hand, cure (banish) to get those spells back into your deck then roll from there.
My understanding is that Padrig is never in your hand after you first get him. He's displayed for the entire scenario and therefore can never be taken as damage/forced to bury, etc. This is a neat advantage where you almost always have a source of combat/strength boosting available as long as you have spells/monsters.
Consider Sagacity instead of Agility/Brilliance if you don't have a dex/int based character in your group. Wisdom boosting is useful for recharging cures, divine attack spells and many potential wis-survive/perception checks for locations/situations. It also guarantees anyone with the divine skill(imrijka/Adowyn/Seelah in particular) will auto succeed at acquiring ALL blessings for a turn.
Edit: Also any character using a d4 for divine (untrained) has a 75% chance of acquiring all blessings for one turn with sagacity on them.
Unless I'm forgetting the wording on Sagacity, it wouldn't help with untrained Divine checks. Divine isn't necessarily a Wisdom check. Adding a bonus to Wisdom would only help a Divine check if your character had a Wisdom based Divine skill listed on his or her character card.
|
AD0 was pretty rough as Balazar. I had a tough time getting any sort of engine rolling. But once I acquired Mirror Image and started AD1, Padrig's power became pretty awesome. With that first Skill Feat and the Veteran trait on Padrig, I was rolling d10+d6+4 on combat checks out the gate before any assistance for myself or others.
I play in large scale games, so allies and blessings generally only have 'discard to explore' text on them to me, so I can't help you there.
When it comes to blessings, I think that this is RotR/S&S logig. First of all, allies are just better at generating explores. A ton of allies give you additional benefits on exploration. A basic card like 'frog' is far better at exploring than any blessing.
Second, especially in large games, you need your blessing to help you make checks. When you hit AP2 there are a ton of cards that require your whole team to make a check. Your blessings need to go primarily to assuring you make the roles to beat henchmen and close locations, and should only occasionally be used for explorations.
AD0 was pretty rough as Balazar. I had a tough time getting any sort of engine rolling. But once I acquired Mirror Image and started AD1, Padrig's power became pretty awesome. With that first Skill Feat and the Veteran trait on Padrig, I was rolling d10+d6+4 on combat checks out the gate before any assistance for myself or others.
Thanks all. Will try to dig a Mirror Image. Not easy in a 6 players game but at least I have a goal :-)
I play in large scale games, so allies and blessings generally only have 'discard to explore' text on them to me, so I can't help you there.
When it comes to blessings, I think that this is RotR/S&S logig. First of all, allies are just better at generating explores. A ton of allies give you additional benefits on exploration. A basic card like 'frog' is far better at exploring than any blessing.
Second, especially in large games, you need your blessing to help you make checks. When you hit AP2 there are a ton of cards that require your whole team to make a check. Your blessings need to go primarily to assuring you make the roles to beat henchmen and close locations, and should only occasionally be used for explorations.
That's the problem, though. Just because you now need the blessings to beat checks, that doesn't change the fact that you still need the blessings to have enough explorations to find and corner the villain in time. So either I have to use a blessing to help another character, and risk the group losing on time because we didn't explore enough, or I save the blessing to explore on my own and risk one of my allies falling behind on explores and we fail on time anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's the problem, though. Just because you now need the blessings to beat checks, that doesn't change the fact that you still need the blessings to have enough explorations to find and corner the villain in time. So either I have to use a blessing to help another character, and risk the group losing on time because we didn't explore enough, or I save the blessing to explore on my own and risk one of my allies falling behind on explores and we fail on time anyway.
... A ton of allies give you additional benefits on exploration...Second, especially in large games, you need your blessing to help you make checks. ...
I agree. There is a kind of multiple-pain in large groups :
- You have much less turns to play before the clock is over to start with- Blessings must be used to avoid barriers that involve everyone or henchmen/closing because you will only get one chance and can't afford to dig down the full location (too many cards on the table vs 30 turns)
- Some characters just don't have many allies in their deck and no way to recharge them
- Losing vs a villain can cost you a lot of turns
I would like one day to have a stat on how many encounters a character does on average depending on the number of characters entering the scenario.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's the problem, though. Just because you now need the blessings to beat checks, that doesn't change the fact that you still need the blessings to have enough explorations to find and corner the villain in time. So either I have to use a blessing to help another character, and risk the group losing on time because we didn't explore enough, or I save the blessing to explore on my own and risk one of my allies falling behind on explores and we fail on time anyway.
... A ton of allies give you additional benefits on exploration...Second, especially in large games, you need your blessing to help you make checks. ...
I agree. There is a kind of multiple-pain in large groups :
- You have much less turns to play before the clock is over to start with
- Blessings must be used to avoid barriers that involve everyone or henchmen/closing because you will only get one chance and can't afford to dig down the full location (too many cards on the table vs 30 turns)
- Some characters just don't have many allies in their deck and no way to recharge them
- Losing vs a villain can cost you a lot of turnsI would like one day to have a stat on how many encounters a character does on average depending on the number of characters entering the scenario.
In a 6 player game, you will win the vast majority of games by completing two explorations (your free exploration + 1 additional exploration) per turn. Occasionally you get exceptionally unlucky and need more explorations than that, but the increased number of locations actually actually makes extreme deviation from the median less likely.
In a 6 player game, that means each player needs to spend about five cards generating additional explorations. When I play, the bulk of those come from allies, spells, abilities, and random boons I pick up from the exploring decks. I generally try to avoid using my blessings unless I have too (have a hand that requires me to play card to cycle the deck, have healing available and nothing to use it on, or I need to close a location out quickly because of its powers/board position)
The clock gets in your head, but it's not as pressing as you think. One extra explore a turn; you can do that! The key is making sure that those extra explores banish cards, and seizing the opportunity to kill henchmen, close locations and beat the villain when the come up. Missing those rolls costs you a ton of turns, and that is what puts you up against the clock.
In short, blessings aren't particularly good at generating explorations, especially in Wrath. At best, they give you an additional explore with no benefit, and many of the corrupted blessings actually restrict when you can use them. In contrast, allies are great at generating explorations. You can use them all the time, and many of them give you an added benefit during your exploration.
So you're saying you can typically finish the game in 60 explores?
That's a really interesting statement and I wish I had metrics to examine it !
So you're saying you can typically finish the game in 60 explores?
That's a really interesting statement and I wish I had metrics to examine it !
In general, you take about 5 explores to clear a location, assuming each location banishes one card from the deck and that you both nail the henchman and close the location when it comes up. Obviously other factors can change that (Damn you, Giant Fly!), but the more locations you have, the more likely you are to approach that '5 explores per location'
60 explores gives you plenty of time for some minor things to go wrong, for you to have some bad luck, and still win.
So you're saying you can typically finish the game in 60 explores?
That's a really interesting statement and I wish I had metrics to examine it !
In general, you take about 5 explores to clear a location, assuming each location banishes one card from the deck and that you both nail the henchman and close the location when it comes up. Obviously other factors can change that (Damn you, Giant Fly!), but the more locations you have, the more likely you are to approach that '5 explores per location'
60 explores gives you plenty of time for some minor things to go wrong, for you to have some bad luck, and still win.
I think you can mitigate that. In best case scenario (you defeat 100% of banes, 100% of henchmen allow you to close and 100% of closing attempts succeed) then in average indeed you need 5.5 explorations.
Because of the above very high assumptions (our success ratio vs banes is more in the 70% in WotR - especially due to lack of attack cards or adequate skill), I'm more into thinking that the average number of explorations is somewhere between 6.5 and 7.5 per location.For a total for a 6 players / 8 locations scenario of 50-60 explorations.
I will let aside the fact that you will sometimes need to lose your first explore to convert it to something else (curing...), because it's somehow balanced by the fact that you sometimes win extra explore due to different powers.
Bottom line you need to be able to explore twice each turn. In RoR and S&S usually tanks were below that level and casters above with the balance leaning in the right direction so if you didn't lose turn with unecessary looting you were fine most of the time.
In WotR due to the additional losing of cards for casters mainly, we are far from an easy "twice each turn".
That's my feedback from playing large groups. Happy to discuss.
Right, at 5.5 per location and 8 locations we are sitting at 44
60 gives you some leeway and I daresay is around the right number.
So you're saying you can typically finish the game in 60 explores?
That's a really interesting statement and I wish I had metrics to examine it !
In general, you take about 5 explores to clear a location, assuming each location banishes one card from the deck and that you both nail the henchman and close the location when it comes up. Obviously other factors can change that (Damn you, Giant Fly!), but the more locations you have, the more likely you are to approach that '5 explores per location'
60 explores gives you plenty of time for some minor things to go wrong, for you to have some bad luck, and still win.
Ooh, that's something testable. Not the 60 explores, that sounds about right to me (as a best case scenario, but Frencois responded to that better than I ever could), the fact that everyone has 5 explores without using any blessings.
So, what can explore? Obviously allies, and it's pretty safely a 100% explore rate on allies in your group. Beyond that, there's Fiery Glare, which is 3 spells, and what else? Detect demons has maybe a 50% success rate? That's, we'll call it 2 more. Are there any items in WotR at this point that explore? We'll go with each character has 1 exploration ability in hand beyond allies. So, how many allies are there in each deck? In order: 3,3,2,2,1,2,2,3,0,3,2. Average is 2.1 allies per deck. So, in everyone's starting deck, they have 3.1 explores (rounding to 19). That means you have to find or cure to restore about 11 additional allies or similar explore in order to get to that 60 you need. And that's assuming you cycle your whole deck to get all of them. Mathematically, I just can't reach 60. I'm not trying to call you out, I have little doubt you've had the success you claim. I just can't find the numbers you're getting.
Ooh, that's something testable. Not the 60 explores, that sounds about right to me (as a best case scenario, but Frencois responded to that better than I ever could), the fact that everyone has 5 explores without using any blessings.So, what can explore? Obviously allies, and it's pretty safely a 100% explore rate on allies in your group. Beyond that, there's Fiery Glare, which is 3 spells, and what else? Detect demons has maybe a 50% success rate? That's, we'll call it 2 more. Are there any items in WotR at this point that explore? We'll go with each character has 1 exploration ability in hand beyond allies. So, how many allies are there in each deck? In order: 3,3,2,2,1,2,2,3,0,3,2. Average is 2.1 allies per deck. So, in everyone's starting deck, they have 3.1 explores (rounding to 19). That means you have to find or cure to restore about 11 additional allies or similar explore in order to get to that 60 you need. And that's assuming you cycle your whole deck to get all of them. Mathematically, I just can't reach 60. I'm not trying to call you out, I have little doubt you've had the success you claim. I just can't find the numbers you're getting.
I don't mind being called out!
First of all, I will confess that I am playing AP2 now. As a result, I am thinking less about what life is like in the B scenarios. When you are running into henchmen that require you to through 4+ cards to beat them, it makes you reevaluate some of your assumptions about blessings.
Second, you pick up blessings and allies when you play and you can use those to explore. Between that and cures, I can get most of the explores I need without using too many blessings.
To give an example, here are some numbers from the party I am currently using.
Crowe
Extra Explores - 4: 2 allies, 2 Fiery Gazes (potentially rechargeable)
Healing: 1d4 cards (Prism)
Imrijka
Extra Explores - 2+: 2 allies, +50% chance to explore when defeating a monster.
Healing: 1d4+1 cards (cure)
Balazar
Extra Explores - 5: 4 allies, 1 BloodScent (potentially , rechargeable)
Healing: None
Kyra
Extra Explores - 3: 2 allies, 1 Fiery Gaze (potentially rechargeable)
Healing: How much do you need? (2 Cure, 2 Life Drain, +1 every time you play a blessing or fight an undead/demon)
Seelah
Extra Explores - 3.5: 3 allies, 1 Detect Demon (potentially rechargeable
Healing: 1d4+1 (cure. Will go up a bunch when/if I get the Imodae armor from AP2)
Can you do that out of the gate? No. But you can do it early in the campaign. All those upgrades are possible during AP1. And that's a party that basically only uses blessings to explore when a) it has visible healing to spare b) when circumstances force you to close a location ASAP or c) when you hand gets clogged and you need to open up space.
Thanks for expanding on that. That does look about right for the average group, and knowing that you will use acquired blessings for explores definitely changes the math. This is a good reference. (I will say it was somewhat fortunate that you've already gotten all 3 fiery gazes, but otherwise that looks about right).
Good point.
However in WotR temp closing is usualy more costly and more difficult that in previous games.
As is spreading the party.
So I need a little more playing before evalujating that impact.
Technically, you only need to close 2 locations.
