The Elven Entanglement and the Carnivorous Stump


Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

We actually played through the scenario recently, knowing about all its difficulties, but we never even encountered a single animal card, so the stump never came into play. However, the henchmen hid well, deep into the location decks. We were lucky to find the villain on the last possible blessing, and in fact defeat it. We rated the scenario as difficult, but for entirely different reasons than what I've read about here. :)


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Longshot11 wrote:
elcoderdude wrote:
After you empty a location of cards, then you can attempt to close it. That's the point of Vinst. (Also, one location will have a Vescavor Swarm.)
I get that's what you CAN do with him; however, since emptying all locations is almost certainly the wrong way to play this scenario (unless you play, I dunno, a 1-2 player game?), that seems to me highly unlikely to be what he's MEANT to do.

You can also return him to the box to temp close a particularly nasty location as part of the villain encounter. Attempting to temporarily close is still attempting to close a location -- you just don't do any of the "When Permanently Closed" stuff or banish cards if you succeed. There are two locations you can permanently close off-the-bat (villain's location and the swarm), every other location you can only permanently close by sending the villain there as part of him escaping or by emptying the deck. Emptying every deck is a huge drain on resources, so bouncing the villain around or simply winning by temp closing locations rather than permanently closing them seems like a better way to progress for larger player counts.


Can't really speak to doing with with a larger group but had a pretty easy time of this scenario in a 2 man with Imrijka and Adowyn. We forgot to shuffle in a swarm, so it was just the villain and tangled traps and closed every location by emptying the deck except for one where we beat the villian to close it and we still finished with 8 turns to spare due to aggressive use of additional explorations.

We used allies and Blessings pretty much exclusively for extra explores, and had pretty good luck about successfully getting more the allies and blessing that appeared in the decks. Imrijka's bonus explorations for winning a fight were pretty pivotal. Always pick a fight at the watchtower when you get a boon for the 50% chance at a free explore. Finished the location about 3 turns. Imrijka grabbed Vinst from the fiendish tree and managed to roll a free explore off it, so we didn't lose a turn to get him.

We did get pretty lucky in some ways though, a Cure brought back 5 allies for Adowyn, which had all been used to explore and were used to explore again. We almost never failed to pick up an ally or blessing and almost never used used a blessing for extra dice on a roll.

The only animals we saw were when We pulled rallying cry as a barrier and both of us succeeded. Adowyn pulled the barrier where you get to summon and beat up corrupted solider for an ally (Since Adowyn was alone at the location we were undecided if Adowyn could just recharge a card, evade the soldier and get the ally, so just shot him to death with a hand crossbow).

Imijka only lost 1 fight but it was a painful loss (only cure had already been used and failed to recharge, lost 3 cards in damage, 2 weapons and archers braces, resulting in being weaponless for 2 turns.)

Still we finished with almost a full 1/3 of the blessing deck left, even after emptying every location and chasing the giant fly around several times. But if we had worse dice luck or needed blessing for rolls instead of explores it might not have been possible.


Sounds like an awesome run. I'm using imrijka too and she's pretty cool when the gods of the dice smile on you..


Kreisel wrote:
Imrijka grabbed Vinst from the fiendish tree and managed to roll a free explore off it, so we didn't lose a turn to get him.

I'm curious, what was your purpose for Vinst, or you just had two armors to recharge for BYA/AYA dmg and you thought you might as well meet the Tree?


I had looted stalker armor off the location last turn & was already holding one. Taking the BYA/AYA dmg let me rechange them rather than discard to cycle my hand. Had Combat heavy hand (longbow, archers bracers and a shortbow to rechange for her power) so chances of losing were slim. 50% chance to still get my explore and get the auto close for a location.

I placed high value in the autoclose ability but that might be in part cause I'm basied after loosing the first scenario once when I spent 5 Turns trying to close the armory once it was empty because I kept failing my checks to aquire. Failed to get a freaking shortbow on 1d10+1


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just ran this scenario and got thrashed hard... I had the boss down to the last 2-3 cards in two locations, but blessings deck ran out.

I would like to know if the above questions were ever officially answered. Does defeating the stump allow you to close the location?


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
nomadicc wrote:

I just ran this scenario and got thrashed hard... I had the boss down to the last 2-3 cards in two locations, but blessings deck ran out.

I would like to know if the above questions were ever officially answered. Does defeating the stump allow you to close the location?

Official answer is "no" since the Stump is summoned, and summoned cards never let you close by the rulebook. If it was intended otherwise, there would have been an FAQ entry letting us know that. Since there is no such entry, the rulebook is correct and the stump doesn't let you close.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I understand that, but I guess I'm asking for clarification because there's room for confusion. For example, the Stump is not used as a henchman in any of the scenarios up through pack 4. If the only instance where it would be in play is through the animal encounter bait & switch in the Elven Entanglement, then the close location text is extraneous.

So, is the close location text an exception to the summon rule, or should it just not be there?

Scarab Sages

We all want it to be true (that it helps you close) because it would possibly augur better for the rest of the set.

Alas, it is not true - the scenario does suck as hard as you perceive it does. That text is only there for the same reason that Black Magga from Runelords has a "check to defeat" (and other seemingly-extraneous info) - so that if it's used in some homebrew scenario or something, it can be used to close locations.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
nomadicc wrote:
I understand that, but I guess I'm asking for clarification because there's room for confusion.

Any confusion you may have is unfortunately grasping for reasons why the rules shouldn't apply. The rules do apply, however, so you can't close. Vic hints that this is design intent above anyway: "Even if that was desired, it can't possibly fit on the card!" Even if that was desired indicates that the stump allowing you to close is not desired.

The text is there because the text is there. It is meaningless so far in the regular AP, however homebrew scenarios or Organized Play scenarios may feature that henchman inside of location decks proper where the text would come into play.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
skizzerz wrote:
Any confusion you may have is unfortunately grasping for reasons why the rules shouldn't apply.

I could do without the patronizing comment above, but otherwise thanks for the responses.


nomadicc wrote:

I understand that, but I guess I'm asking for clarification because there's room for confusion. For example, the Stump is not used as a henchman in any of the scenarios up through pack 4. If the only instance where it would be in play is through the animal encounter bait & switch in the Elven Entanglement, then the close location text is extraneous.

So, is the close location text an exception to the summon rule, or should it just not be there?

The way I see it (and Mike may correct me) is that reason a card is made an Henchman is NOT that it is supposed to be a henchman in any scenario NEITHER it is that it is supposed to help close a location.

The reason a card is made an henchman is that it is not shuffled in a facedown deck in the box. I. e. it can be found easily in the box before play (to be add in a location) or during play (typically being summoned). Servitor demons is a good example in WotR.

Therefore : there is absolutely no reason to automaticaly link henchman and closing locations (even if indeed many henchmen help doing so - but that's back to the "cards do only what they say" golden rule).

In the case of this specific henchman, the closing text on the card may be of use later or in SotR or in any home-built game, but certainly not when the hench is summoned. No issue there.

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion / The Elven Entanglement and the Carnivorous Stump All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion