WotR - Not Having Fun Yet


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game General Discussion


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Having really enjoyed RotR and S&S I’m finding myself getting really annoyed at WotR and not enjoying the game play at all. I think my primary complaint so far after playing through the base scenarios is that it’s really random and there are too many monsters that are explore, flip and get hurt.

FYI - My party is Alaine, Kyra and Enora.

The randomness is really killing the fun for me. Demonic Hordes has about a 50/50 chance of hand wiping one of my casters. It’s rare they get multiple attack spells in hand so randomly getting selected to face the demonic horde more than once means the second or third time is with nothing but bare fists.

Then there are cards like Carrion Golem whose only purpose is to hand wipe casters who encounter them. First before you act discard 1 card from your deck. Second you cannot use spells with the attack trait. Third if undefeated discard two more cards from the top of your deck. For Enora that’s a 6 card hand loss plus 3 cards from her deck. With a 15 card deck that leaves her just enough cards to drawn another hand and there is little she can do about it (maybe Mirror Image if she finds that spell but Create Pit doesn’t work nor does a Wand of Paralysis.) This is just too brutal. Kyra doesn’t fare much better.

Additionally there are so many cards you can’t do anything about. Mongrelfolk Ranger forces you to take damage before you act. The Mogrelfolk Wizard forces you to take damage before and after you act. Wight forces you take a cold damage and bury the card before you act. Pitborn Scoundrel forces you to take damage if you are alone. The Minitaur Ghost Villian (name escapes me right now) forces you to take damage if you encounter him on your first explore. And it’s all luck of the draw. You don’t know what’s coming, you can’t plan for it and you don’t get a chance to negate or lessen it with a check. It’s like playing an RPG and your character walks into a room and the GM says “You take 40 damage.” When you ask the GM why it’s because you hit a trap or were ambushed. The problem with that scenario and why you feel put out as a player is you didn’t get a chance to detect/avoid it or a save/resist it. That kind of GM fiat in an RPG really leaves a sour taste in my mouth and Wrath is doing the same through the basic scenarios.

Another issue making the basic scenarios harder is lack of Blessing of the Gods. First when you encounter Blessing of Ascension you are not guaranteed to get it. In the previous two sets BoG was auto put in hand. It’s essentially a free explore. The lack of free explores is making the basic scenarios much harder. Secondly you can no longer copy the top card of the blessing deck which is something that could come in handy from time to time, especially in the early scenarios.

I'm really bummed Wrath is leaving me with a sour taste so far. I played the hell out of the previous two games and loved every minute of it. I'm really feeling a lack of control in Wrath and that luck is guiding my games more than skill, tactics or strategy. I truly hope the scenarios in AD 1 feel different as many people have said.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I do feel like you're being a bit nitpicky because you did take 2 casters and therefor you do have a squishy set-up. And the fact that you don't get free explores because of the BotG missing, seems silly to me. Since almost every deck starts with Allies and Blessing in it or a way of scouting ahead. The blessings in locations are there to be a chance, not to be a gift to you. Since you still have a chance to find NO BotG's even if there are more than 5 blessings in the locations.

I do agree with you that some cards are too powerful and a lot of RNG is in the working with monsters. But on the other hand, there are characters that are great at scouting. So if you took a party of say Adowyn, Kyra and Enora you would be way more efficient. Since you can either 1) Scout every card or 2) Heal through all the damage.

Do not blame the game for being bad if it's hard, blame the player for not thinking steps ahead, which is still a good -if not great- option in this game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My girlfriend and I finally got a chance to dive into the base adventure this past weekend and boy did we have a tough time. We tried a mix of characters and played each scenario probably 3-4 times. Our whole experience through this adventure was less of "what could we have done better to succeed?" and more of "hopefully we don't get that unlucky next time." Overall, I agree that the luck aspect in WotR is far and above that of the tactic aspect as it was previously. The base adventure felt like you could only win by getting lucky banes and/or lucky hands. I am not a fan of heavy luck based games and neither is she so we certainly did not enjoy this base adventure. When we won a close or difficult scenario in RotR or SnS it usually made us feel accomplished, like we deserved that win. In WotR, that feeling is gone and instead replaced with "thank the lord it's over" and that just isn't the feeling either of us enjoy playing games. We don't want constant stress. I get that this all about demons and such and maybe that is the whole point if this adventure path but that just isn't for us.

I can say we are both disappointed so far. I am really hoping Adventure 1 is less luck driven otherwise WotR may be shelved or sold as neither of us are really into the whole luck based difficulty aspect of games.


Not played WotR at all yet, but you should also take into account that the first few adventures are always more luck based, because you haven't upgraded your decks at all, you have no improved skills or tricks, nothing, so your characters don't have much chance to be effective in their niches.


First off, a few tips.

1. Kyra doesn't need Attack spells to handle demons or undead; she can recharge her healing or utility spells if available to use Blast Evil. And if she has discarded cards, she regenerates one of those just for trying. (If you have none, you can throw a blessing - even a Corrupted blessing - for an extra d12 and get to recharge it.)
She usually welcomes the chance to be multi-targeted by Demonic Horde. Usually.

2. Actually:
-Create Pit doesn't have the Attack trait, if I recall. It has Trap.
-Wand of Paralysis doesn't have the Spell card-type.
Both work on Carrion Golem, because neither is an Attack spell.

3. The Wight's power is if-undefeated, not a before-you-act; it's an Enervating Chill Touch attack added to its claws.

4. Karsos's bigger problem is that he's an incorporeal undead minotaur, and adds insult to injury if you don't have Magic in your check against him: not only will he be undefeated (and potentially drain blessings from the deck,) he summons a location and mazes you into it. I'm fine with minotaurs having a racial "flavour" related to the first explore. Minotaurs smack you during it, Baphomet +2ds your checks during it, etc.

It's just like sharks (including sharklike creatures such as adaro or weresharks) in S&S having no-evasion, or Mongrels having random as their check-against. First-explore interaction is just a minotaur thing. :)

5. The lack of Blessing of the Gods is not a problem; if it were between having them and Ascension, I'd want Ascension's ability to do any of these starting in AD2:
-Replenish a mythic charge;
-Temporarily overcharge, which lets you:
--Build up to and use your 5-charge power;
--Get a persistent +1 in the manner of a displayed stat-buff spell;
--Have an extra charge to burn for the d20 bump and burn power;
-Anything else that Gods can do, apart from the random emulation power (which is made slightly worse due to Corrupted blessing backlash effects.)


One correction: If I'm remembering right, Create Pit only works on checks that are 12 or lower and the golem is a 14.

In regards to randomness of the scenarios and the overall difficulty, I agree with a lot of people here that the B scenarios are probably a bit harder than they should be. The Deck 1 scenarios aren't nearly as bad.

To combat the randomness somewhat, I've been experimenting with a house rule that would allow players more control over their starting hand.

Basically, I've played a few scenarios where characters could choose their starting hand, but had to have at least two of their favored card and no more than one of any other card type. It definitely leads to more thematic starting hands (i.e. Seelah starting with 2 blessings, a weapon, and an armor) and makes sure that everyone is ready for a random demon hoard or a group of evil Groots (stupid Arboreal blights). I can't tell if it makes the game too easy, though. So, mileage may vary.


Too bad you aren't have fun. In my opinion, the base scenarios in Wrath are not well designed. They are difficult, offer mediocre rewards, and, as you observed, aren't as much fun as earlier iterations of the game.

However, hope is not lost! Give the AP1 scenarios a try. They are both easier and more enjoyable, and do a better job of scaling you into the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gotta say my wife and I have played the first 3 intro scenarios and, while we've won all three, they've been crazy tough! While I hear that people don't like the difficulty, I've found it kind of exciting and brag worthy when we're able to survive! We did them all with arcanist, the inquisitor and with either the summoner or the shaman as a NPC/third player for backup. We just finished The Wardstone Patrol last night and it felt like there were henchmen every turn and the Elven Entanglement was even worse with those damned stumps- felt like we had EVERY animal in the set come up in that one. In short, maybe because we lived, we've walked away having a ton of fun and feeling like we've accomplished something rather than just easily taking care of business (something I sometimes feel with RotRL). Hope it gets better for those who aren't having fun yet.


Comment on Bless of the Gods.

I'm not saying I miss BoG per say. I'm saying its lack is adding to the difficulty in the Base Scenarios.

BoG is a free pick up that lets you explore or get a bonus to a roll. It also let's you copy the top of the Blessing Deck. In my experience through RotR and S&S in the early adventures B-2 you'd generally run into 1 to 2 BoGs per scenario on average (when running 3 characters.) In the early levels they can really be useful, especially in the hands of a healer who cure them into their deck and reuse them.

In WotR this ability comes back in Adventure 2+ when you get a mythic path and mythic charges as then Blessing of Ascension becomes an auto pick up. But in the Base Scenarios I feel its another contributing factor to the toughness compared to RotR or S&S.


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

You can have mythic charges in Adventures 0 and 1 as well, the issue is before you reset your hand you lose any number of them greater than the current adventure number (so charges don't stick around between turns in AD0, although in AD1 you can have a single charge stick around to make Ascension an auto-acquire).


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
skizzerz wrote:
You can have mythic charges in Adventures 0 and 1 as well, the issue is before you reset your hand you lose any number of them greater than the current adventure number (so charges don't stick around between turns in AD0, although in AD1 you can have a single charge stick around to make Ascension an auto-acquire).

If you don't even get a mythic path (the ability to use mythic charges) until after completion of AD1, how is it possible to have mythic charges before then, where exactly would you put them?


There are two ways.

1. Defeat a Mythic bane (eg, Temptation of Big Die)
2. Use a Blessing of Ascension for that purpose.

You'd keep the one on your character card (for want of a better place for it.)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Sandslice wrote:

There are two ways.

1. Defeat a Mythic bane (eg, Temptation of Big Die)
2. Use a Blessing of Ascension for that purpose.

You'd keep the one on your character card (for want of a better place for it.)

My point is according to the rule book for WotR, a mythic charge is placed (and used) by your mythic path. If you are playing AD0 or AD1, and do not have a mythic path...you cannot acquire (or use) mythic charges. The WotR rules wording about spending charges says "After you acquire a mythic path..."

This is of course unless a developer has clarified this somewhere on the forums.


http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2sajt?Mythic-Charges-Without-A-Mythic-Path

In which a developer states that there is no rule preventing you from having a charge without a path - you simply have no way to use it.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Sandslice wrote:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2sajt?Mythic-Charges-Without-A-Mythic-Path

In which a developer states that there is no rule preventing you from having a charge without a path - you simply have no way to use it.

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Though the charges still do not do anything..since that power comes from the path correct?

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I think the point is that you can auto-acquire Blessings of Ascension if you have the token. You just can't "spend" it.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Yes : charges can actually "do" things without having to be spent.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Ah ok,

I know charges can do things without being spent, via use of the mythic path, but things like auto acquire a Blessing of Ascension would be a relevant effect for having a mythic charge but not a mythic path.

Good to know, thanks.


I can understand the frustration people feel. The creatures that hit you before and/or after combat are way too common (I'm looking at you Fiendish Trees), especially when combined with certain barriers that spawn said monsters (rot in the abyss Arboreal Blight). With 5 players and only one of us having Cure spells, it makes a bit of a slog at times.

As to Karsos specifically, that guy is just plain cheap.