However, that actually doesn't change the math. No matter how many locations are permanently closed vs temp closed at the end of the game, you have to dig through each deck approx. the same amount. Think of it this way, you closed 2 locations, and the villain escaped, and is in one of 3 locations. The problem is, you still have to have characters stationed at the other 3 locations because they must be temp closed when the villain is encountered to actually win. This means that there's still an even distribution of turns spent on the non-villain locations as the locations that may have the villain, though you don't necessarily have to spend as much on explores. The end result is that each character is still going to have to spend resources in order to dig, on average, somewhere in the 5.5 to 7.5 per location range in order to reliably defeat the villain.
isaic, there are a couple of factors that affect the calculation once you get to the position you are describing. A small factor is the fact that cards/powers that move characters around during or at the end of a turn are a bit more prevalent here in WotR than they have been in the past (in WotR's base set, there are Crowe's power, Alain's cohort Donovan, the spell Skitter, the item Potion of Striding, and the ally Riding Horse). With these tools, you can have characters go to explore at a potential villain location during their turn and then move back to stand guard for temporary closing duties after their turn is over. While this does not need to be min-maxed for success, it can certainly add several explorations at key locations while leaving a punishing ignorable location alone.
I had actually considered the factor of being able to reposition, but left it out since the post was already getting too long. I feel that doing so would be an inefficient strategy on the whole, with the exception of certain characters with evasion capabilities, since if they actually do find the villain, then the Villain can still flee. This does end up allowing some increased level of flexibility, since there's an additional closed location, but I think at most you're saving maybe 2-3 explores. Not insignificant, but, as I said, the post was already getting to be pretty rambling and I didn't think it needed another tangent.
Something else now regarding Balazar. It looks to me like there would never really be a reason for his player not to display Padrig on his first turn. Is there a way that Padrig could ever get "undisplayed"? Or is Padrigs power basically just another power that could, in theory, be on his card (if there was space)?
Separating the card for the eidolon allow them the make other version of the eidolon which possess different powers. Adds a lot of flexibility
A couple ideas from the RPG:
RPG Eidolons are subject to dismissal and similar effects. In the card game, I could see an enemy with the power "Before you act, [succeed at a (whatever) check or] discard any displayed cards with the Outsider trait."
PCs are also subject to that when not on the Prime Material plane, at least in some situations. ("If encountered at an Abyssal location, before you act succeed at a (whatever) check or move to a random non-Abyssal location; (this card) is evaded.")
The other mechanical reason to dismiss your Eidolon in the RPG is to use your summon monster spell-like ability, but that isn't reflected in the card game. There's also the social reason of "having a really weird monster following you around in town", but that isn't reflected in the card game either. :)
Nothing yet messes with displayed cards (at least nothing that didn't do the displaying). But that doesn't mean there won't be at some point.
Nothing yet messes with displayed cards (at least nothing that didn't do the displaying). But that doesn't mean there won't be at some point.
Thanks, that is certainly a future possibility.
Was this ever resolved? Remain tuned?Stay tuned.So, since no Paizo employee debunked it, I take it that later on in the AP, even if Balazar defeats a 'basic' monster he won't be able to take it into his hand?
It sometimes takes them a few weeks to reach a satisfying conclusion.
Patience, Grasshopper.
Here is a Balazar tip: Get both copies of Charm Monster in your deck. It will let you load up on monsters in your hand since the monster you draw from the box to lower the combat check is defeated and banished.
Here is a Balazar tip: Get both copies of Charm Monster in your deck. It will let you load up on monsters in your hand since the monster you draw from the box to lower the combat check is defeated and banished.
Now I want to play Balazar in Rise of the Runelords so he can get the loot Summon Monster.
Here is a Balazar tip: Get both copies of Charm Monster in your deck. It will let you load up on monsters in your hand since the monster you draw from the box to lower the combat check is defeated and banished.
That's freaking awesome if it works (I don't know the card - are you sure it's not summoned, for instance).
AP 2 card? I didn't see it when looking for basics.
Also, it's interesting that we had Charm Person in RotR, Charm Animal in S&S, and now Charm Monster in WotR. I wonder what the next one will be in MM? Assuming there's one at all.
If you do not have the Arcane or Divine skill, banish this card after playing it.
Balazar is also appropriately pictured in the artwork.
Yeah, that's pretty much tailor made for Balazar (and the other 'mancers). Looking forward to it.
Also good for characters who get other benefits for defeating monsters.
Charm Monster is, in fact, amazing on Balazar.