I was almost literally about to hit suit on my order of all the character mats for Wrath of the Righteous and my AD3 pack arrived at my door. Now I'm wondering if Arueshalae is going to be the only lonely character without a shiny new playmat, or is there a chance that we will be able to get one eventually.
Just a thought, nothing so bad that I'll lose sleep, but I might.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Arueshalae is so seductive, she can take anyone's playmat away from them and they won't even complain.
As much as I would love to see her own mat, I guess that works for me, haha.
Well, three cards in the box are Owner: Arueshalae, so you're starting with a +3 weapon (and d8+3 ranged) right off the bat and a couple interesting items. Her powers are a little indirect. categorical evasion, and +d4 for a single character on checks of a specific attribute of your choice, refreshable at the beginning of your turn, and pretty solid elemental damage reduction. Not a crazy OP monster, but she sure seems nice to me! I'm not dropping Adowyn, but a rad rogue/bard hybrid is juuuuust my type of character.
She's not that lonely anyway; there's 21 other characters that don't have playmats. (You could put them together yourself if you wanted.)
Well you wouldn't be starting with the Owner: Arueshalae cards if you played her from the beginning. They might be basic for her, but they're still adventure 3 which means unavailable till then.
That is accurate! For whatever reason, that bit slipped my mind. Oh well, guess she'll just have to languish with her d12 Charisma and her free pass on any summoned encounter she doesn't want to bother with.
I miss Merisiel. ;_;
Not having received AD3 yet, how do she rate powerhouse without feats? Is she a viable character to play a path through from the beginning and gain feats like a normal character?
She gains feats equal to the rest of the party when you free her.
She is certainly viable from the beginning, though I wouldn't start off with her in wrath since she is 'unlocked' through specific conditions that you achieve during the campaign.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a demon succubus approaches you and asks to use your play-mat...
There's going to be a blog post about her tomorrow, apparently.
Re: Classes (FWIW)
Oddly enough, Succubi come with a bunch of the prereqs for Master Spy.
All will be revealed, tomorrow!
Those of you who already have them, congratulations. I don't even have mine yet :)
I would ask - although this may well be answered tomorrow - if, assuming there is no new player to start as Rue (as I know we won't have), whether the 'abandoned' character should have their deck broken up?
And I assume Rue is considered to have completed all the previous scenarios, for the sake of future rewards?
I think the way you get her is worded in such a way as to create multiple possibilities.
Possibility 1: Someone in your group of 1 to 6 players abandons their character and plays her instead. (I'd say you break the deck of the abandon character up, since the rules say if you aren't playing a character you shouldn't keep their deck constructed.)
Possibility 2: Someone in your group of 1 to 5 players begins to play her in addition to their other character.
Possibility 3: You are a group of 1 to 5 players and convince a new player to join you and play her.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Well you wouldn't be starting with the Owner: Arueshalae cards if you played her from the beginning. They might be basic for her, but they're still adventure 3 which means unavailable till then.That is accurate! For whatever reason, that bit slipped my mind.
They're also loot, so they're unavailable until you complete a specific *scenario* in adventure 3.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the way you get her is worded in such a way as to create multiple possibilities.
Possibility 1: Someone in your group of 1 to 6 players abandons their character and plays her instead. (I'd say you break the deck of the abandon character up, since the rules say if you aren't playing a character you shouldn't keep their deck constructed.)
Possibility 2: Someone in your group of 1 to 5 players begins to play her in addition to their other character.
Possibility 3: You are a group of 1 to 5 players and convince a new player to join you and play her.
We consider your party's player and character makeup a "social contract" issue, not a rules issue. Which is to say we have never given you rules about this sort of thing before, and we didn't start here. All of those options work just fine.
They're also loot, so they're unavailable until you complete a specific *scenario* in adventure 3.
Not that I'm saying YOU'RE WRONG, obviously, but if this is the case why do they have the Owner trait at all? Just flavor?
It's to trigger the owner rule, that Arue is allowed to RFG instead of banish them as though they were Basic, if she so chooses.
But since they're Loot cards the difference between banishing and removing from game is semantic.
We consider your party's player and character makeup a "social contract" issue, not a rules issue.
Is that where we surrender some of our freedoms and submit to your authority as a rules arbitrator in exchange for protection of our remaining rights?
|
They're also loot, so they're unavailable until you complete a specific *scenario* in adventure 3.Well you wouldn't be starting with the Owner: Arueshalae cards if you played her from the beginning. They might be basic for her, but they're still adventure 3 which means unavailable till then.That is accurate! For whatever reason, that bit slipped my mind.
If, after a scenario, the party doesn't have enough cards of the same type to fulfill everybody's deck requirements, and they have been banished (or not kept in anyone's deck between games), she can fetch them from the box.
So Loot is considered still available after getting rid of it, so long as it has the Owner trait, and only to rebuild your deck?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
"Between Games" in the rulebook tells you these things:
• Loot cards count as cards of their type.
• If you can’t construct a valid deck from the cards your group has available because you don’t have enough of certain card types, choose the extra cards you need from the box, choosing only cards with the Basic trait.
• If your character is the Owner of a card, you—and only you—may treat it as if it has the Basic trait.
See this thread for related discussion. Also, keep in mind the context for what Mike said. There was no owner mechanic and he also wasn't crafting his answer so as to be an actual entry in the rulebook.
And for the record, I also think Vic is saying the Owner part overrides the Loot part.
I think Vic is saying that the Owner mechanic overrides the "no loot" rule.
I see that's what he is trying to say, but the only thing the rule actually does is add "Basic" to list of traits for the Owner. That doesn't get around any restrictions on choosing cards with the "Loot" type. The real question is whether or not that restriction even exists and based on:
"Between Games" in the rulebook tells you these things:
• Loot cards count as cards of their type.
the restriction doesn't actually exist. Rulebook quotes!
After each scenario, you must rebuild your character deck. Start by combining your discard pile with your hand, your character deck, any cards you buried under your character card, and any cards you displayed; you may then freely trade cards with other players. Your deck must end up meeting the Cards List requirements on your character card, along with any deck adjustments on your role card, if you have one. Loot cards count as cards of their type. For example, if your character’s Cards List specifies 3 items, and you keep 1 loot card with the item type when your rebuild your deck, your deck must contain exactly 2 other items.
If you can’t construct a valid deck from the cards your group has available because you don’t have enough of certain card types, choose the extra cards you need from the box, choosing only cards with the Basic trait. After you begin the adventure Demon’s Heresy, you may ignore the Basic trait restriction; instead, you may use any cards in the box from the base set and the Character Add-On Deck, as well as any cards from an adventure whose adventure deck number is at least 2 lower than the adventure you’re currently playing. If you have cards left over after rebuilding all of the surviving characters’ decks, put them back in the box.
(Emphasis added in previous quote)
Loot: Loot cards are unique in a couple of ways. The other boons can be found by exploring locations, but loot cards are only given out as rewards for completing scenarios, except in very rare cases when other cards give them out. They are automatically acquired, and so they have no check to acquire. Also, loot cards list a type, such as “weapon”; apart from the way loot cards are acquired, loot cards behave just like other boons of that type and count as cards of that type rather than loot when played. If a loot card ends up in a location deck, you automatically acquire it when you encounter it.
Searching the rulebook, I don't see anywhere that says that Loot cards aren't perfectly valid cards for replacing banished cards with, so long as they are either basic or AD-2. Kinda changes the question about hanging on to Radiance just in case it is more useful later on...
|
|
That's what I'm thinking too, my second to last post was asking specifically about that to be sure. The response just didn't really answer it. Going straight by Vic's response as written (ignoring that he seems to be saying Owner overrides Loot), you could take any Loot at the appropriate adventure. After all, an Item 2 Loot counts as it's type, so why couldn't I take it in Adventure 4 as an Item?
We all know you aren't allowed to do that, I'm just pointing out that Vic's response indicates otherwise (though I know that wasn't what he was saying, and that still isn't allowed).
I will say, in response to my own post, that I understand that the "Loot cards count as cards of their type." was in a paragraph about what to do with acquired cards and not pulling cards from the box. But the "Loot cards are only given out as rewards" is in a sentence talking about acquiring cards by exploring and also not about pulling cards from the box.
If the rule is that you can't choose loot cards, the rules should say "any non-Loot cards in the box" instead of "any cards in the box".
And if adding the Basic trait gets around the Loot restriction for deck building, why doesn't being AD-2?
As long as there isn't any muzak...
|
Data Entry Clerk
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As long as there isn't any muzak...
Unless it's both enticing and demonic, as befits Arueshalae.
As long as there isn't any muzak...Unless it's both enticing and demonic, as befits Arueshalae.
I see what you did there...
Please hold.
While we hold, I would suggest an idea: any loot that ends up back in the box but not RFG should be kept out of the game until the chacters reach adventure level x+2 where x is the level of the loot.
At that point the loot should be suffled in the box in its respective type of cards.Thus from then on the loot could end up in a location deck, could be drawn at random from the box when instructed to do so, or could be added when completing decks between scenarios.
That would add nice surprises along the road.
Note that we are playing the hard way, meaning that when we lack cards between games to rebuild decks we take additional ones at random (not chosing - yes you can get an arcane spell that you can't recharge because you are a divine guy), that's why sometimes we like to give us a little slack.
Note also that it only concerns loots that end up BACK in the box. I. E. Only valid for those you did previously gain through normal reward of hard work. Those you failed to get when you add the opportunity are forever RFG.
What would be the check to acquire for this loot that you find in a location deck?
|
|
I would very much disagree with that. It works fine as is, this character just created a new situation to check on is all. If Owner overrules Loot, then so be it, but everything else about Loot is fine already and has no need to be changed. The only concern about Owners being allowed to pull Loot is it requires you to remember if you unlocked that loot if it is earned by some optional method like Arueshalae is. Outside of that one issue, the Loot should be kept as is with the addition of Owner overriding Loot if the card was previously unlocked.
What would be the check to acquire for this loot that you find in a location deck?
Loot in a location deck is acquired automatically. (WotR rulebook p. 24; same page in S&S.)
|
There's going to be a blog post about her tomorrow, apparently.
Re: Classes (FWIW)
In The RPG:
She's a Master Spy with the Trickster mythic path.
I am just wondering... Do you get to choose the mystic path to her also? You get the feats like the other players as Vic mentioned, but mythic path is not a feat. Do you get to choose the mythic path for her?
Yes, the location that rewards you with her as a playable character says you get to choose a Mythic Path card for her too.
Which makes it even more of a problem.
Don't see why.
Get me right: if you are against reintroducing loots, fine with me, as we said many time, whatever makes YOUR game fun. But if you were into reintroduction, don't see why applying the rule makes things worse :-)
|
|
Which makes it even more of a problem.Don't see why.
Get me right: if you are against reintroducing loots, fine with me, as we said many time, whatever makes YOUR game fun. But if you were into reintroduction, don't see why applying the rule makes things worse :-)
I wasn't referring to the gener idea with that post (though I am against it), but the fact that Loot is autoacquired when found in a location. It's one thing to do that when it's insanely rare for it to happen, but to add them to their respective boon decks and still have no CtA? Way too far. They are extremely powerful compared to regular cards that actually have checks, that's not balanced.
If you house rule adding Loots back, sure do a check or not, whichever is most fun. I'm talking about if we were actually instructed by rules to put them into the decks.