Ps. Wight's power is before you act


Troymk1 wrote:
Ps. Wight's power is before you act

I'll admit being wrong about this, while protesting that it makes no sense for a Wight; a Shadow or Wraith would make more sense for that power. (Then again, THOSE would be incorporeal, and have a different problem as a result...)

AT LEAST it only comes up on a failed check against a certain barrier, or as the when-closing at Family Tomb - and being Cold damage, there are ways to block it other than burying (eg, Enora's spell-as-armour works.)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I have been enjoying the discussions in different threads about the difficulty of WoTR.

Several of the commenters have shared experiences that echo exactly what I'm feeling, while others defend the game saying that players need to play smarter, adapt, adjust their play style, or just suck it up and expect to die a bunch over the course of the game.

Our regular groups are by no means inexperienced and most would fall into the category of moderate to hard core gamers. Some enjoy a tough challenge more than other, but above all we get together to have fun.

RoTR was extremely fun and got us all addicted to the game. We played through over and over. We got to play pretty much any characters we wanted. Want 3 fighters and a bard...sure thing! Want a group of all casters... we can wing it. Want to up the challenge a little, lets add an extra location.

S&S came along and upped the game. It did take some time to adapt but we were still having fun. It was also the first set where we failed a few times along the way, and I think that is a good thing. We also had to be a bit more prudent with strategy. People generally got to play the character they wanted, but we had some playthroughs were people had to compromise and round out the party a bit better. We never got stuck on a scenario that beat us over and over until we were ready to put the game down (Which is good, since we have to get people together from 2+ hours away for our game weekends, we tend to marathon non-stop for 2 days.) Again, even through the challenge we had fun.

I'm holding out my firm opinion on Wrath until more comes out, but we tried the base scenarios and got wiped out pretty fast. Ok... reality check, we can't approach this game the same way we did the other two. Lets work out a more balanced party (Sorry to my wife, she got stuck playing the healer that nobody else wanted to play but we obviously NEEDED to have one to survive.) Now that we picked some different characters that balanced each other out a bit better we tried again (with some grumbling that not everybody got to play the character they wanted.) We made it past the first scenario and had a death and failed the 2nd. Like many other posters have commented, we really can't think of what we could have done differently to "play better" or "more strategicly." The banes just beat us down over and over and over. I felt the casters had a very hard time. This was the first weekend that we got fed up with the game and turned pathfinder weekend into "what else do you have to play?" I also worry that if people feel forced into playing certain characters, they will enjoy it less. The game should be reasonably achievable with a wide variety of parties and not just the A team. A team of mismatched characters should be able to still get through the adventure, though it may be a bit more challenging...but it should be doable! Our group has no moral dilemma with house ruling the game harder if we feel it needs it...but we feel kinda weak and worthless if we have to house rule it easier (Geez..we had to play with training wheels on...we suck!)

We are giving it a fresh start in a few weeks when we can get together again and I really hope we can get through the adventure AND still feel like we are having fun. I realize that a lot of the hard-core players on the forum thrive in this environment where it isn't fun until you beat the thing that everyone else is having a hard time beating... but that is a vocal minority of a diverse group of gamers with different needs. A very small percentage will actually come here and voice their opinion and I hope they are considered in the projects to come. Is Wrath is intended to be the "hard mode" to please the top-tier hardcore players who have lots and lots of free time to play adventures over and over? Only time will tell...it's still early.

I haven't commented much in these forums, but i've been a pathfinder player and enthusiast since RotR released. I've introduced all of my gaming friends to pathfinder, and it is pretty much my "go to" game for the last year. I read the forums almost every day, hanging on every word and development. Mike and his team are top notch and I've never seen a more responsive group of developers/designers. I have high hopes for the rest of Wrath and future sets to be challenging but balanced; and above all, FUN!

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
fuji6100 wrote:
Like many other posters have commented, we really can't think of what we could have done differently to "play better" or "more strategicly."...A very small percentage will actually come here and voice their opinion and I hope they are considered in the projects to come.

I agree with almost everything you've written here.

Wrath is the first adventure path for the card game that benefits (?) from the shorter development cycle they've set for themselves. S&S came out a whole year after Runelords; Wrath followed S&S a mere ~8 months later. As others have pointed out in different threads, the base scenarios in Wrath have erratic and random difficulty levels, and are harder than the first adventure. As a "series of interesting choices," Wrath's choices feel more constrained - as you suggest, I think there are fewer viable combinations of characters, decks, and # of players that can reasonably be expected to result in a win. For many, I think that will make the choices less interesting, and therefore Wrath will likely not be as good a game as the other sets we've seen so far.

While I am still having fun with this set and enjoy the challenge myself (and betimes with Hawkmoon), I too think this set is not really something the larger group we play with regularly would find too enjoyable. By the time this group finishes with Skull & Shackles, we'll probably have another adventure path besides Wrath available, so hopefully that will be different.

I have to wonder if the shortened development time has negatively impacted the quality of this set. As they seem set to continue the quicker releases, I hope this isn't the case.

Shadow Lodge

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Yeah, as hard a time as my son and I had in B1 he's been afraid to play any more.

As much as I can appreciate the hard-core parts of WotR, my hope was that this would be a game I could play with my family, who get frustrated a lot more easily than I do.


fuji6100 wrote:

I have been enjoying the discussions in different threads about the difficulty of WoTR.

-redacted-

I'm holding out my firm opinion on Wrath until more comes out, but we tried the base scenarios and got wiped out pretty fast. Ok... reality check, we can't approach this game the same way we did the other two. Lets work out a more balanced party (Sorry to my wife, she got stuck playing the healer that nobody else wanted to play but we obviously NEEDED to have one to survive.) Now that we picked some different characters that balanced each other out a bit better we...

Great post and I am so pleased that your group can get to do that !

I have a suggestion which I just tried based on the analysis in another post

Add in the adventure deck 1 cards for your Base adventures. This will provide more variance of the killer barriers that heavily season the B set.

The nicer boons are balanced by some tough banes. I think it works :)


fuji6100,

Man, after reading that, I feel like I should apologize specifically to you. I'm sure I've got to be one of the people lecturing you about 'sucking it up' and all.

I hate that that's how those posts came out. Really sorry, mate. Our group--by some random stroke of fate--found ourselves enjoying the B scenarios after being punished by them a bit. It's just what happened. And so someone urged that one of us ought to post our thoughts just to add a little perspective balance to the mixture (mostly for the designers to know, I suppose). Never really intended to debate anything or make anyone feel bad.

Not just you, but apparently there are just too many strong feelings about this not to address 'em. And ending up having no fun at all on our precious weekends or w/e is too sad a prospect for me to behold.

Well, the devs have balanced some trickier issues than this in the past, so we do have that working for us. If there's some magical remedy for keeping the majority of us happy, these are probably the guys to find it.

Good hunting out there...


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Not to flog a dead horse here, but I would have to say I agree with all the comments (good and bad) on the forum.

However, please note the title of the thread is "Not Having Fun Yet".

I have a few tips for players who are finding it too difficult to make it through the scenarios and aren't having fun. Play it differently.

For example, the "Elven Entanglement" fiasco. Complete freakin disaster, we ran into animals left and right and it was a nightmare. Death abounded.

So, trial two, I made a rule that we'd let the dice decide - so we rolled a 1d6, 1-3 the rule applied, 4-6 it didn't. So instead of fighting the same guy over and over and over we got to mix it up a little.

This really helped out with my wife (who plays games for ENJOYMENT not for "fulfillment" or that big "Ahh - success" moment at the end), and would probably work well with children and such. Rolling dice is great.

I just want to say for the players out there -- don't feel constrained to follow every rule in the game if it's going to make you unhappy or leave you unhappy/unsatisfied. WotR seems to be heavily luck-based through the B scenarios, so its time you mix in a little luck of your own.


In regards to "Elven Entanglement," you could also play it so that the stump lets you attempt to close your location.

I played this way last night and it worked pretty well. It still keeps a bit of randomness because you aren't guaranteed to encounter any animal cards, but it also cuts down on the hide and seek with the villain.


SkyeGuy's comment is my fave so far.

Beyond the opinions, one of the chief virtues of the game is that you don't have to know any computer code to edit it for a better time.

Liberty's Edge

To be perfectly honest, I wasn't having fun until I decided to skip over the basic scenarios and jump immediately to AD 1. While I'll probably go back to the base scenarios in the future, I just didn't see the point in playing if I (and everyone was I playing with!) were so over it. So, we opened the deck, mixed it in and immediately got back into it.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Based on what I've been reading as of late, people are having a lot of trouble with the Base scenarios, and noticed that it's easier in Adventure 1.

We all know that normally we would start with B then start the Adventure Path once we finish the B scenarios. Since a lot of people recognize that there is some disparity between difficulties of B scenarios and Adventure 1 scenarios, should we then advise struggling groups that are not having fun to just start at AD1 and do B scenarios after that?

Would that help them enjoy the game better? Should they just mix the cards from Adventure 1 off the bat? I'm just suggesting this because I see a lot of "it should be this it should be that, it's too random, it's too punishing," and just want to pitch in in trying to help them help themselves enjoy the game.

Some people have mentioned that their groups have given up on the game after several failed attempts and want to play another game instead. Hopefully we can figure out what we can do to prevent other groups from doing the same by giving them homebrew options to make the game easier for them enough to enjoy just blazing through scenarios.

I recognize that yes maybe it is a design flaw. Maybe it is because when they were designing Wrath, it was at the time when most people just finished Runelords and are commenting how easy it was. I think the design team just really listened to our cries from Runelords feedback to make the game harder and went a tad overboard, but I'm sure they are listening and will scale it back down a bit for MM's B scenarios.

I believe people would rather make the game harder on their own terms (Runelords) than have to make the game easier to enjoy it (Wrath's B scenarios). I personally enjoyed it more when I made Runelords harder than what was designed.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
bbKabag wrote:

Based on what I've been reading as of late, people are having a lot of trouble with the Base scenarios, and noticed that it's easier in Adventure 1.

We all know that normally we would start with B then start the Adventure Path once we finish the B scenarios. Since a lot of people recognize that there is some disparity between difficulties of B scenarios and Adventure 1 scenarios, should we then advise struggling groups that are not having fun to just start at AD1 and do B scenarios after that?

Would that help them enjoy the game better? Should they just mix the cards from Adventure 1 off the bat? I'm just suggesting this because I see a lot of "it should be this it should be that, it's too random, it's too punishing," and just want to pitch in in trying to help them help themselves enjoy the game.

Some people have mentioned that their groups have given up on the game after several failed attempts and want to play another game instead. Hopefully we can figure out what we can do to prevent other groups from doing the same by giving them homebrew options to make the game easier for them enough to enjoy just blazing through scenarios.

I recognize that yes maybe it is a design flaw. Maybe it is because when they were designing Wrath, it was at the time when most people just finished Runelords and are commenting how easy it was. I think the design team just really listened to our cries from Runelords feedback to make the game harder and went a tad overboard, but I'm sure they are listening and will scale it back down a bit for MM's B scenarios.

I believe people would rather make the game harder on their own terms (Runelords) than have to make the game easier to enjoy it (Wrath's B scenarios). I personally enjoyed it more when I made Runelords harder than what was designed.

I think that actually is a good idea as a default recommendation on the forums. If people come bye to ask for recommendations, just recommend they do AD1 first, then go back to Base. At that point, they have some skill and power feats, better cards, and the AD1 banes mixed in, so the difficulty should end up being pretty close to what AD1 was out of the box. It may allow a casual group to salvage a game that they were worried they'd have to stop.


So as the OP I wanted to continue my thoughts as I've progressed through the Adventure 1 Scenarios.

I slogged my way through the Base Scenario's with two near deaths for Enora but then I got to the Adventure 1 Scenarios and I have to agree with people... it all changed. It was much more of the Skull and Shackles level difficulty. I failed to complete two scenario's one because of bad luck and the other because I was greedy (it sucks to have a location with 8 boons and draw the henchman first... no way was I giving up those boons.)

My question is how much easier is Adventure 1 vs how much did my style of play change and how did better boons help.

For instance Fortune Teller saved Enora's life twice. Every time she has Fortune Teller at the end of her move she says "boon" and looks at the top card of the location deck (FT says if it matches what you say, boon or bane, you encounter it.) Twice she said "boon" and saw a Carrion Golem and said... "I'll take this turn off" as she motioned with her finger for Alaine to come over. She also started carrying around the silver falcon item (not sure its exact name) and as soon as Alaine or Kyra found an extra armor she'd scoop is up along with any Blood Amulets and eventually the scale that prevents damage.

Kyra started rocking a little better with a skill feat and some better spells. Sanctuary was a god send. She could use it to set up kills for Alaine and Enora.

In the Adventure 1 Scenarios there were challenges but I never felt like the game was beating me down like the Base Scenarios did. It was a very different experience. Many people say the Adventure 1 cards dilute the painful banes. Can't deny that but wish I could go back and play Adventure 1 straight from the get go to see if I'd still feel they were more balanced or whether my play style had changed.

One thing that bummed me a little about Adventure 1 was the loot. I kept the weapon scale and the damage reduction scale around for a while but by the end of Adventure 1 there were far better items for me to take so all the scales went back to the box. For some reason I always feel like I shouldn't put back loot... I mean its LOOT! But away they went.

I was also tempted to dump Radiance but know from blog posts its supposed to get better over time. I got Radiance in the same adventure as a Cold Steel Longsword and comparing the two the non-magical Cold Steel Longsword clearly wins at this level. Radiance is strange to me as a magical weapon because it does not add a +1 to the base weapon die (i.e. 1d8 for the longsword.) Most every other magical weapon does "Attribute + Die + #" for combat checks. Radiance doesn't. (If someone notes a magical weapon without the "+#" out there I'd love to hear about it.)

Anyways back to the original concern... Not Having Fun Yet. Adventure 1 turned it around but the Base Scenarios are just rough for the reward. Someday I'll try them with another party. Maybe they'll have an easier time now that I know the basic gist.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Jimmy_Weasel - No need to apologize. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of the game and to comment on the play-style that is best for them. I don't take anything personally, especially in a group forum.

I agree with bbKbag about adjusting the difficulty. We never felt cheaty when we upped the difficulty on our own, but we all feel a little dirty about dumbing the game down.

I am glad to hear the feedback about AD1 being better. Perhaps we should just jump right into that next time we play.

I also hope Wrath will be survivable for sub-optimal party choices, as several of our players don't pick characters for power, but for thematic flare or just outright fun. The same goes for some of the boons as there are clearly more powerful choices you can put in your deck as you advance, but sometimes doing so makes you say goodbye to a really fun flavorful card that isn't as much of a tactical advantage. I hope the difficulty does not push players to into narrow deck choices, but we have 5 more adventure paths so time will tell.

I'm really glad we are having this discussion as a community and also glad to see the dev team so involved with our feedback.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

fuji6100 is using logic, reasoning, politeness and articulating an opinion without lingo typically found on the internet....

I ...I.... I don't know what to do...I feel my eyes watering.

Paizo forums, where have you been all my life!


I was thinking the same thing. Yet another reason this game is so awesome.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / General Discussion / WotR - Not Having Fun Yet All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion