Emerald Legacy - Adventure Path (Complete!)


Homebrew and House Rules


4 people marked this as a favorite.

After another roughly 9 months of work after Revenge of the Wicked , I proudly present to you my new custom AP

Emerald Legacy!

In this AP for Skulls and Shackles, you get to join a warship from Tian Xia - including Ninjas and Samurais - and go on a wild chase through the Shackles to find a Tian noble that stole a valuable heirloom from his clan; no ones knows what he's up to, but you might find out that you need to stop him!

Instead of the various ships of the original game, you get a powerful ship from Tian Xia that acts as your base and is similiar to a character in that it gets analogues to skill feats, card feats and even power feats for its crew during the the AP!

But don't get too confident because of your ship, since this time, you will face an adventuring party from Tian Xia which grows in strength just as you do! Eventually, they even learn some new tricks and acquire new power feats during the course of your journey!

There are 28 (!) new custom cards included this time, made beautiful by the awesome LudwigO, and I even painted some of the artwork myself!

The AP is meant to be compatible with all class decks, and there are special rules to incorporate them thematically into your game. While not necessary, the recently released Hayato and Reiko with their ultimate decks, as well as the Monk deck can make for a great thematic experience!

By the way; there are also sidequests that you can do (or neglect), and they will have minor and major repercussions on the overall story, which may or may not include how the ending turns out!

This first draft surely has some typos and inconsistencies, but if you help me to find them, I'm dedicated to fixing them :)

Looking forward to hear what everyone thinks
- Doppelschwert.

Lone Shark Games

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I sense a homebrew special coming.


Wow. Gave it a look over. Lots of good stuff in there. Thank you!


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Excellent! Thanks for sharing! I still need to go through your wotr adventure but will be adding this to the list as well. I'm wrapping up another campaign soon so excited to dive into these!


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

Hey, Doppelschwert!

Assuming you're again going to do an editing round or two, I'll try do go through it all and post my notes here as time permits. Here's the first portion of it:

Rules:
-Basic removal starts at AD1, and Elites – at AD4 – is that correct?
-“parties weaknesses” -> “party’s weaknesses”
-“can be considered as a swimming fortress … to reflect this with gameplay” => “can be considered a seaborne/floating/naval fortress … to reflect this within the game”
-“none of the uncheck boxes apply” => “none of the unchecked/empty boxes apply”
-“compromising of a description” => “comprised of a description”
-“adventuerer” => “adventurer”

Trial of Mind…: “You win the scenario once each character has AT LEAST…” – since I will be displaying those card only 1 at a time, this leaves me unsure if I’m allowed to continue playing even after I have gained 4 displays each. If so, maybe something like “When each character has at least 4…. you MAY win the scenario”
Also, it bugs me somewhat that I will be required to banish non-Basic blessings that I could otherwise earn. So how about the 2nd Scenario power be something like “… you MAY display it next to your deck” ? That way, players can chose for themselves if they want to advance towards scenario win, OR to gain a blessing for their decks (obviously, they’d always chose to display banes)

Art of Shipping:
-same note on win condition as above
-“ressource” => resource
-“faculties” => facilities

Order of Gentle Waves: “swimming fortress” => seaborne/floating/naval fortress
“it’s stalwart crew” -> “its stalwart crew”

Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?

AD1 Scenario List/Scenario Titles: “matter”, “usual” and “first” should be capital letters

AD1 Reward: is it “Order of GENTLE Waves” (s it appears here and in the title of the AD0 scenario) or Order of RAGING waves (as in the card’s name and a bunch of other places). Also, “wave/s” is being used as singular/plural at different places.

Surf War: “Broodbine Queen” => Brinebrood Queen
-“…you MAY win” – since I can only explore the siege deck, and I gain all location boons anyway – is there a point in NOT winning after the Siege Deck is empty ?!?

Ogre Mage: doesn’t seem to be a particular reason why its AD indicator is “B” instead of “1” ?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

This is my second portion on notes.

First, Doppelschwert, let me say that this is a great work, and I regret that I'm in the middle of another campaign and can get it started immediately! The things you've done with the Shirofune, the Raging Wave, and the Sidequest are awesome, and deliver the level of diversity and innovation I would expect from the official products! (Also some of them are pretty close with things I've been tinkering with in my homebrew games, so if someday I muster the time to write an AP like this - I just might give you a holler for some tips :D

One minor aesthetic gripe: the flat bright-green background can get too much at times. While it's something you can get used to in scenario headers etc., it's always jarring on the "cover" of the AP. If you can find access to a nice -and free!- "emerald" texture, you might consider switching it in on at least the front and back covers.

On to the notes:

-On the Villain cards and in the story segments we have “Yasuko the Righteous” and “Sayaka and Masao”. On the (probably earlier draft of the) Sidequests card, we have “Minoko the Righteous” and “Haruka and Masao Yamashi”

Without being sure how phantoms and hobgoblins are treated in the RPG:
-Masao may need the Incorporeal trait?
-Takeshi may need a Goblin trait?

-Ice Yai – you should update his power, to specify that he only need ANY check to be beaten with 3+ to allow you to close (if that’s indeed the intent).

-AD2 Scenario List/Scenario Names - capitalization of some words (that issue seems to pop up through several of the Adventures)

-Sea Devil in the Details: Your ship is anchored at Shipwreck Graveyard – but this location is not on the location list ?!?

-Cloudy With a Chance…: Playing the PACG treatment of Sharknado I never knew I needed? Yes, please!
“a number of Hurricane Winds henchman..” => henchmen

-All Aboard the Wormwood: the List 1 stack always contains only a single Ice Yai, correct?
- I’m supposed to shuffle the stack from List 2 into Shark Island – but this location is not listed for the scenario?!?
- I don’t have the Wormwood card on hand; what’s the point of it being displayed next to a location?!? Does this prevent me from summoning it when encountering Elizmara or is there something else…?
- “get’s wrecked” => ‘gets wrecked’ (or maybe better: “if your ship is wrecked, you lose the scenario.”

-Ruins of Shark Island: “Masao’s henchman” -> henchmen

-Otherworldly Reunion: “Masao’s henchman” -> henchmen; reveiled -> revealed
- Viallain is listed as “Sayaka and Masao Yamashi”, while the card name is only “Sayaka and Masao”
- Throughout the document, there’s inconsistent use of both “Magi” and “Mages” as the plural for “Ogre Mage”
- Just to be sure what’s the deal with villain here: 1) I encounter it 2) I discard 1 from Blessing deck 3)I go through the CtDs to prevent taking damage 4)Villain can’t escape to his current location (it’s temp-closed); 5) I lose MORE blessings from Blessings Deck when the villain escapes. Is that all correct?
- Displaying Umiko is purely “cosmetic” , right? Since I can never move to her location?

AD4 overview: “finally meet him” -> met him; “back in the past, where” -> when; “hidden the Mwangi” -> IN the Mwangi

- Meeting the Locals: “Check that lists Diplomacy” => Diplomacy check
-> Starting this scenario with a displayed Curse of Flesheaters is incredibly punishing for small parties, and downright homicidal for solo play. You may want to consider introducing a way to remove this Curse before the end of the scenario

-Yamashi Scouts: this card confuses me a bit – is it only a “placeholder” for the Raging Wave summon? Traditionally, powers on “ships” only apply to the person *commanding* the ship; OTOH, you never “command” a ship you’re not “on “ (and you never count as being “on” the Scouts). So, do I “command” the Scouts, even if I’m not on them (in which case – can I use them for ship “mass movement”?!?) . If not – maybe they should be reworded to the effect of “While displayed, when a character encounters a non-villain card, she may banish…”

- Cyclops VS Dinosaur: The “return the baby” condition is extra cool, and I wouldn’t mind seeing it as a Sidequest

-Turning the Eye / The Fall of the…- “vulcanoes” “vulcano”-> volcano/es

-The Fall of the… - There are 7 locations and only 6 henchmen on the list; nothing tells you not to put a henchman in Eye of Serenity (which is probably the intent?)


Thanks everyone for the feedback! Especially you Longshot, who raised a lot of good and helpful points!

Please excuse the amount of inconsistencies and writing mistakes; I wasn't able to properly read through the whole document again after working on it for so long and just wanted to publish it :)

I've updated to Version 1.01 by fixing most of the issues you raised and included you in the credits; most of the mechanical issues were because I changed a lot of things and forgot to adapt everything that was affected by the change. I'll shortly comment on the rest:

Longshot11 wrote:
Basic removal starts at AD1, and Elites – at AD4 – is that correct?

That's intended; I want the game to pick up faster, and it's necessary to give you a better chance at actually using the ship facilities.

Longshot11 wrote:
Trial of Mind, Art of Shipping

Changed as suggested.

Longshot11 wrote:

Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?

- Meeting the Locals: “Check that lists Diplomacy” => Diplomacy check

I'm aware of the wording, but I want the bonus to also apply to using Charisma on a Charisma/Diplomacy check that happens before you act or that is imposed by the scenario rules.

Longshot11 wrote:
Ogre Mage: doesn’t seem to be a particular reason why its AD indicator is “B” instead of “1” ?

It's for consistency mostly; there is one new oni in each adventure up to AD5, and they shouldn't differ in #AD for the sake of cards that care about it.

Longshot11 wrote:
One minor aesthetic gripe: the flat bright-green background can get too much at times. While it's something you can get used to in scenario headers etc., it's always jarring on the "cover" of the AP. If you can find access to a nice -and free!- "emerald" texture, you might consider switching it in on at least the front and back covers.

I'll look into that once I have more time on my hands, thanks for the note.

Longshot11 wrote:
-Ice Yai – you should update his power, to specify that he only need ANY check to be beaten with 3+ to allow you to close (if that’s indeed the intent).

I already updated this in my files, but forgot to have the card updated. Sorry, I'll take care of it in the near future.

Longshot11 wrote:

Without being sure how phantoms and hobgoblins are treated in the RPG:

-Masao may need the Incorporeal trait?
-Takeshi may need a Goblin trait?

I used Honaire for the traits of Masao and forgot the Goblin trait on Takeshi. But I think he's better of without it so he doesn't have unintended interactions with the goblin characters/decks.

Longshot11 wrote:
-Cloudy With a Chance…: Playing the PACG treatment of Sharknado I never knew I needed? Yes, please!

I'm happy you caught the (admittedly fairly obvious) reference :)

Longshot11 wrote:

-All Aboard the Wormwood: the List 1 stack always contains only a single Ice Yai, correct?

- I don’t have the Wormwood card on hand; what’s the point of it being displayed next to a location?!? Does this prevent me from summoning it when encountering Elizmara or is there something else…?

Yes, only one Ice Yai. The idea is that you are boarding each others ships, and since your ship is already displayed at one location, the Wormwood is displayed at the other location, so that they are physically next to each other as well.

Longshot11 wrote:

- Just to be sure what’s the deal with villain here: 1) I encounter it 2) I discard 1 from Blessing deck 3)I go through the CtDs to prevent taking damage 4)Villain can’t escape to his current location (it’s temp-closed); 5) I lose MORE blessings from Blessings Deck when the villain escapes. Is that all correct?

- Displaying Umiko is purely “cosmetic” , right? Since I can never move to her location?

Yes. Worst case that happens when you spread out and temp close everything is that you lose 3 cards from the blessings deck the first encounter and another 2 cards from the blessings deck on the second encounter that puts him guaranteed into the Shrine of Sealing. Instead of spending resources on the fight, it's most of the time more efficient to put them into explorations instead and just accept your beating, as the story implies, but defeating them while still winning is an optional challenge. Umiko is only there to setup the narrative.

Longshot11 wrote:
-> Starting this scenario with a displayed Curse of Flesheaters is incredibly punishing for small parties, and downright homicidal for solo play. You may want to consider introducing a way to remove this Curse before the end of the scenario

Defeating a Witch Doctor henchman allows you to remove a card that has the curse trait; it's usually enough to quickly tear through one location to get rid of it in time.

Longshot11 wrote:
-Yamashi Scouts: this card confuses me a bit – is it only a “placeholder” for the Raging Wave summon? Traditionally, powers on “ships” only apply to the person *commanding* the ship; OTOH, you never “command” a ship you’re not “on “ (and you never count as being “on” the Scouts). So, do I “command” the Scouts, even if I’m not on them (in which case – can I use them for ship “mass movement”?!?) . If not – maybe they should be reworded to the effect of “While displayed, when a character encounters a non-villain card, she may banish…”

The power box of both ships actually says "While displayed" instead of "While commanding this ship", so you can always use the summon independent of where you are relative to your ship.

The intent is that the Scouts don't allow mass movement, don't trigger the ship summons on cards like Elizmara or Pirate Hunt, and lastly to not give you any benefit from those cards that get better when you are on a ship. They are also there to give you access to the cargo table and ship facilities when it doesn't make sense to be on the ship from a narrative point of view, e.g. you're walking away from your ship into a cavern / on land / into a dungeon.

I'm looking forward to further comments from you on the rest of the AP! :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Doppelschwert wrote:
Please excuse the amount of inconsistencies and writing mistakes; I wasn't able to properly read through the whole document again after working on it for so long and just wanted to publish it :)

Hah, I know what it's like to go over at a text to the point where you don't even want to look at it anymore :D But that's the good thing about having a bunch of eyes on the forum that can spot some of the stuff that slipped by :D

Doppelschwert wrote:
Longshot11 wrote:

Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?

- Meeting the Locals: “Check that lists Diplomacy” => Diplomacy check

I'm aware of the wording, but I want the bonus to also apply to using Charisma on a Charisma/Diplomacy check that happens before you act or that is imposed by the scenario rules.

I get you. However, with this intent, I believe the wording is even more confusing, as Scenario/BYA checks never "list" anything - they're just spelled out as "Diplomacy check", for example. The "list" thing would only apply to CtA/CtD where you have *several* listed check, Diplomacy is one of those check, but you're attempting a *different* check (or a card manipulation that's not related to a check; say, a power "You may automatically acquire an ally that lists Diplomacy in its checks to acquire" - but I think this part obviously is not the intent for Hiro/Meeting the Locals powers).

In all other instances, you're already attempting a straight-up Diplomacy check (including, say, using Imrijka's Strength skill for Diplomacy) - and that's already traditionally covered by the PACG template "on/to your Diplomacy check"

Doppelschwert wrote:
Longshot11 wrote:
-> Starting this scenario with a displayed Curse of Flesheaters is incredibly punishing for small parties, and downright homicidal for solo play. You may want to consider introducing a way to remove this Curse before the end of the scenario
Defeating a Witch Doctor henchman allows you to remove a card that has the curse trait; it's usually enough to quickly tear through one location to get rid of it in time.

Oh, thanks! I had forgotten about that!

On to the last portion of notes:

-AD5/Epilogue: “vulcano” -> volcano

-AD5: “etheral” -> ethereal, “it’s strength” -> its

-5A is called “Smooth-…”, instead of “Brazen-…” (as it correctly appears in the scenario list for AD5); “trying to life up” -> live up
-> Barracuda Aiger was examining the whole location, right? Otherwise, this is one very random condition for the Sidequest
-> this scenario reminds me of the dreaded Siege of Drezen, but there beating an Army was closing a location automatically. Since here characters have no control over which locations to explore, there may be a bit too much for a single character’s “closing” turn – a typical Close Location would consist of 1) Defeat a ship (most characters won’t have Survival) 2) Complete “To Close” condition (most characters won’t be well-suited for their particular location) 3) Defeat a villain. Maybe consider a mechanic to allow another character to take on one of those challenges?
….Aaaand it just occurred to me, this may be the first time where using the Raging Wave seems almost mandatory. If that’s the intent – disregard my rambling.

-5B – what is the point of Yamashi Scouts being anchored? Can I not use them at other locations? From your previous explanation, I gathered that they just display, and may be used by any player, anywhere?? (same note applies for 5C too)
- “it’s difficulty” – its difficulty
- The Blink Spider Trigger seems a bit counter-intuitive to me – I’ve literally done what the scenario told me, “stay on your toes”, and I get *easier* to ambush as a result?!? I think it would’ve been better if the Spiders were harder by default – but if you Trigger them, you get to ignore that difficulty boost.
- “When you encounter Kaze…” – it is not clear if I should encounter Aquatic BEFORE or AFTER I’m done with the Kaze encounter

-5C – Just to make sure, I only ever need to close 2 locations here – 1 character’s Murderhold, move him to Hall of Champions, then close Hall of Champions and encounter Takeshi?
- it just occurred to me that Water Yai are disproportionately cruel towards Alchemists, but that’s probably OK…
- I don’t have the card on hand, but just as a heads up – Murderhole and Hall’s “To Close” conditions shouldn’t be too restrictive for a wide array of characters (can’t remember what those are right now)
EDIT: And I just checked them - this scenario seems to hit casters hard (3 consecutive combats to close a Murderhole!) AND it may turn out downright impossible for some of them to "win"(need 1 weapon for Hall of Champions); furthermore, it's still severe for more Melee/Ranged -oriented guys - they need to have on hand one weapon To Close HoC, one weapon (presumably) to fight the Honorable - and that's not including the need to possibly discard/recharge a weapon for the HoC Henchman fight.
This, and a couple of other scenarios, make me think if maybe when you say "When you would close a location" you actually meant "When you would attempt to close a location"?
Otherwise, could I suggest some alternative combat/To Close conditions for caster? (Say, a Seoni who hasn't taken a Weapon feat would just drag the party down in this scenario - she has no chance to close HoC and will just have to do "empty turns").
Alternatively, maybe at least the Takeshi encounter shouldn't be forced On Closing, but rather "When Hall of Champions is closed, at the end of your turn you may summon and encounter Takeshi" - so that characters can "catch their breath" before the final encounter?
At any rate, since you tested that with your friends, I'd be curious about how your experience went, as I'm theorizing here.

-5-D: “it’s checks to acquire” – its checks
- this scenario seems quite punishing for dedicated casters. Granted, it’s “thematic” but people will have to go through the same number of locations, with some of their party severely handicapped… It’s difficult to judge impact without a playthrough though.

- 5E: “Masao’s henchman” – henchmen

- AD6: “Masao and his henchman” – henchmen; “Sayaka and their henchman” – “and her henchmen”; some capitalization needed in the Scenario List (just to make sure, make another pass for this on all Scenario Lists/Names – there are different “style guides” in English on this, AFAIK, so I won’t presume to speak on all instances); the name of 6A features “anway” instead of “anyway” (also, where’s my Skill Feat reward for spotting Pirates of the Caribbean references? :D

- 6-A: Reward – random plunder seems a bit underwhelming at this point, maybe add a “with AD# of 4 or higher” provision?
6B: “by the islands guardian” -> “by the island’s guardian”; “tempering” -> tampering; on the back of Hirgenzosk’s Tummy: “ignore it’s powers” -> its
- There’s something that bugs me about this scenario: on one hand, players want to spread as much as possible, or otherwise Hirgenzosk is going to take huge bites off the Blessings Deck each time he’s encountered (due to him being “auto-undefeated”). OTOH, the optimal strategy seem to be to get everyone ASAP in Hirgy’s belly, have them grind through all the card within, and remove his “invulnerability” – but this would currently require 1 “undefeated Villain” encounter per player!
I think I would like to see (and also from a thematic standpoint!) the scenario power changed to “After you encounter Hirgenzosk, any player at your location may bury their discard pile to move to Hirgenzosk’s Tummy. I.e. – some of my buddies may be exploring the Shackles on foot, but those of them who are with me on the Shirofune when I fight the turtle are just as capable of jumping into its mouth as I am. Gameplaywise, thiswill offer the dilemma – do we spread out for temp closes and count on only 1 or 2 characters to gring through the Tummy, or do we bunch up – we’ll take a huge loss of timer the first time we fight Hingy, but we’ll also be able to take on the Tummy together (while minimizing risk of Hirgy encounter in his invulnerable state)

-6C: “to enter Gannet Island” -> to approach; “if it’s location” -> “if its”

- 6D: “from it’s prison” – its prison;
- It strikes me as really odd that having beaten Masao’s henchmen MORE badly (completing their Sidequests) actually makes them STRONGER. Or is it a mistake, and they should gain a feat if I HAVEN’T completed both their quests?!?
…Aaand I just saw the Reward, so turns out this is actually a blessing in disguise? So, disregard the above.

-7A: There’s no point in restricting the “Devil conversion” to Human monsters only (as in, why would a Half-elf not be a Devil? I imagine the “random monsters” here just represent various incarnations of summoned Devil creatures) Furthermore, they should most definitely gain the Outsider trait as well!
- the Win condition would probably be better worded as “You win the scenario when the siege deck is empty…”
- It is not clear if players are allowed to move between locations: there ARE “other open locations” besides the “Shrine of Sealing” a character’s at, but they’re ALSO “Shrines of Sealing”. So, it’s unclear if the ATL text means “other than THIS Shrine of Sealing”, or “other than LOCATIONS NAMED Shrine of Sealing” (this note also goes for 7B)
- In the Henchmen table, Drowning Devil and Magaav Assassin are separated in way that’s not usual – why is that? I am unclear on how many of which henchman I’m supposed to shuffle in the Siege Deck.
- To be clear: I’m NOT shuffling the banes from the Shrines into the siege deck, correct?

-EPILOGUE: double “in in” in the first sentence; “extoic” -> exotic; “surrounding” -> around;

I think that's about it for now. I'll probably skim a couple more times over it (just reading it made me feel like I was on an epic adventure!), so I'l write back if I come up with anything else. Cheers!

EDIT: Also, this note applies to "The ARt of Shipping":
- “You win the resource stack contains AT LEAST…” – since I will be adding those cards to the stack only 1 at a time, this leaves me unsure if I’m allowed to continue playing even after I have gained 3x Boon Type. If so, maybe something like “When the resource stack contains at least 3…. you MAY win the scenario”


Thanks again for your feedback!
I've uploaded version 1.02 which fixes most of the issues you've mentioned.

While I'm not a native speaker, I'm a bit ashamed about all those grammar/spelling mistakes, so let me shortly give some excuses so I can feel better about myself:
While I was writing the texts, I somehow got the wrong impression that in the context of rules for games, you always use [it's] instead of [its], no matter if it makes sense or not, and I was actually going out of my way to make a lot of those mistakes, as crazy as that may sound. I also think the style guides are very confusing, so I'm fine with having screwed up the titles, but the remaining errors are totally on me.

Anyway, let's adress the remaining issues that weren't changed:

Longshot11 wrote:
Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?

I agree with you, but the main issue is that I want the power to affect the scenario check in 5-E regardless of whether you choose Diplomacy or Charisma. I'll leave it as it is for now in good faith that the RAI are clear enough. I'm open to better formulations of course.

Adventure 5 wrote:

This adventure is supposed to challenge parties that overly rely on overspecialization (in this order: high combat skills at the cost of low non-combat skills, heavy examining, high non-combat skills at the cost of low combat skills, heavy casting), with the failsafe that you can always summon the Raging Wave if you skilled them to cover your weaknesses.

Scenario 5-A wrote:

This scenario reminds you of Siege of Drezen because it is modelled after it. However, I think there are two changes that make it significantly easier:

- The henchmen are not Armies
- Only the banes move on to the next location instead of all cards, and there aren't too many banes around
Regarding your fears:
1) While not mandatory, you CAN use the Order of the Raging Wave to defeat the ships if you skilled them accordingly (...which you should if your party can't deal with ships otherwise), but the cohort is helping you as well
2) When a henchman allows you to close, the closing is part of the encounter, and you can still use the Order of the Raging Wave
3) You don't need to defeat the villain in order to close
If anything, the scenario felt a bit too easy with my party of 3 characters, and I had to explore almost every card of each location before finding the henchmen
Yamashi Scouts being anchored wrote:

Now that you mention it, there is a disconnect with my previous explanation; I think at some point, the intention was that the Scouts should actually allow mass movement, but don't trigger the ship summons on cards like Elizmara or Pirate Hunt, and don't give you any benefit from cards that get better when you are on a ship.

The way I read the rules is that while the scouts deny you being on a ship, you are still commanding them, which is only relevant to enabling the mass movement here, given that their power can be used everywhere.
The anchoring is to deny you the mass movement as well.
I guess the bottom line is that as written, they do allow mass movement, but I'm fine with everyone deciding on their own if they'd rather disallow it.
Scenario 5-B wrote:

-I agree on the Blink Spiders from a story perspective, but I really want to punish you for doing any examining in this scenario.

-"When you encounter" is defined in the rulebook as the first step before you can evade a card, but I've adjusted the text a bit to emphasize that I'm refering to this step.
Scenario 5-C wrote:

- Yes, you only need to close both locations, but since no one can help you with the first location, it takes longer

- Casters have the option to close the first location after emptying it instead of defeating the henchman, and they can use the Order of the Raging Wave for combat as well
- The Hall of Champions has 4 weapons you can acquire (with the help of the Raging Wave if needed be) in order to close it, so if you don't have any, you can refuse to close after encountering the henchman to have enough opportunities to acquire one of those
- When I playtested, I decided on a champion character to rush through both locations, while the other two dedicated all of their ressources to make him succeed at everything on his way. With more characters, I also would've made a rush party and a support party that supports who made it out of the murderhole first
Scenario 5-D wrote:
If you can reliably recharge your spells, you'll usually have a chance of over 50% to cast your spells as normal, but you'll need some resources to keep your spells around. The first villain fight is known beforehand so you can prepare, and after that you get access to the cohort, which can help you with both casting and recharging. If everything else fails, there is always the Raging Wave to help you out
Scenario 6-B wrote:

Changed as suggested. Who says you can't have nice things? :P

Scenario 6-D wrote:

My interpretation is this: The more sidequests you complete, the more you earn their annoyance or respect (depending on the character), and that motivates them to get back at you

Scenario 7-A wrote:

-It's only about the Human trait for balance reasons; it's no fun if you're heavily invested in fire and/or poison and everything in the last scenario is immune to it, without you having a chance to know beforehand. I forgot to add the Outsider trait in the current version but will do so in the next one.

-It's intended that you can move freely between different Shrine of Sealing locations.
-Yes, you're not supposed to shuffle the banes into the siege deck. That would make the scenario far too hard, especially for smaller parties (since the number of locations is fixed)
The Art of Shipping wrote:

I forgot to include this in the current version but it will be in the next one.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Doppelschwert wrote:
Longshot11 wrote:
Hiro Yamashi: “your check that lists Diplomacy” – either “Diplomacy check” or “check against a card that list Diplomacy in its checks to acquire or defeat” (quite the mouthful that)?
I agree with you, but the main issue is that I want the power to affect the scenario check in 5-E regardless of whether you choose Diplomacy or Charisma.

I see. In that case,"When you fail a Diplomacy check..." covers you for 4-A, but for Hiro (so he can service your needs for 5-E) - what you're looking for is:

"...you may add... to your non-combat Charisma or Diplomacy check."

Doppelschwert wrote:
- The Hall of Champions has 4 weapons you can acquire (with the help of the Raging Wave if needed be) in order to close it, so if you don't have any, you can refuse to close after encountering the henchman to have enough opportunities to acquire one of those

Oh, I totally forgot there're weapons in Hall of Champions, and spaced out on the "use Raging Wave" again.

Doppelschwert wrote:
I guess the bottom line is that as written, they do allow mass movement, but I'm fine with everyone deciding on their own if they'd rather disallow it.

To me, the issue is not disallowing it, bu rather that the way the Scouts were written, I wasn't clear that you were allowed to mass-move with them in the first place. I'll understand if you don't want to bother, but I think a line of explanation to that effect in the Scout section of the Rules (the card is too crowded already) would only be a benefit.

Thanks again for all your hard work!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Hi again,

So I just went through the AP again to look over the rewards. I would like to point out 2 "issues" though they may be up to personal preference:

- Character Power feats: I think (I didn't really check, I'm working from memory here) you're pretty much following the S&S feat distribution. One particular issue I had with that set is that -while the feat total equals RotR in the end- it's very slow to give out post-Role power feats.
This may or may not be desired, as far as "difficulty scaling" goes, but regardless of any benefit a designer sees in that, there's a drawback that much outweighs it (in my eyes) - players are getting a lot less "play" out of their character's coolest features.

Compare RotR that gives you the 5th POwer feat just a couple of scearios after Role and 4th Power - to create a nice mid-game boost to characters and let them get a quicker scaling up some of the Roles new "upgrade paths.
(btw, YOU are giving the 7th power feat at end of AD5 - which is LOT more sensible than (iirc) S&S which gave you only 1 or 2 scenarios to play with (!!!) - those might as well be non-existant)

So, I'd prefer if the 5th (and, potentially, 6th) Power feat were moved a little earlier to get some more play out of them.

- Raging Wave power feats: somewhat connected to the above, but I feel the Order is getting too little Power feats. Again, difficulty balance may very well be your main concern here, but since the Order has a price tag attached and is (imho) primarily intended as a contingency for parties that are under-equipped for a particular scenario's recquirements - I don't thing more power feats here would be over-powered, to allow characters to (sensibly) delve into more of the upgrade paths.

More importantly - by limiting the use of the Order (only 5 feats VS a character's 7; I'm not counting the one-off AD6 reward here), I feel you're under-utilizing one of your "unique selling points" and I'd prefer I could get some more mileage out of that one.

So, I'd recommend you at least give out a power feat for AD0 (consistent with characters also gaining a power feat) - the AD0 completion scenario is even called "Order of the Raging Wave" after all! - if not for 5-3 as well.


So, I'm very late to answer, and I'm sorry for that, but I needed to take a step back to deal with some private issues, so that couldn't be helped unfortunately.

Thanks a lot for your feedback Longshot - I will adress it once I've thought through everything properly, and then there will be an update to the PDF as well!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Version 1.03 is online now!

Changelog:

- Added power feat for Order of the Raging Wave as reward to AD0
- Adapted rules of engaging Triceratops to punish low dex characters less in 4-C
- Adapted evading rules to punish low dex characters less in 4-D
- Updated artwork of Shen-Tei to use the picture from the blog

@Longshot:
I've been thinking a lot about the power feats for the order and adapted them according as seen above (it was actually like that in an earlier draft). I was hesitant to do so since I want the choices to feel meaningful (in particular, that implies you shouldn't get access to 9 feats for them so that one power stays weak throughout), but you've convinced me that one feat more is more in line. You can end up with 8 feats now for the final scenario, which is fine with me.

Regarding the power feats for characters, I'm mostly following the MM distribution, which grants the feats earlier than RotR in every AD except AD4. I actually prefer it that way, since the first power-feat post role feels more meaningful to me that way, while getting access to your powers earlier in general.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I also see the Outsider trait is added in 7A :D

Thanks again for the epic work, Doppelschwert! I was wating for the final revision to start a big print order for this and the PACG Season adventures. Now it's on! Now I must only hope Core gets delayed 10 years or so, so I can play through all of the backlog... :)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / Homebrew and House Rules / Emerald Legacy - Adventure Path (Complete!) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules