Another WotR Kyra Question


Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion


Should Wrath Kyra's first power count as playing a spell (so Blessings of Pharasma can give it maximum punch)? Or does it just happen to share similar phrasing with other spontaneous casters' powers?

WotR Kyra Character Sheet wrote:
For your check to defeat a bane that has the Demon or Undead trait, you may recharge a spell (□ or blessing) to use your Divine skill + 1d8 and add the Attack, Divine, and Magic traits.


Also, can it be used if the monster's powers say you cannot play spells with the Attack trait?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Good question. This is something that would definitely need input from a designer to know if that was left out on purpose or if it was a mistake. Personally, I can see it not being treated as a spell because it seems to be a representation of the damaging side of channeling positive energy which is not a spell-like ability in the RPG. But again, we'd need input from the designers to know for sure.


elcoderdude wrote:
Also, can it be used if the monster's powers say you cannot play spells with the Attack trait?

Oooh, I kinda like that. You don't have to worry about flubbing the Knowledge (or what have you) roll before blasting away at those demons!

Another also: this would count as a non-combat Wisdom check, right? So even if Blessings of Pharasma don't add two dice, Milani or Shelyn are doubleplusgood for it. Neat!


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I asked this in the WotR initial impressions thread. Didn't get an official response, but players said it was based on a non-spell ability, so take that for what you will.

If you were using the ability on a Ghost's Divine check to defeat, you could use Milani or Shelyn to get a double d12 buff, but if you're using it on a demon's regular ole Combat check it's a no go.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Whether or not is is a combat or non-combat check depends on the check to defeat on the bane. If you use Kyra's power for a combat check to defeat, then it is a combat check. If you used it for a non-combat check to defeat, then it is a non-combat check.

It gets even crazier though. Imagine a Demon trait monster had an Acrobatics check to defeat and Kyra used her power. Would it still count as an Acrobatics check? If it did, it would be a non-combat, Acrobatics, Divine, Wisdom, Attack, Magic check.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
It gets even crazier though. Imagine a Demon trait monster had an Acrobatics check to defeat and Kyra used her power. Would it still count as an Acrobatics check?

I doubt it. Kyra's power seems to replace the skill used in the same way that a Mattock does. If a barrier has a Dexterity check and I use a Mattock to replace it with a Strength check (I just looked in the rulebook and it does say that some powers replace the skill), I don't think it's a Dexterity check any more. Likewise, Kyra's check would become Divine instead of Acrobatics.

Combat checks seem to be unique in that (i) "Combat" is not a skill, and (ii) the Combat-ness of a check stays the same if you (re-)define the skill. But it would be nice to have some rules backing for that view.


Nefrubyr wrote:
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
It gets even crazier though. Imagine a Demon trait monster had an Acrobatics check to defeat and Kyra used her power. Would it still count as an Acrobatics check?

I doubt it. Kyra's power seems to replace the skill used in the same way that a Mattock does. If a barrier has a Dexterity check and I use a Mattock to replace it with a Strength check (I just looked in the rulebook and it does say that some powers replace the skill), I don't think it's a Dexterity check any more. Likewise, Kyra's check would become Divine instead of Acrobatics.

Combat checks seem to be unique in that (i) "Combat" is not a skill, and (ii) the Combat-ness of a check stays the same if you (re-)define the skill. But it would be nice to have some rules backing for that view.

This is essentially what I was wondering. Since Kyra's power isn't phrased "For your combat check," does it retain that aspect of the original check, or does the check become "Kyra's Divine check to defeat"?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

rulebook wrote:
Some cards allow you to use a particular skill for a specific type of check, or to use one skill instead of another. (These cards generally say things like “For your combat check, use your Strength or Melee skill,” or “Use your Strength skill instead of your Diplomacy skill.”) You may play only 1 such card or use only 1 such power to determine which skill you’re using.

The rules intentionally don't require the phrase "for your combat check" to make their magic happen. Kyra's power is definitely doing what's described above.

I will get back to you on whether or not using it should count as playing a spell.


Johnny Chronicle wrote:
Nefrubyr wrote:
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
It gets even crazier though. Imagine a Demon trait monster had an Acrobatics check to defeat and Kyra used her power. Would it still count as an Acrobatics check?

I doubt it. Kyra's power seems to replace the skill used in the same way that a Mattock does. If a barrier has a Dexterity check and I use a Mattock to replace it with a Strength check (I just looked in the rulebook and it does say that some powers replace the skill), I don't think it's a Dexterity check any more. Likewise, Kyra's check would become Divine instead of Acrobatics.

Combat checks seem to be unique in that (i) "Combat" is not a skill, and (ii) the Combat-ness of a check stays the same if you (re-)define the skill. But it would be nice to have some rules backing for that view.

This is essentially what I was wondering. Since Kyra's power isn't phrased "For your combat check," does it retain that aspect of the original check, or does the check become "Kyra's Divine check to defeat"?

The way Kyra's skill is phrased, she's not replacing what the check-against is. So the interaction gets a bit weird.

So if we had a Demon with Acrobatics to defeat:
-She'd use her Divine skill (1d12+2) +1d8, and any other modifiers that apply to her Wisdom or Divine skill but not such checks.
-She'd use any modifiers on Acrobatics checks because the check type didn't change. No "skill" blessings would be indicated.

If it had Dex or Acrobatics instead, Calistria (not Shelyn!) and Milani would be indicated, because it's a Dex check on (1d12+2)+1d8.

If it's a combat check, it becomes a combat Divine check. Now your modifiers that apply to Wisdom or Divine checks would apply; but no skill blessings would be indicated, as there is none for combat Wisdom.

In all cases, if Vic decides that it counts as playing a spell, Pharasma should work.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Vic Wertz wrote:
rulebook wrote:
Some cards allow you to use a particular skill for a specific type of check, or to use one skill instead of another. (These cards generally say things like “For your combat check, use your Strength or Melee skill,” or “Use your Strength skill instead of your Diplomacy skill.”) You may play only 1 such card or use only 1 such power to determine which skill you’re using.

The rules intentionally don't require the phrase "for your combat check" to make their magic happen. Kyra's power is definitely doing what's described above.

I will get back to you on whether or not using it should count as playing a spell.

Are you saying that we should take Kyra's power as "instead of"? I think since it is missing that phrase, I didn't take it that way. I assumed it would still count as the kind of check specified on the bane.

When a card says "For your combat check..." the check remains a combat check, while also becoming the skill specified by the card you played or power you used. Likewise, I'd read Kyra's power to be such that it still remained the check specified by the bane, but also became a Divine check.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Sandslice wrote:

The way Kyra's skill is phrased, she's not replacing what the check-against is. So the interaction gets a bit weird.

So if we had a Demon with Acrobatics to defeat:
-She'd use her Divine skill (1d12+2) +1d8, and any other modifiers that apply to her Wisdom or Divine skill but not such checks.
-She'd use any modifiers on Acrobatics checks because the check type didn't change. No "skill" blessings would be indicated.

I don't think that is quite right. Even if it isn't "instead of" it is still the kind of power that determines the skill. She is determining the skill to be Divine. And that means she is making a Wisdom check. So anything adding to a Divine check or a Wisdom check would apply to a check made with her power.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Sandslice wrote:

The way Kyra's skill is phrased, she's not replacing what the check-against is. So the interaction gets a bit weird.

So if we had a Demon with Acrobatics to defeat:
-She'd use her Divine skill (1d12+2) +1d8, and any other modifiers that apply to her Wisdom or Divine skill but not such checks.
-She'd use any modifiers on Acrobatics checks because the check type didn't change. No "skill" blessings would be indicated.

I don't think that is quite right. Even if it isn't "instead of" it is still the kind of power that determines the skill. She is determining the skill to be Divine. And that means she is making a Wisdom check. So anything adding to a Divine check or a Wisdom check would apply to a check made with her power.

I could certainly be wrong about this. Would it be both then? If you had things that applied to Acrobatics checks and Divine checks, you could use all of them? You aren't replacing Acrobatics, just using your Divine skill for the Acrobatics check.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Maybe. That is sort of what I'm wondering.

One the one hand, compare it to cards like Arcane Robes or Mattock. They say "instead of the normal skill" or something similar.

On the other hand, compare it to "For your Combat check..." cards. They don't replace the "Combat" skill of the check. But, you could see them as replacing Strength or Melee.

So, I'm not really sure whether it remains the type of check specified by the bane (Acrobatics in our example). But I'm pretty sure it becomes a Divine check.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

IMHO, the way I see it is this is Kyra's "channeling positive energy" ability (the old "turning undead" ability from when I was younger...).
It has nothing to do with spellcasting (and shouldn't - this is one of the key stuffs what make clerics different from wizards).

It has obviously the "Attack" trait but shouldn't be considered as playing a spell.

Note that some cards may forbid you to play "spells with the attack trait" and others to just add the "attack trait" to your check.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Frencois wrote:
Note that some cards may forbid you to play "spells with the attack trait" and others to just add the "attack trait" to your check.

This is what I noticed with the Carrion Golem. Presumably to mark the difference between Spells and Wands--though wands and earlier sets (RotR, at least) didn't have the attack trait, correct? It's been a while since I played one. I assumed it was a terminology change.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I think the wands (of Force Missile, of Scorching Ray) did have the Attack trait in RotR.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

If this power is based upon the RPG Channel Energy power, it would make sense for it not to count as a spell. Among other things, this allows it to bypass spell resistance which a Channel would do.

Further, I believe that the power as currently written, alows you to substitute it for any check to defeat a bane, be it Combat, Divine, Wisdom or something else.

1st Power:

For your check to defeat a bane that has the Demon or Undead trait, you may recharge a spell (□ or blessing) to use your Divine skill + 1d8 and add the Attack, Divine, and Magic traits.

Most blessings could add a die for sure. Not so sure if the skill related blessings could add 2 dice. If they can, I would argue that the check is a combat check at least vs. a monster bane.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
The rules intentionally don't require the phrase "for your combat check" to make their magic happen. Kyra's power is definitely doing what's described above.

Are you saying that we should take Kyra's power as "instead of"? I think since it is missing that phrase, I didn't take it that way. I assumed it would still count as the kind of check specified on the bane.

When a card says "For your combat check..." the check remains a combat check, while also becoming the skill specified by the card you played or power you used. Likewise, I'd read Kyra's power to be such that it still remained the check specified by the bane, but also became a Divine check.

What I'm saying is that her power is doing exactly the same thing that the phrase "for your combat check" does on weapons. It's not changing the type of check, but it is adding the skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, as traits to the check. The text in the rulebook under "Determine Which Skill You’re Using" applies here.

So if it's a combat check, it's still a combat check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

And if it's a Dexterity check, it's still a Dexterity check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Also, the design intent is that it does *not* count as playing a spell... unless any of you see some reason why that's terribly broken.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Vic Wertz wrote:
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
The rules intentionally don't require the phrase "for your combat check" to make their magic happen. Kyra's power is definitely doing what's described above.

Are you saying that we should take Kyra's power as "instead of"? I think since it is missing that phrase, I didn't take it that way. I assumed it would still count as the kind of check specified on the bane.

When a card says "For your combat check..." the check remains a combat check, while also becoming the skill specified by the card you played or power you used. Likewise, I'd read Kyra's power to be such that it still remained the check specified by the bane, but also became a Divine check.

What I'm saying is that her power is doing exactly the same thing that the phrase "for your combat check" does on weapons. It's not changing the type of check, but it is adding the skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, as traits to the check. The text in the rulebook under "Determine Which Skill You’re Using" applies here.

So if it's a combat check, it's still a combat check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

And if it's a Dexterity check, it's still a Dexterity check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

Great. That is how I read it, thanks for the confirmation.


The only thing I can think of is that she gets a reliable Spell Resistance bypass, but it can't easily exploit trait weaknesses; and the fact that it doesn't trigger things that trigger on spell (or Attack spell) casting can go either way.

With Kyra's limited martial-combat ability even compared to RotR, I think it's balanced.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I found the power handy so far. It looks to be great for low-level play. My worry was that it would not scale to higher levels but both of Kyra's roles seem to give the power a boost. The boost on Dawnflower's Flare certainly is much more significant.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
1970Zombie wrote:
I found the power handy so far. It looks to be great for low-level play. My worry was that it would not scale to higher levels but both of Kyra's roles seem to give the power a boost. The boost on Dawnflower's Flare certainly is much more significant.

It will of course get boosted by Wisdom skill feats, and since you're likely to take the Hierophant mythic path with Kyra, you will get a boost there as well.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

True. Have not looked at the mythic paths yet.


1970Zombie wrote:
True. Have not looked at the mythic paths yet.

Quickest rundown. Each has three powers.

1. Boost to two stat-skills' checks. (Passive)
2. When you make such checks, you can burn a number of charges to replace dice (best to worst) with d20s and do something else too. The thing is per-charge if it can apply.
3. In some case, you can also burn 5 charges to do something cool.

Hierophant's is Wisdom / Charisma, someone at the location cures 1 per charge burned, and Raise Dead. To save time looking at them, if you intend to play Kyra, you are probably taking Hierophant as it's the only path that boosts Wisdom.


Thanks for the clarifications, Vic! Looking forward to trying it out...

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Vic Wertz wrote:
Also, the design intent is that it does *not* count as playing a spell... unless any of you see some reason why that's terribly broken.

Thanks Vic. I do not think this is broken and it helps to differentiate her power from similar powers that do count as a spell.


I have an example of play and not 100% sure which option is right.

Kyra encounters a demon monster with a check to defeat (combat) of 15. Her current hand is a fiery glare and a cure spell.

A. She casts fiery glare for her combat check and uses d12 + 2d4 + 2 for her divine skill.

B. She casts fiery glare for her combat check and also recharges, since its a demon, the cure spell for a total of 2d12 + 2d4 + d8 + 4.

After a discussion, we decided it was A, but there was some disagreement that it could also be B.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

It is A. Kyra's power is something that defines the skill she is using. You can only do that once. So you can't play Fiery Glare to define the check and use her power to define the check on the same check.


You can only use one card or power that Determines Which Skill You're Using. (Page 12 of the WotR Rulebook; second paragraph under that section.)

So you can start with d12 + 2d4 + 2 (Fiery Glare) or d12 + d8 + 2 (recharge either Spell for Kyra's ability).


And with Kyra's healing power, it's almost always best to take the recharge from her power. 1d8 is slightly worse than 2d4, but you get to heal a card on you or someone else.


Vic Wertz wrote:
And if it's a Dexterity check, it's still a Dexterity check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

So just to confirm, you could use either a Blessing of Calistria or a Blessing of Shelyn to add two dice to such a check? It seems a bit like double-dipping.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

That's correct. It's one of the many times cards or powers change the way a check can be modified.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
jduteau wrote:
And with Kyra's healing power, it's almost always best to take the recharge from her power. 1d8 is slightly worse than 2d4, but you get to heal a card on you or someone else.

... And this is why when rebuilding decks between scenarios, we always give the crappy spells (except one cure) to Kyra and the good ones to other casters... because Kyra never really cast spells (except standard cure when needed on someone else's turn).


Frencois wrote:
... And this is why when rebuilding decks between scenarios, we always give the crappy spells (except one cure) to Kyra and the good ones to other casters... because Kyra never really cast spells (except standard cure when needed on someone else's turn).

Are you thinking of RotR or CD Kyra, not WotR Kyra? WotR Kyra needs standard attack spells so she can fight non-Demon/non-Undead monsters. Of which there are a few.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
elcoderdude wrote:
Frencois wrote:
... And this is why when rebuilding decks between scenarios, we always give the crappy spells (except one cure) to Kyra and the good ones to other casters... because Kyra never really cast spells (except standard cure when needed on someone else's turn).
Are you thinking of RotR or CD Kyra, not WotR Kyra? WotR Kyra needs standard attack spells so she can fight non-Demon/non-Undead monsters. Of which there are a few.

In our LARGE group, the chance that Kyra encounters a non-Demon/non-Undead monsters is so little that she usually can afford to lose that fight or ask for help on it.


I'm sorry if I'm coming off rude right now, but the trait/type problem is something I keep talking about since the middle of S&S and that is still completely unelegant in the rulebook. Please read this contribution until the end and take into account that I am not a native speaker.

Vic Wertz wrote:
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
The rules intentionally don't require the phrase "for your combat check" to make their magic happen. Kyra's power is definitely doing what's described above.

Are you saying that we should take Kyra's power as "instead of"? I think since it is missing that phrase, I didn't take it that way. I assumed it would still count as the kind of check specified on the bane.

When a card says "For your combat check..." the check remains a combat check, while also becoming the skill specified by the card you played or power you used. Likewise, I'd read Kyra's power to be such that it still remained the check specified by the bane, but also became a Divine check.

What I'm saying is that her power is doing exactly the same thing that the phrase "for your combat check" does on weapons. It's not changing the type of check, but it is adding the skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, as traits to the check. The text in the rulebook under "Determine Which Skill You’re Using" applies here.

So if it's a combat check, it's still a combat check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

And if it's a Dexterity check, it's still a Dexterity check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits.

You got to be kidding me Vic.

ROTR Rules p.12 wrote:

Some cards and powers affect only specific types of checks, such as

Dexterity checks, Acrobatics checks, or non-combat checks. If, on your
character card, the skill you’re using refers to another skill, both skills
count for the purpose of determining the type of check[...] Traits
also determine the type of check;

Therefore it is a Dexterity check and a Wisdom check at the very same time. I really thought that you tried to circumvent that with the whole "skills that are added to the check are not added as traits to the check" nonesense.

And for Irgy's question: By Vic's definition above you could not since both blessings refer to the type of the check not the traits of the check. But as the rules state that all traits influence the type, it is wrong to assume you could not play both (by 2 different characters of course) on the same check for 4 additional dice.

And of course you're all making an assumption here that is not in the rules (even Vic): The rules never say that the skill written on the card you encounter defines the type of the check. It only says which skill you can use when you attempt the check.

ROTR Rules p.11 wrote:

Each boon card has a section called Check to Acquire. This section

indicates the skills that can be used in checks to acquire the boon and
the difficulty of the checks.[...]
Each bane card has a section called Check to Defeat. This section
indicates the skills that can be used in checks against the bane and the
difficulty of the checks.

Only if you use it it then determines the type of the check. Of course if the card does not give you a skill but the type combat, it is dertermined as combat instead of the default non-combat type.

I know that Mike says that the "type" is not a mechanical term and therefore does not need definition but as cards refer to different types it clearly is a term and you accidentally gave the most awful definition inside a paragraph you labeled optional.

So a proper introduction of the TYPE OF A CHECK in the rulebook needs
1. to say clearly and not through the process of elimination that all checks using listed skills are non-combat checks.
2. say that the listed skill automatically becomes it's type if it should be after all.
3. to possibly drop the used skill, as the definition of the type respectively.
4. include referenced skills from your character card (if you followed step 2 and 3).
5. reevalutaion on whether or not skills need to be added as traits at all, since all cards that refer to that always speak of the skill as the type not the trait; or did you ever read of "your check that has the Strength trait?"

I think I will still "houserule" that you can only end up with one of the "basic" skills and one of the "secondary" skills in the type and which allow you to play cards on the check.
Therefore:

So if it lists a combat check, it's still a combat Divine, Wisdom check—and it now also has the Divine, (Wisdom,) Attack, and Magic traits.

And if it lists a (non-combat) Dexterity check, it's still a Dexterity non-combat Divine, Wisdom check—and it now also has the Divine, (Wisdom,) Attack, and Magic traits.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

We agree more than we disagree—you're just misunderstanding a lot of what I'm saying; in some cases, that's because you're divorcing it from its original context.

All of the stuff above "You got to be kidding me Vic": The context of the question I was replying to was "should [we] take Kyra's power as 'instead of'." So when I said "It's not changing the type of check," I meant that "the new skill is not replacing the required skill, it's adding to it." There are powers that explicitly replace the original skill, but Kyra's power (and standard weapon powers) don't do that. So when I said "So if it's a combat check, it's still a combat check—and it now also has the Divine, Wisdom, Attack, and Magic traits," that means it's a Combat check, a Divine check, a Wisdom check, an Attack check, and a Magic check.

Also, I want to caution you about quoting from the RotR rulebook, especially on this point. We've made a lot of clarifications regarding skills since then: the most current text would be the Wrath rulebook plus the Wrath FAQ.

Michael Klaus wrote:
The rules never say that the skill written on the card you encounter defines the type of the check.

You're somewhat correct there, in that there's no explicit statement of that fact, and you're right that there should be. But this set of examples shows that it's true:

Rulebook wrote:
For example, if you’re using the Arcane skill on a combat check, and your character card says that your Arcane skill is Intelligence +2, the check counts as both a combat Arcane check and a combat Intelligence check. Traits also determine the type of check; for example, if you’re attempting a combat check and you played a weapon that added the Ranged trait, it counts as a Ranged combat check.
Michael Klaus wrote:
you accidentally gave the most awful definition inside a paragraph you labeled optional.

I don't know what you're referring to here. Can you be specific?

As for your list:

1. Saying that would be like having a statement that says "all checks that don't use Dexterity are non-Dexterity checks." We already say "If It Isn’t Called Something, It Isn’t That Thing."

2. You're right that that can be clearer.

3. Not quite sure what you're asking for there.

4. The rules already say "The skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are added as traits to the check," and since traits also determine type, that's covered.

5. I'm pretty sure there are things that care about that.

Adventure Card Game Designer

Well, in

rulebook, p. 11 wrote:
Each bane card has a section called Check to Defeat. This section indicates the skills that can be used in checks against the bane and the difficulty of the checks.

I guess we could change "indicates" to "defines," but it sure seems pretty clearly defined to me.

Mike


Mike Selinker wrote:

Well, in

rulebook, p. 11 wrote:
Each bane card has a section called Check to Defeat. This section indicates the skills that can be used in checks against the bane and the difficulty of the checks.

I guess we could change "indicates" to "defines," but it sure seems pretty clearly defined to me.

Mike

Whenever you say, Mike, it looks good to you I suspect that you are victim to something we call Systemblindheit. I'm alleging that it is harder for you, as the original designer, than anybody else to emphasize the POV of a person who is new to the game.

Of course everyone who was introduced to the game by somebody else, at a convention for example, or looks into the forums for help get's the game quickly, but the sheer number of threads concerning "can I play card X on check Y?" indicate that it is hard to grasp the concept if one simply grabs the game off the shelf and learned to play by the rulebook. But I think with a few tweaks the rulebook could deliver that.

Vic Wertz wrote:
Also, I want to caution you about quoting from the RotR rulebook, especially on this point. We've made a lot of clarifications regarding skills since then: the most current text would be the Wrath rulebook plus the Wrath FAQ.

Oh. I am really sorry. I wrote ROTR but actually all those quotes stem from the freshly downloaded Wrath rulebook.

I am not looking this up right now, but either you could notice in the part from page 12 (the part about skills should be new) or you did not change the quoted parts since ROTR which could explain why they do not properly engage with changed parts.

Vic Wertz wrote:
I don't know what you're referring to here. Can you be specific?

The whole paragraph on Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check beats around the bush of what the type of the check might be. I put differnt parts of the definition in italics:

Spoiler:
WOTR p.12f wrote:

Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check(Optional).

Players may now play cards or use powers that affect your check.
Players may not do things that modify a skill unless you’re using that
skill, and players may not do things that affect combat unless you’re
attempting a combat check.
Do not add traits from these cards to the
check; for example, playing the spell Aid on a check does not give
the check the Divine trait.
Some cards and powers affect only specific types of checks, such as
Dexterity checks, Acrobatics checks, or non-combat checks. If, on your
character card, the skill you’re using refers to another skill, both skills
count for the purpose of determining the type of check.
For example,
if you’re using the Arcane skill on a combat check, and your character
card says that your Arcane skill is Intelligence +2, the check counts as
both a combat Arcane check and a combat Intelligence check. Traits
also determine the type of check;
for example, if you’re attempting a
combat check and you played a weapon that added the Ranged trait,
it counts as a Ranged combat check.
Some cards may allow you to replace a specific die with a different
one. For example, the location Sacristy allows you to roll your Divine
die in place of the normal die for a check to acquire a boon—this
means you’ll replace the die (not the skill) you would normally use
with your Divine die (not your Divine skill).

While actually you already needed the definition in the preceding paragraph:
"WOTR p.12f wrote:

Some cards allow you to use a particular skill for a specific type of

check, or to use one skill instead of another.

My propostition would sound like:

Spoiler:
Quote:

Determine Which Skill You’re Using.

Cards that require a check either specify the skill or skills you can
use to attempt the check or list "combat" as an option. You may choose
any of the listed skills for your check. For example, if a check lists
Dexterity, Disable,Strength, and Melee, you may use any one of those
listed skills to attempt your check. Even if your character doesn’t
have any of the skills listed for a check, you can still attempt the
check, but your die is a d4.
While all of these are considered non-combat checks (even if it listed
as the check to defeat on a monster card), you can attempt a combat
check by either using your Melee or Strength skill, or playing a card
or power that says "For your combat check."
Other cards and powers you might play at this point can allow you to
use a different skill. These generally say things like “Use your Strength
skill instead of your Diplomacy skill.” or "When you attempt a check
against a bane with the Undead trait you may use your Divine skill."
Few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they
instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your
die roll.
You may play only 1 such card or use only 1 such power to determine
which skill (or dice) you’re using and these gereally refer to certain
types of checks.
The type of the check is determined by the option you chose from the
check to defeat or check to acquire entry
the card or power that
required you to make the check and the traits of the check. The skill
you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are
added as traits to the check and if you play a card that determines
which skill you’re using, you also add it's traits to the check.
For example, if you attempt a non-combat Stealth check and your
character has the skill Stealth: Dexterity +2, you can use your Stealth
skill, you add both the Stealth and the Dexterity trait to your check
and your check is a non-combat Dexterity and Stealth check.
Or when you attempt a combat check and you reveal the weapon Heavy
Pick for your combat check, it allows you to use your Melee skill, it
adds the Pick, Melee, Piercing, and Basic traits to the check. Since
this leaves you with a really long type of the check, most of the
traits will mostly be listed as such: A combat Melee check with the
Basic, Pick and Piercing traits.
[If you replace a listed skill/WOTR Kyra power example]
Adding a trait that shares the name with a skill does not give you the
skill for example, playing the spell Dazzle adds the Arcane trait to
your check, but it does not give you the Arcane skill.)
If a power does not allow you to use a skill but adds a skill to the
check you that skill is not added as a trait to the check. For example,
a card that adds your Craft skill to your combat check does not add the
Craft trait to your check.

Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check (Optional).
Like cards and powers that dertermine the skill you use for your check
other cards and powers that can be played on your check often refer to
specific traits that your check has to have or it's type, others refer
to traits the card has to have that you are making the check against
and still others refer to certain types of cards that you or others
have already played on the check e.g. a weapon.
You add traits to your check if a power says so but do not add the
traits of the cards that are played in this step.
Remember that each player may not play more than 1 card of each type or
use any 1 power more than once during each check, other than cards that
can be used each time something particular happens.
Some cards may allow you to replace a specific die with a different
one. For example, the location Sacristy allows you to roll your Divine
die in place of the normal die for a check to acquire a boon—this means
you’ll replace the die (not the skill) you would normally use with your
Divine die (not your Divine skill).

Of course this is but a quick draft but it should put the different aspects into order instead of the current disorder of those two paragraphs.

To come back to Kyra's power in question: I am still lost why we now have combinations a like Dexterity, Divine, Wisdom check and apparently
Disable, Melee, Strength checks (combining an Obstacle/Lock with Mattock*) but Bombs were nerfed so we would not have combat Craft, Ranged checks; or the Canesword Pistol, I believe, that would have created combat Stealth checks?
Is it just because there are cards that let you automatically succeed at Craft and Stealth? Or is it because there should be a limit on what cards could be played on a single check?

Spoiler:
*First Barrier with the Obstacle trait that fell in my hands was Shopkeeper's Daughter; SD+Mattock=Wisdom, Strength check...


Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Cards you play during Determine Which Skill You're Using add all of their traits to the check. You're then told that all of the traits on the check determine what type of check it is. Additionally, the skill you end up using for that check, and every skill that skill references, also determine what type of check it is. The overall check's type therefore is all of the above added together, on top of the base check type defined by the card you're doing the check against.

Bombs and such are played in Play Cards and User Powers That Affect Your Check, cards played during this time do not add their traits to the check, so they do not modify the check type.

I hope that helps explain things a bit better. The check's type gets added to or not added to depending on what step you use the power/play the card in.

I tried to look at your proposed rewording, but it was difficult to follow exactly what was changed. But a couple of things:
1. You do not need the paragraph on non-combat checks. A check is a non-combat check if it doesn't have Combat in the list of types. Or should we also add that all of the checks listed in the examples are non-Fortitude checks and non-Diplomacy checks, too? Combat isn't given any special treatment compared to other skills when determining the type of check.
2. Striking out "the check to defeat or check to acquire entry" is wrong. That choice is added as a check type. That is why you can have both a Dexterity and Wisdom check (e.g. if WotR Kyra is using her power against an Undead bane with a Dexterity check). Removing that sentence changes the game mechanics.
3. The rulebook is space-constrained. There is no room to add a page of explanatory text to further clear things up. Indeed, adding more text will probably just muddy the waters further -- it should be expressed in as few words as possible to keep the rules clear.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
skizzerz wrote:
Bombs and such are played in Play Cards and User Powers That Affect Your Check, cards played during this time do not add their traits to the check, so they do not modify the check type.

How do you mean? Bombs do very much Determine Which Skill You're Using (Dexterity/Ranged).

Adventure Card Game Designer

Michael Klaus wrote:
Whenever you say, Mike, it looks good to you I suspect that you are victim to something we call Systemblindheit. I'm alleging that it is harder for you, as the original designer, than anybody else to emphasize the POV of a person who is new to the game.

This is something every designer at Lone Shark has heard me say.


Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Longshot11 wrote:
skizzerz wrote:
Bombs and such are played in Play Cards and User Powers That Affect Your Check, cards played during this time do not add their traits to the check, so they do not modify the check type.
How do you mean? Bombs do very much Determine Which Skill You're Using (Dexterity/Ranged).

I don't have my cards on me, so I was going from memory there. I thought bombs just added dice for some reason, guess I was mistaken. The other points of my post are still correct however.


1970Zombie wrote:
I found the power handy so far. It looks to be great for low-level play. My worry was that it would not scale to higher levels but both of Kyra's roles seem to give the power a boost. The boost on Dawnflower's Flare certainly is much more significant.

Dude, she's recharging a spell or blessing for d12 +3d8 +12 for me currently on any check to defeat Undead or Demons. She's fine :)


skizzerz wrote:
1. You do not need the paragraph on non-combat checks. A check is a non-combat check if it doesn't have Combat in the list of types. Or should we also add that all of the checks listed in the examples are non-Fortitude checks and non-Diplomacy checks, too? Combat isn't given any special treatment compared to other skills when determining the type of check.

Please say that again after you counted how any threads and individual posts in other threads hold the ralization that not all checks to defeat monsters are combat checks. The terminology of combat checks and non-combat checks suddenly(!) appears in a later step of the rules but it is very much appropiate to clear this even for the least intelligent customer up front before he/she decided to play a "For your combat check card".

I think this is one of the uttermost problems whose resolution is handed down orally.
skizzerz wrote:
2. Striking out "the check to defeat or check to acquire entry" is wrong. That choice is added as a check type. That is why you can have both a Dexterity and Wisdom check (e.g. if WotR Kyra is using her power against an Undead bane with a Dexterity check). Removing that sentence changes the game mechanics.

I did that purposefully since I realized that the upfront wording included not only check to acquire and checks to defeat but all checks, like checks to recharge a card or checks before an encounter. The listed skills there should also determine the type of the check, right? For example if Kyra was asked to make a Knowledge check to see if she can add 5 to her check to defeat the Demon, she can make a Knowledge, Divine, Wisdom check.

skizzerz wrote:
3. The rulebook is space-constrained. There is no room to add a page of explanatory text to further clear things up. Indeed, adding more text will probably just muddy the waters further -- it should be expressed in as few words as possible to keep the rules clear.

This is uttermost stupid. Space should be constrained based on necessity; not vice versa. Basically you could put a leaflet in the box that read "The rulebook is accessible at paizo.com"; the rulebook and the core mechanics need to be self-explanatory from the box without further consultation; a conscious decision against this is really bad customer service

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion / Another WotR Kyra Question All Messageboards

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