Hey!
It probably doesn't help that I am trying to learn the game alone, but that's how it is for now!
I have a question re the close/guard condition on Caravan.
I get that if I don't succeed at a Perception 5+# then I need to summon and defeat the danger.
Does this mean, I have to go through all the locations, find the card, defeat it, and then shuffle it back to the original location?
I'm still playing the quick start a few times until I get used to the rules, and this one keeps hitting me.
I've started keeping the danger out, and using one of the proxy cards in the quick start deck for when the danger should come out.
Am I doing this right?
Sorry for the really dumb question.
Joe
Chief Technical Officer
|
The danger shouldn't be in a location. The Quick-Start Guide says (under Prepare the Story Banes), "The scenario lists the story bane Rescue as the danger; set that card where everyone can see it."
The rules for "summon and defeat" (page 14 of the rulebook) say "Summon and Acquire/Summon and Defeat: The To Close or To Guard section on some locations requires you to do this. Summon and encounter the card; if you do not acquire or defeat it, the location is not closed."
The rules for Summon and Encounter (same page) say: "If you’re told to summon and encounter the danger, summon the danger listed by the scenario and encounter it."
And from the leadoff paragraph for Summoned cards (same page): "If you’re told to summon a card that’s already being used, just imagine you have another copy of that card for the new encounter; this summoned copy ceases to exist at the end of the encounter."
So during setup, you'll put the danger out where everyone can see it. When you're told to summon and encounter it, you'll encounter an imaginary copy of it that just ceases to exist at the end of the encounter.
In short, encounter it; if you defeat it, the location closes; if you don't defeat it, the location doesn't close. Either way, the imaginary copy of the danger goes away and the "real" copy stays where it was, to be referred to again should it be needed.
I knew I was doing something wrong!
This makes sense now.
So, I should be shuffling in both proxies as the henchmen, not one, the bandit and the danger!
OK, so the danger never gets shuffled in (unless listed as a henchman or villain)
I hope I'm not the only person that has had this issue!
The examples in the book are good, but because they don't reference the sample scenario, they can be strange to follow to someone new to the game.
Thank you for clearing this up!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just played Rumble Road recently (rating: reasonably risk-free). I don't have the Caravan location in front of me, so I don't know the exact wording, but I interpreted it to be either you can attempt the check or you can summon and defeat the danger. I didn't read the danger as being a consequence.
Which is correct?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just played Rumble Road recently (rating: reasonably risk-free). I don't have the Caravan location in front of me, so I don't know the exact wording, but I interpreted it to be either you can attempt the check or you can summon and defeat the danger. I didn't read the danger as being a consequence.
Which is correct?
To close or guard the location Caravan
you either
succeed at a Wisdom or Perception check
or you
summon the danger.
So, you are correct, the danger is not a consequence.
My family just played through Rumble Road with the Quick Start rules as our first experience with the ACG, and I'm left with some questions.
1) Is there any limit on the number of cards you can play in a turn?
2) My daughter ended up with two armor Item cards. Common sense says she can only display (and thus benefit from) one at a time, but I didn't find a rule limiting the number of displayed items.
3) My husband played Amiri, and she has a power: "Closing your location does not prevent you from exploring." I assume this means that she can move to another location and play a card to explore there, but other characters have to end their turn when they close a location (and move)?
4) The Rescue Story Bane card says, "If defeated, draw a new ally that lists Diplomacy in its check to acquire." Does this mean draw from your own deck? Do you go through it to find an appropriate card (and thus examine your own deck)? Do you choose one, or is it random?
5) The Bandit Story Bane card has a check to defeat of Combat 9 + ## or Banish a Random Boon. Does that really mean you can just throw away a card and automatically defeat it? It seemed a little too easy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Not really, though there is the limit of how many cards you can play per check/step (one per boon type) and you can only play a specific power once per check/step. (p. 7-8 of the Core Set Rulebook)
2. You can display as many cards as you want. It is a little weird when you're talking about Armor, but that's the game abstraction for you. :)
3. Yes, normally when you close a location you can't explore any more. (p. 15 of the Core Set Rulebook)
4. When something says "a new X" it means from the vault (box). (p. 14 of the Core Set Rulebook, also in the Glossary on p. 31)
5. If that's what it says, then yes, you can lose a random boon card from your hand to defeat the Bandit. (Effectively, you paid it to go away.)
3) My husband played Amiri, and she has a power: "Closing your location does not prevent you from exploring." I assume this means that she can move to another location and play a card to explore there, but other characters have to end their turn when they close a location (and move)?
3. Yes, normally when you close a location you can't explore any more. (p. 15 of the Core Set Rulebook)
To complete Parody's answer, since the character card text override the rulebook, your assumption is exact: Amiri as an exception can play a new card/power to keep on exploring while she has made her mandatory move after closing her previous location.
To be exact other characters do not "end their turn" when they close a location, they just can't explore anymore in their new location. But they can still play cards like a Cure spell.And if I didn't miss a rule, you could even attempt to close the new location you moved to if it happens to be empty (if its your turn).
Thanks for the replies. Since our first session, I sat down and read the Example of Play in the rulebook, and things are getting clearer. (I know: I ought to have read that first, but the Quick Start rules sheet told me I didn't need to for the first session!)
Oddly enough, the one-boon-type-per-check rule seems only to be clearly stated in the Example of Play and the Transition Guide listing rule changes. Am I just missing it in the actual rules?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Oddly enough, the one-boon-type-per-check rule seems only to be clearly stated in the Example of Play and the Transition Guide listing rule changes. Am I just missing it in the actual rules?
We don't state it directly in the Quick-Start Guide, but we do say "The back of the rulebook summarizes important things including the steps of a turn, the steps of encountering a card, the actions in attempting a check, and how to play cards." The back of the rulebook's "A Few Rules That Are Easy to Forget" section includes "While encountering a card, the party may collectively play no more than one boon of each type during each step."
The primary rule, including an example, is on page 8 under Encountering a Card in the paragraph that begins "During each step": "Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit. For example, if Amiri plays a weapon on a check, Valeros may play a weapon on that check only if it can be played freely."
There's a reminder on page 12 under Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check: "Remember that collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon during a check, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit."
There's another reminder on page 12 under Suffer Damage, If Necessary: "Remember that collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon during a check, so if someone already played a spell on the check, a spell can’t be played to reduce damage."
And there's the glossary entry for Freely: "Not counting toward the usual limit of playing one of each type of boon on a check or step or while suffering damage. See Encountering a Card on page 8 and Suffering Damage on page 13.")
The primary rule, including an example, is on page 8 under Encountering a Card in the paragraph that begins "During each step": "Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit. For example, if Amiri plays a weapon on a check, Valeros may play a weapon on that check only if it can be played freely."
Okay, I see it now. I was looking for it under Playing Cards.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
It's not under Playing Cards because it's not true at all times you might play a card—only while encountering a card, attempting a check, or suffering damage. (The latter has its own specific version of the rule on page 13 under Suffering Damage: "Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same source, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit.")
I don't have the Caravan location in front of me, so I don't know the exact wording, but I interpreted it to be either you can attempt the check or you can summon and defeat the danger. I didn't read the danger as being a consequence.
Which is correct?
To close or guard the location Caravan
you either
succeed at a Wisdom or Perception check
or you
summon the danger.
So, you are correct, the danger is not a consequence.
For what it's worth, new players on BGG are having this same confusion. So it might be worth adding to the FAQ.
For what it's worth, new players on BGG are having this same confusion. So it might be worth adding to the FAQ.Maybe, but precisely such differences in wording are covered in a side box within the rules on page 11.
Yes, but - depending on how a new player parses the Caravan wording - different bullets in the p. 11 sidebox apply.
The exact wording is: Either succeed at a Wisdom or Perception 5+# check or summon and defeat the danger.
If you parse this as:
Either (succeed at a Wisdom or Perception 5+# check) or (summon and defeat the danger) then the fourth bullet applies [choose an option].
If you parse this as:
(Either succeed at a Wisdom or Perception 5+# check) or (summon and defeat the danger) then the third bullet applies [if you fail, must take consequences].
So the sidebox actually supports both interpretations. It's only because I'm an experienced player that I know that the fourth bullet is correct.
Jenceslav is exactly right.
When a power wants you to make a choice you will have "EITHER" before things like "SUCCEED AT", and then later a "OR".
When a power wants you to roll dice or suffer a consequence you will have "SUCCEED AT" before things like "EITHER", "OR"...
Don't forget that I generally agree with you. :)
All I'm saying is that new players are having trouble with the Cavaran (which isn't necessarily intuitive in terms of everyday English grammar) and the p. 11 sidebox. This is one of those things that requires a fairly technical and sophisticated understanding of the game, and no doubt new players will keep asking for clarification. That's why I mentioned that it might be included the FAQ - particularly since the location happens to be in one of the first few Core scenarios, which is when players are still learning the basics.
If the official viewpoint is that the FAQ is more of an errata document than a list of commonly asked questions, then IMHO that's unfortunate. But it's completely Paizo's call, of course.
So that you don't think I'm a total loon (too late, I know), I've personally written almost 20 game FAQs. Mostly for wargames, but not all - and some 10-20 pages in length. One thing is that PACG is perhaps now closer to a wargame than anything else, with its long and intricate rulebook and rules logic.
I'm frequently told that certain questions shouldn't be included in a FAQ, because the rulebook logic "clearly" answers the question. But if new players keep asking the same question, it doesn't matter; something about the rulebook is causing widespread trouble. Including the question in the FAQ is (a) useful for new players (and some old) and (b) saves the community the trouble of answering the question on the forums over and over again (e.g., am I a character at my own location?). If players know that the FAQ is available, at least.
It also helps to remember, I think, that the Paizo forum is a comumunity of PACG experts. Not many brand new players post here. They go elsewhere - most often BGG. That's where most of the rules activity occurs.
Since the beginning, the PACG "FAQ" really are more PACG "Errata" than "Clarifications / Players help" although it sometimes include some.
I tend to see the Forums as being the "Clarifications" position.
I tend to see the Forums as being the "Clarifications" position.
Fair enough. This is something that I've only come to understand recently about the FAQ, as my brain can sometimes be on the denser side. At least the part that processes PACG rules.
Anyway, for what it's worth, I just posted a list of "easily missed rules" for brand new PACG players. It doesn't include the Caravan issue, but it does have other stuff. :)
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm frequently told that certain questions shouldn't be included in a FAQ, because the rulebook logic "clearly" answers the question. But if new players keep asking the same question, it doesn't matter; something about the rulebook is causing widespread trouble.
Since the beginning, the PACG "FAQ" really are more PACG "Errata" than "Clarifications / Players help" although it sometimes include some.
My perspective is somewhere between the two. If there's something that people get wrong a lot, then it's likely deserving or clarification by an actual change to the card or rules. So where other games will issue a FAQ that says "here's how you do this thing," we couple that with a change that officially shores that up.
But there's only so far you can take that. We do get repeated questions where the answer is clearly covered in the rules, and we feel that the language is as correct as can be and the placement is as correct as can be, and all we can really do with that is keep answering in the forums.
For example, your list includes this: "End-of-turn effects occur *before* you reset your hand, not after. This is fairly counterintuitive, since you’d think “end of turn” activity would be last thing that you do; but that’s not the case. By the way, Recovery also happens before you reset your hand." Not only are all those things clearly in a very specific order in End Your Turn, but the Turn Overview on the back of the rulebook and on the reference card on the back of all the Core scourges all say "End your turn—apply end-of-turn effects, do recovery, then reset." In the Example of Play, Lee's turn even has him go through recovery then resetting.
We think we're doing everything within reason to lead people to the water, but if they don't drink it, at some point we have to say that's their own problem.
Not only are all those things clearly in a very specific order in End Your Turn, but the Turn Overview on the back of the rulebook and on the reference card on the back of all the Core scourges all say "End your turn—apply end-of-turn effects, do recovery, then reset."
Agree 100%. Not everything on the linked list should be in a FAQ. (Sorry, didn't meant to imply that.) Maybe only 1-2 items, if that. "Easily missed" and "frequently asked" are two very different things, to be sure.
For example, I've learned over the years that the phrase "end-of-turn" is innately confusing. Both new and experienced players get tripped up, and even some OP groups that I've visited have gotten this wrong and do end-of-turn stuff after resetting. And I swear, my own group has to ask each time: Wait, is end-of-turn before resetting, or after?
It's natural to assume that "end of turn" is the very last thing you would do, and it doesn't necessarily occur to people to look it up. Hence the warning in the list.
But yeah, it's clearly stated in the rulebook - multiple times, as you say.
Anyway, thanks everyone for your thoughtful responses. I'll go back to enjoying the game now. And teaching new players. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difference here is that 'end of turn' in PACG refers to a phase, comprised of a few steps, all of which occur before your turn (as a player) is actually over and the next player can play. In other games (or just the vernacular of everyday life), 'end of turn' means that your turn is over; stop doing stuff.
Yes, the rulebook does a good job explaining that 'end of turn' means something different in PACG, but it's battling a lot of held beliefs and preconceptions. I think it bears mentioning to new players, especially in a game like PACG, where one player will own the game and others will (often) learn the rules through them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually never had a problem with End-of-Turn, because it speaks innately to how start-of-turn works in MTG. But then, I think that's why MTG never uses the phrase "start of turn"; they invented all-new terminology.
"Untap, upkeep, draw" is a common shorthand to refer to the 3 stages that comprise what can loosely be considered your start-of-turn. You untap your permanents, you have your 'upkeep' step (which is usually when what could be described as 'start of turn' effects trigger), then you draw your card for the turn and move on.
"End Turn, Recovery, Reset" is no different, though perhaps slightly different terminology like "Resolution, Recovery, Reset" would've been more immediately readable to players (plus, it features alliteration). Too late now for such a change, of course.