Do You Die If You Can't Examine Your Deck?


Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion

51 to 90 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

skizzerz wrote:
What won't be known until the final wording comes out is whether or not someone with 2 cards remaining in their deck could live through the Oracle.

The answer we are intending is that if you have fewer than 3 cards in your deck, you die—not because of the examining, but because of the recharging, discarding, and burying.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

The trick for Vic's wording here (so I'm all supporting cause that's not an easy one) will be to make sure it's crystal clear in pretty much any situation.

For example, suppose a power asks you to "recharge 2 cards from your deck", and you only have one left. It should be clear whether you die or not.

Whatever Vic/Mike will decide will be the rule. I wish I could help them make it simple and beautiful.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

This took a while to process because it had major implications for Mummy's Mask, but yes, if there aren't enough cards, examining your deck can kill you, and examining the blessings deck can make you lose the scenario. Added to FAQ.


This only makes me think that some of the things they have put into Mummy's Mask are especially evil.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Examine:

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Also, the following is going to be a bit of a stealth update, because it doesn't affect earlier sets, and will be correct in the MM rulebook from the start:

Under If You Defeat the Villain, Close the Villain’s Location, "Examine the location deck; if there are no additional villains in it, banish all of the cards" is changing to "Search the location deck for additional villains; if you don’t find any, banish all of its cards."


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Sounds like a good change, considering.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I had a thought skimming through this list, and pardon me if it's been stated already. If "examine" means to look at cards and put them back where you found them, then the "three" cards you need to recharge/discard/bury are still in your deck, much like Revealed cards are still in your hand. Therefore, when you come to the Recharge/Discard/Bury phase, you are removing those cards from your deck, not some mystical pseudo-display area of the proverbial playfield. Therefore, death.

Adventure Card Game Designer

Wraithguard wrote:
This only makes me think that some of the things they have put into Mummy's Mask are especially evil.

Did anyone think the set based on ancient curses would be especially nice?


This is slightly off-topic, but how does Chasm of Shadows interact with the close rules? You can't examine _or_ search the deck to close it whether you defeat the villain or henchman, so do you just have to go through the whole deck?


Mike Selinker wrote:
Wraithguard wrote:


This only makes me think that some of the things they have put into Mummy's Mask are especially evil.
Did anyone think the set based on ancient curses would be especially nice?

As nice as rampaging angry trees and hordes of demons?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

James McKendrew wrote:
I had a thought skimming through this list, and pardon me if it's been stated already. If "examine" means to look at cards and put them back where you found them, then the "three" cards you need to recharge/discard/bury are still in your deck, much like Revealed cards are still in your hand. Therefore, when you come to the Recharge/Discard/Bury phase, you are removing those cards from your deck, not some mystical pseudo-display area of the proverbial playfield. Therefore, death.

Except the rule is you don't die until you don't have *enough* cards. If you have three, you have exactly enough. It's having less than 3 that kills ya.


Seems like you could get around it in this case with a power stated thusly:

Reworded Cyclops Oracle wrote:
Before you act examine the top 3 cards of your deck; discard 1 and bury 1, and if you cannot, you die. Then recharge 1 (if any).

It takes the order out of the equation, so you can't 'save' one through recharging, but I believe this is the intended effect--being closer to death might kill you.

EDIT: There's a FAQ now for it that took a different route to the 'dead' end.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Vic Wertz wrote:
Except the rule is you don't die until you don't have *enough* cards. If you have three, you have exactly enough. It's having less than 3 that kills ya.

Well, two, really, since the "first" one recharges.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Mike Selinker wrote:
Wraithguard wrote:
This only makes me think that some of the things they have put into Mummy's Mask are especially evil.
Did anyone think the set based on ancient curses would be especially nice?

I was honestly hoping the egyptian trip would be more like tourism, with good food, sun tan, snorkeling. I guess when you are named after a dog itself names after a american state, there is no way you avoid the scarabs, snakes, skeletons and mumies...


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Frencois wrote:
Mike Selinker wrote:
Wraithguard wrote:
This only makes me think that some of the things they have put into Mummy's Mask are especially evil.
Did anyone think the set based on ancient curses would be especially nice?
I was honestly hoping the egyptian trip would be more like tourism, with good food, sun tan, snorkeling...

You forgot "petting crocodiles". That's a thing, right?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Longshot11 wrote:
You forgot "petting crocodiles". That's a thing, right?

They're ESPECIALLY snuggly if you're wearing Crocodile Skin Armor...


I was honestly hoping the egyptian trip would be more like tourism, with good food, sun tan, snorkeling. I guess when you are named after a dog itself names after a american state, there is no way you avoid the scarabs, snakes, skeletons and mumies...

Oh, Frencois, how I love this.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
James McKendrew wrote:
Longshot11 wrote:
You forgot "petting crocodiles". That's a thing, right?
They're ESPECIALLY snuggly if you're wearing Crocodile Skin Armor...

You can make lots of things out of Crocodile Skin.

But this thread is about the fact that Examining your deck when there aren't enough cards kills you and Examining the Blessings deck when there aren't enough cards loses the scenario.


You could reword the Cyclops Oracle so that it says..

Quote:
Recharge one card from your hand, discard one card from your hand, bury one card from your hand. You must immediately reset your hand afterward.

If you didn't have 2 cards in your deck, you will die.

I don't think this fits the spirit that the Cyclops Oracle is supposed to interact with what's in your deck, but at least it's clear you're dying.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Nope. if you only have 2 cards in your deck, you die. You don't get to be "saved" because the first one is actually recharged. You need 3 cards in deck to survive. Period.
I find the new general rule great because it's clear and easy to apply.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Ok so this means that you can die and still have one card in your deck after you die... Because that first card goes back to you deck... I can see why this is not clear even now...

So in the case of two cards...

You example 2 cards. First one goes back to you deck ( or is the way to there)
You discard the second.
You try to bury the third, but you can not and you die.
The first one goes now back to the deck and you you have one card in you deck but you Are dead... ???

Are you back to life after short time being dead or what?

Same with one card.

You recharge first.
You discard second and die, because you can not
You bury Third and can not so you die second time
And after that the first one goes back to your deck...

So again a dead, with one card in her deck.

It should be added to the rulebook that you can be dead even if you have cards in your deck.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Hannibal_pjv wrote:


It should be added to the rulebook that you can be dead even if you have cards in your deck.

IMHO it would create more issues than it would solve.

By rule as soon as you die, you bury your deck so there is no need to say more.
Especially as you may die and in very specific cases end up with cards in your deck because some cards (see some existing cohorts) cannot be buried... But you are dead anyway.
Say a monster as a power that makes you discard 4 cards from your deck and you only have 2 left. At that very moment you are dead with cards in your deck. Then just after you bury everything. By rule when you are told to discard N cards, it's N cards in one discard, not cards discarded one by one.
Say a monster as a power that just say you die. At that point you have cards in your deck. Then just adter you bury everything. Same situation in fact.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Frencois wrote:
Hannibal_pjv wrote:


It should be added to the rulebook that you can be dead even if you have cards in your deck.

By rule when you are told to discard N cards, it's N cards in one discard, not cards discarded one by one.

Say a monster as a power that just say you die. At that point you have cards in your deck. Then just adter you bury everything. Same situation in fact.

Many thanks. Did not remember that bury everything part of the rules. Then this is clear as water, moonshine, thing... ;-)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Hannibal_pjv wrote:

Ok so this means that you can die and still have one card in your deck after you die... Because that first card goes back to you deck... I can see why this is not clear even now...

So in the case of two cards...

You example 2 cards. First one goes back to you deck ( or is the way to there)
You discard the second.
You try to bury the third, but you can not and you die.
The first one goes now back to the deck and you you have one card in you deck but you Are dead... ???

The power is "Before you act, examine the top 3 cards of your deck, then recharge 1, discard 1, and bury 1."

If you have 2 cards, you die as soon as you try to examine the third card that isn't there. You don't ever get to "recharge 1, discard 1, and bury 1."

If you have 3 cards, you examine them all, and after recharging, discarding, and burying, you are still alive, with 1 card in your deck (the one you recharged).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Hrmmm... Well, rules are rules, but if you're looking for feedback, I don't like it. It feels like checking your bank balance, finding you only have $2 in your account, and accruing overdraft charges whether you buy something or not.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I like the rule. I would argue that it looks like you take an electric shock. You can die immediately, but if not there may be only little or no lasting damage. It looks like the save or die rolls in the RPG where if you save... you may not lose hit points at all.
So a power that pretty much says: you die if you have less than N cards left, but if you have you do not lose cards (or lose only less than N) makes sense in specific situations.


James McKendrew wrote:
Hrmmm... Well, rules are rules, but if you're looking for feedback, I don't like it. It feels like checking your bank balance, finding you only have $2 in your account, and accruing overdraft charges whether you buy something or not.

I think the closest analogue would be having $2 in the account, withdrawing $3 then depositing $1, and most banks I know would consider that overdrawn.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Irgy wrote:
James McKendrew wrote:
Hrmmm... Well, rules are rules, but if you're looking for feedback, I don't like it. It feels like checking your bank balance, finding you only have $2 in your account, and accruing overdraft charges whether you buy something or not.
I think the closest analogue would be having $2 in the account, withdrawing $3 then depositing $1, and most banks I know would consider that overdrawn.

For the cyclops power, sure. But if ANYTHING makes you examine the top card of your deck when it's empty, you die. You don't even GET to the recharge/discard/bury part of the equation.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
James McKendrew wrote:
Irgy wrote:
James McKendrew wrote:
Hrmmm... Well, rules are rules, but if you're looking for feedback, I don't like it. It feels like checking your bank balance, finding you only have $2 in your account, and accruing overdraft charges whether you buy something or not.
I think the closest analogue would be having $2 in the account, withdrawing $3 then depositing $1, and most banks I know would consider that overdrawn.
For the cyclops power, sure. But if ANYTHING makes you examine the top card of your deck when it's empty, you die. You don't even GET to the recharge/discard/bury part of the equation.

James, there are reasons why Examining cards have consequences. At this point in the evolution of the game, those reasons now force the rules to change.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Theryon Stormrune wrote:
James, there are reasons why Examining cards have consequences. At this point in the evolution of the game, those reasons now force the rules to change.

I'm not expecting anyone to defend the decision. I'm just providing feedback. I don't like it. I've stated why. And I'll abide by the rules (or houserule if I'm not playing a guild game, which is kinda rare these days).


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I think so far, the banes that force you to examine your deck are:

Cyclops
Cyclops Oracle
Cyclops Savage
Demonic Cyclops
Gholdako
Shaija
Siren
Siren Caller

Only the Siren would potentially not have you do something with the card you examine (other than shuffling them back in). In all other cases the examining is a precursor to recharge, discarding or burying or a card. So, most of the examining powers essentially end up being the same as "recharge/discard/bury the top card(s) or your deck" which, even before this would have killed you.


Ahh interesting. So examining requires a card to be there now or bad things happen. Ok, let the deaths begin. :)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Hawkmoon269 wrote:

I think so far, the banes that force you to examine your deck are:

Cyclops
Cyclops Oracle
Cyclops Savage
Demonic Cyclops
Gholdako
Shaija
Siren
Siren Caller

Only the Siren would potentially not have you do something with the card you examine (other than shuffling them back in). In all other cases the examining is a precursor to recharge, discarding or burying or a card. So, most of the examining powers essentially end up being the same as "recharge/discard/bury the top card(s) or your deck" which, even before this would have killed you.

This actually makes me feel stronger about my position, oddly. If your character is going to die anyway, there's no need for a change to the core rules. And with new core sets and class decks popping out every month, the number of things that cause one to examine one's deck will only expand. A benevolent "on closing" location power could become a death sentence.

Anyway, as I say, I'm not upset or demanding change. I'm respectfully disagreeing. The horse, she is dead. I'm more than happy to set down my stick.

Adventure Card Game Designer

James McKendrew wrote:
A benevolent "on closing" location power could become a death sentence.

This is why Tengu Rookery says, "On closing, you may examine the top card of your deck; then you may recharge it or give it to another character."

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Mike Selinker wrote:
This is why Tengu Rookery says, "On closing, you may examine the top card of your deck; then you may recharge it or give it to another character."

Indeed. Otherwise (if I'd had that location's text memorized) I'd've held that up as exactly what I'm talking about. I'm just sayin', who knows what the future will bring?


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
James McKendrew wrote:
Mike Selinker wrote:
This is why Tengu Rookery says, "On closing, you may examine the top card of your deck; then you may recharge it or give it to another character."
Indeed. Otherwise (if I'd had that location's text memorized) I'd've held that up as exactly what I'm talking about. I'm just sayin', who knows what the future will bring?

Location: Tomb of the Oracle

On Closing: Examine the top 5 card of your deck. You may put them in any order.

That's an example, but now I totally expect MM to be full of such shenanigans. I only hope they don't overdo the "examine cards = bad stuff happens" thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I can totally imagine a scheming ally who seems all nice and helpful (remarkably so) on the face of things, doing super awesome things, however secretly they're plotting and scheming to do nasty things to you down the road. If you catch them in the middle of that scheming (e.g. examine it while it's in your deck), you'll be in for a world of hurt.

That said, most examine effects are probably going to be attached to banes in the location decks, not things in your own deck. I can even envision some beneficial examine effects in location decks -- for example you may come across a Trap while examining, and because you spotted it in advance you have an easier time of disarming it (e.g. you could encounter it right then and the difficulty is reduced if you do).


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

So, apparently MM will feature plenty of cards that, when examined, cause bad stuff to happen. I thought I'd get ahead and ask:

When you're told to examine X cards:
- does it count as one action, i.e. you examine all cards at the same time and any powers triggered on examine are triggered simultaneously, so you chose the order to resolve
- or, do you go "I examine the first card; Stuff Happens; I resolve stuff; I examine the second card..."


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

I'd imagine that you would choose the order, however I haven't played in any of the MM demos and obviously do not have access to the MM rulebook yet, so this is just an educated guess on my part. With the current rules, you examine all the cards at once, and WotR features some banes that do bad things if you examine them, so in WotR I would say you get to choose the order of you were lucky enough to examine more than one of them (if there are more than one; I can actually only think of one bane in WotR that has an examine trigger).

51 to 90 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion / Do You Die If You Can't Examine Your Deck? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.