5-1E under 6.0: how is this possible without a team full of clerics?


Pathfinder Adventure Card Society

Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

So, my OP group just wrapped our *third* failure to clear 5-1E under Core rules, and it's becoming a bit of a frustration. I just want to make sure that I have everything figured out and we're playing everything as intended.

For reference, the party makeup is CD Estra/Ultimate Magic, CD Imrijka/Ultimate Intrigue, UC Hayato/Barbarian, and Pathfinder Tales Celeste/Ultimate Magic.

1: Scar Bay location decks are consistent issues, with monsters being added every turn. It isn't safe to be there if you don't have some kind of combat ability, and if you aren't very armored, an early close of any location is going to wipe your hand out. Additionally, we are finding that under the new one-blessing-per-check rule, the only one of our players able to reliably make the closing check is Estra. This is a problem as that player is rarely the one finding the Henchmen.

2: The new rule that attempts at closing a location force the end of your turn means that hitting a henchman in your first exploration cuts off your ability to mill the location, slowing progress through the decks. Again, when the Scar Bay locations don't stop refilling, this is a huge issue.

3: Celeste seems pretty well designed to shine in this path, what with the pirate theme and everything. So, of course, any turn that she begins without combat spells of some kind in hand, she has to go hide in the one other location, because her unarmed combat ability is useless in Scar Bay. Can't poison undead, after all. Bad shuffles result in a lot of wasted turns as a result.

4: Lack of boon variety: the location decks here give you items, allies, and blessings. Great. Celeste needs *spells* in order to adjust her deck to be more useful in this scenario, and isn't getting any. The only spells we're seeing are as plunder, and those just go away when we fail the scenario.

We've failed three times due to clock-out, now. Every time, it can be directly blamed on having had two failed closing checks in Scar Bay locations, and not having the turn/exploration economy to mill through to the bottoms of the decks.

Anyone have some suggestions of what we could try in order to get past this thing and move on?


While it was a pain, our group of Jirelle (S&S, Rogue+Intrigue), Talitha (CD, Magus+Magic?), Alahazra (CD, Oracle+Magic?), and Ukuja (CD, Hunter+Wilderness?) got through this one OK. I don't think we did anything too different other than exploring more than we might have normally. However, we got to play it under the old rules so we had a bit easier time making up for our flaws.

Your party isn't perfect for those closing checks, but at least you all have more than the minimum chance to hit it when you have at least one extra die. I was Amaryllis in Season of the Shackles and any Scenario with a lot of Ships meant she was on support duty. :/

1. Don't forget that another answer to taking damage is having an empty hand. Also, if you've won 5-1B, you can take a Cure or another helpful Basic card from the box instead of stashing a Plunder card and those cards will be there for upgrades even if you fail.

2. Attempting to close a location during your explore step doesn't end your turn. Only closing a location during your explore step stops you from further exploring. (Page 15 of the Core Set Rulebook, final paragraph under Closing Your Location.) This didn't really change from how it worked before, they just had to modify it for disappearing Locations.

3. I agree, Scar Bay is bad for Celeste Combat-wise. I assume she didn't take the Examine power? Examining twice on her turn would be helpful even if she spends most of the game at the Fringes. (Reference: Cards don't remember you've used them before.)

4. It can suck when you're not finding upgrades that help. I've had plenty of stretches where I wasn't getting anything useful even when we weren't stuck on a Scenario that only has a few types. If there are cards you know would be helpful, you could always go play a different Scenario to try to get them and come back.

As far as other hints:

With a lot of locations that only one or two characters have a good chance to close, you need to do your best to let them have that closing chance. Examine as much as you can. Swap with a good closer when a location gets low on cards. Since temp closing isn't an issue, going in pairs with one of the better closers in each might be a good way to start.

While I don't think it's as helpful here, don't forget that you're on a ship and can move with others.

Do you have the Player Mats or something else that gives you a reroll from the Accessory Perks? If you're playing at a store, does the combined group buy enough stuff before the game to get a benefit from the Retail Incentives?

Good luck! Hope you get through it next time!


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

There is also the avenge mechanic.
If there are multiple characters in one location, if the active player fails against a bane, another player can buyer a boon to encounter the bane before it is shuffled back in.
If you do this with henchmen, I think this allows the avenging player to do the close check i.e. if someone else finds the henchman, they fail and the Estra Avenges, defeats the henchman and then does the close check


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

Have everyone pile onto the same Scar Bay and close it ASAP, then have everyone pile onto the next one and close it ASAP, rinse and repeat. The faster you close them, the less monsters you have to deal with; remember that the end of turn bonus monsters goes to a random Scar Bay, not a random open Scar Bay, so by piling up and closing you increase the chance of a closed location getting the monster. Always close early and take the damage. Otherwise you are effectively taking MORE “damage” by going for late closes due to both turn and card resource expenditure.

Have someone give Celeste a spare weapon so she isn’t useless while spell-less.

Advice given by other posters is good as well.

Venture-Agent, Online—ACG aka redeux

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How are you approaching these locations? I don't see it in the post and sorry if it is obvious but grouping up and closing them one at a time will help out since the scenario rule puts it into a "random Scar bay location deck" (including a closed location, because the conversion rules don't banish Scar bay when closed). So closing the first few scar bay locations as quickly as possible is very important here.

1. Estra and Celeste both are using Ultimate Magic which gives access to Fire Snake. Very good upgrade that I'd consider keeping for the lifetime of those characters. Inquisitor has access to Blessing of Shelyn and Estra has access to Blessing of Milani which will help with that particular close check. Celeste also has access to Good Omen which can help (Especially if you have a core set laying around where she can use the replacement option to get the new version which gives 1d6+# instead of 1+#). Not great solutions but this should help if you're able to get some/all of those cards.

2-3. Agreed with parody.

4. Sometimes it helps going back and replaying a scenario to get those deck upgrades you need. If you don't want to replay a scenario then one thing you *could* do is go through We Be Heroes? from Free rpg day. That is 2 scenarios and gives a total of 4 deck upgrades one of which can be a guaranteed blessing1 for each character if you complete it. could be useful for that alone, but might be a fun side-adventure after the frustrating 5-1E multiple times. We Be Heroes (make sure to also download the sanctioning document which lists the rewards for Organized Play).

Matsu wrote:
If you do this with henchmen, I think this allows the avenging player to do the close check i.e. if someone else finds the henchman, they fail and the Estra Avenges, defeats the henchman and then does the close check

Correct, the avenging player is the one who "defeated" the henchman and then that means the avenging player attempts to close the location.

The avenge mechanic can be costly to use, but I've found in some cases it is worth it. Closing a location deck that has quite a few cards left in it would be on the list, and especially in this scenario where more cards are added.


Parody wrote:
Only closing a location during your explore step stops you from further exploring. (Page 15 of the Core Set Rulebook, final paragraph under Closing Your Location.) This didn't really change from how it worked before, they just had to modify it for disappearing Locations.

The rules did change a bit, since - under the old rules - if you closed a location you could still explore if you had a way to move to another location. (Ranzak was a close-move-and-explore specialist in one campaign.)

Understandably, the Core rules don't let you explore after closing because of the free move. (Apocrypha does the same thing.) However, in legacy campaigns, locations don't disappear after being closed. So is stopping post-close explorations still necessary? Perhaps so, to prevent infinite move-and-close combos.

And yeah, Tapestry's Tides AD1 (and AD2?) is unforgiving to poison-centric characters. Taking a Scorpion Whip as my first card upgrade in TT wasn't the best move.

It is unfortunate that the one-blessing limit appears to hurt the parties most in need: unbalanced parties (in terms of skills), underpowered parties, parties that aren't matched to their campaigns (no Survival characters in TT), etc.

And while the Avenge strategy is interesting and effective, it may not support the fun side of PACG if it becomes a common workaround for legacy scenarios that are otherwise extremely difficult to beat. Repeatedly failing, and then having your failure Avenged by the "closer" is mostly entertaining for the Avenging character - not necessarily for anyone else. (Unless you're playing solo, in which case it doesn't matter.)

P.S. Under the one-blessing limit, the Blessing of Gozreh is much better than it used to be.

Either way, good luck with Tapestry's Tides. We're just finishing AD3 under the Core rules (early scenarios were under the old rules, though), and I suspect we'll be reporting some scenario failures in AD5 and AD6 - if not sooner.

Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's worth noting that Avenge doesn't help at all in most cases in 5-1E, as three of the five Henchmen our group is facing are Pirate Shade Haunts.

We do have a Milani active in Estra's deck right now, at least, and both Celeste and Estra have been running Fire Snake all along, so that's a good start.

I wasn't aware that the attempt to close *doesn't* end the turn, though; that's good to know.

I'll have to see if I can get Imrijka to loosen her deathgrip on her weapons to let Celeste borrow something Dex-based. :)


I'm one of the players (Yojimbo) - and our group generally has minimal issues with scenarios outside a run of bad luck, or approaching a scenario completely wrong.

Two of our players - with a blessing, are rolling 2d6 and looking for an 8 (or 9 post-haunt).

Because this is a deck 1 adeventure, there are VERY few tools available to us to improve our chances, and altering your deck takes forever due to the way organized play upgrades work.

Honestly, my biggest complaint is that this scenario is so lobsided that spending too much effort setting up our decks to try to handle it a bit better will just hurt us during Deck 2 & 3, where we'll be forced to intentionally replay just to get anti-undead (or other cards we put in for this scenario) stuff back out of our deck, because the rest of the campaign is not 95% undead & wisdom closes (or divine).

Avenge really doesn't help much, since the core problems we are encountering:

Close checks (and as James posted, 3/5 of the Henchmen are just auto-clears).
Monsters and Barriers that aggressively punish players for grouping up, combined with 2 characters that cannot deal with getting dragged into multiple extra combats per turn (ie, Celeste being unable to use her default combat ability). So if we were to group up, the odds of us just getting wiped out increase dramatically.
Imrijka can't help with combats (via bow/xbow) unless she's in a different location.

It really feels like if we group up, Celeste is basically removed from the scenario. So what we've been doing is having Yojimbo and Imrijka clear through a location with occasional outside help. However, even with a blessing, Imrijka is 2d6+3 looking for an 8 (or higher), so the chance of a failure remains quite relevant - and failing is catastrophic.


I've never really understood how "Taking One For the Team" works - but perhaps you could do that here? Temporarily replace a character with someone else, that is.

Another option would be to skip the scenario for now, do most/all of AD2, and then come back to 5-1E with more feats and better cards.

Not saying either of these are ideal, but they might be decent options.


wkover wrote:
I've never really understood how "Taking One For the Team" works - but perhaps you could do that here? Temporarily replace a character with someone else, that is.

In this case I suspect it would mean someone (Celeste?) swapping out for an anti-Undead or support character with a high Divine so everyone else can finish. A brand new Kyra (RotR or Core, Cleric+whatever) might work.

Then they can play it again with characters that have the bonuses from completing it and (presumably) the Adventure. You may still want someone to use the helper rather than their own character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, having to swap characters for a reasonably well balanced group to clear a scenario means (to me) that the scenario has critical design flaws.

That shouldn't be the solution to overcoming a scenario, because at that point, the adventure paths should simply list which characters they are designed to play with (which defeats the entire point of organized play and class decks).

Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

Celeste, on the third attempt, used the deck upgrade at the end to swap a moderately-useful Basic item that helped with monsters for a different, also moderately-useful Basic item that will allow at least a little more combat readiness.

But that doesn't change the fact that this scenario, even under pre-Core rules, would have been seriously rough for any Celeste build that uses spells for versatility over combat-readiness, despite being a character who, again, seems purpose-built to shine in the S&S box, and whose release timing seems to line up marvelously with TT using that box.

That said, given that we're going into the fourth attempt at this scenario next week, taking the 'Take One For The Team' option might be best if we fail again. However, the 6.0 guide seems to suggest that using that option is only valid from Adventure 3 forward. Not quite sure what to do with that, or how chronicles are supposed to be filled out to reflect it. It does appear to say that using that option would mean that Celeste can then claim the reward for the scenario *anyways*, in a similar fashion to what using one of Faction's Favor's P1/P2 rewards would do, but the fact that we're still in Adventure 1 seems to preclude actually being able to use this option at all.

I've got almost all of the decks myself, I can make sure there's three or four high-WIS/combat-friendly character options. It would just be really nice not to have to resort to that. :)

Re: various perks... None of us have any of the Accessory Perks available to us as far as I know, and none of the retail incentives are helpful in this particular scenario. The heal one card is nice, but that doesn't sort out the pile of monsters or the Wis 8 check.


Viro Melchior wrote:
Honestly, having to swap characters for a reasonably well balanced group to clear a scenario means (to me) that the scenario has critical design flaws.
James Sinnett wrote:
But that doesn't change the fact that this scenario, even under pre-Core rules, would have been seriously rough for any Celeste build that uses spells for versatility over combat-readiness, despite being a character who, again, seems purpose-built to shine in the S&S box, and whose release timing seems to line up marvelously with TT using that box.

Unfortunately, some Scenarios are hard for some characters/builds. The new ruleset has put a focus on it by removing the old way to get around these problems (throwing Blessings at them) without completely giving us the new way to get around these problems (throwing other types of cards at them that have helper powers).

When I was playing Season of the Righteous we would have had similar problems with the early Scenario with the Labratory and non-Combat checks against the Villain. It was d4s all the way down, and in that one you don't get anything when you fail. (Well, you get random draws from the box.)

James Sinnett wrote:
That said, given that we're going into the fourth attempt at this scenario next week, taking the 'Take One For The Team' option might be best if we fail again. However, the 6.0 guide seems to suggest that using that option is only valid from Adventure 3 forward.

Ignore the Guide; you're just playing with a different character, one you've hand-picked to help get the group through this Scenario. That character will get the reward, not that player's normal one. You'll have to do it again with that player's normal character so they get the reward.

James Sinnett wrote:
I've got almost all of the decks myself, I can make sure there's three or four high-WIS/combat-friendly character options. It would just be really nice not to have to resort to that. :)

I think we all agree. It's the suggestion of last resort, but one that should be put out there for you.

James Sinnett wrote:
Re: various perks... None of us have any of the Accessory Perks available to us as far as I know, and none of the retail incentives are helpful in this particular scenario. The heal one card is nice, but that doesn't sort out the pile of monsters or the Wis 8 check.

A Venture-Whatever doesn't have at least a Folio or t-shirt? What is this world coming to? :)

I come from the RPG side so I'm used to everyone having something. I don't need them for our Card Game group, though, because our organizers bring mats for everyone. If you've had a consistent play group for the card game you might want to poke around online or in your local FLGSes and used book stores for a cheap set of mats that your players can use.

As far as the perks, I like the card draw but you said your group is short on healing so I don't blame you for leaning that way. A reroll is always (potentially) useful, while the discard/draw is almost never used in our group. (We tend to forget it.)


Viro Melchior wrote:
Honestly, having to swap characters for a reasonably well balanced group to clear a scenario means (to me) that the scenario has critical design flaws.

No argument here. From a design perspective, having duplicate locations is problematic because there's a good chance that certain party builds will be unable to reliably meet the closing requirements. This problem is exacerbated under the one-blessing Core rules, to be sure.


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

I’m curious now. Can you post the deck lists and feats of each character in your group? I want to run through it myself in your conditions to see if it’s actually an issue with the character composition or if it’s just a play-style thing.

Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

I'll see about getting everyone's deck lists, sure.

I'm going to come right out and say that at least for Celeste, part of the issue stems from the 4-7 'Duel' reward and how it plays in 6.0. That reward would have been *incredible* before the new feat cap rules were put in place, but now that feats per tier are capped, that deck, which got loaded with extra explore economy up front, wound up unable to take any new spell slots until tiering up.


Deck list for Yojimbo (feats are +1 blessing, +1 hand size, and +1 str)
As mentioned, using Barbarian + Ultimate Combat

Katana +1
Naginata
Nine-Ring Sword
Greatsword
Wolfhide Armor
Fireproof O-Yoroi
Mattock
Crowbar
Blood Periapt
Surgeon (just got, have not ran this scenario with this card - was Retainer)
Retriever
Blessing of the Samurai
Blessing of the Gods (x2)
Blessing of Shax
Jinfu

Of note, the single card that would help Yojimbo the most here is any of the "roll X stat instead of the normal die" items, which are Deck 2. Since that could let me roll 2d10 (including blessing) instead of 2d6 when looking for that 8 or 9 to close. But because this debacle is occuring right out the gates in Deck 1, you haven't gotten access to cards that give that level of problem solving.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Viro Melchior wrote:
Of note, the single card that would help Yojimbo the most here is any of the "roll X stat instead of the normal die" items, which are Deck 2. Since that could let me roll 2d10 (including blessing) instead of 2d6 when looking for that 8 or 9 to close. But because this debacle is occuring right out the gates in Deck 1, you haven't gotten access to cards that give that level of problem solving.

I presume you don't have own the Core Set?

If you do, you can replace the Gem of Physical Prowess (UC Item 2) that you referenced in the Ultimate Combat Add-On Deck Box with the Gem of Physical Prowess (Core Item 1) whenever you want between scenarios, as they have the same name. That allows you to gain it by this point.

As an aside; I agree the "Duel" reward is pretty poor now. I can only see it having value in 3 specific sets of circumstances...

  • You've already hit your Tier+1 Card Feat cap, and want to trade the boon for 2 Hero Points for some reason.
  • Your season never rewards you with an extra Card Feat (I'm not sure there are any seasons like this?), so it's the only way to push yourself to Tier+1 Card Feats (which you want to spend on an Ally or Blessing).
  • Ally/Blessing Card Feats are desired above other card types, so you get the card feats earlier than you otherwise would (admittedly, it probably won't change how your long-term character plays out at all). Probably notable for exceptionally card-hungry characters like Ekkie.


  • Yewstance wrote:
    If you do, you can replace the Gem of Physical Prowess (UC Item 2) that you referenced in the Ultimate Combat Add-On Deck Box with the Gem of Physical Prowess (Core Item 1) whenever you want between scenarios, as they have the same name. That allows you to gain it by this point.

    For what it's worth, not everyone is playing the "card substitution" rule the same. In some cases, people are playing that the original card has to be in your deck before you can substitute in the Core version - which in this case couldn't occur until AD2.

    I like your interpretation better. :)


    Here is the Inquisitor deck list:
    Imrijka
    Using Inquisitor and Ultimate Equipment
    Card Feats +1 Ally, +1 Blessing
    Skill Feats +1 Wisdom
    Power Feats +1 hand size and "When you defeat a monster ...recharge a card (X)you may draw a card"
    Card list (Ally)
    Court knight
    Fencer
    Quartermaster
    Card list (Armor)
    Bronzed Leather
    Card list (Item)
    Boots of Friendy Terrain
    Sacred Candle
    Card list (Spell)
    Cure
    Light Crossbow
    Galvanic Chakram +1
    Javelin
    Deathbane Light Crossbow +1
    Force Shortbow +1
    Card list (Blessings)
    Blessing of the Quartermaster (x3)
    Blessing of the Gods
    Blessing of Besmara


    Estra's current deck:

    Djinni Quarterstaff
    Fire Snake
    Cure (x2)
    Life Drain
    Burning Snot
    Tussah Silk Coat
    Dreamcatcher
    Hypnotist's Locket
    Magical Child
    Vexing Daredevil
    Honaire
    Blessing of Sivanah
    Blessing of Milani
    Blessing of the Spellbound
    Blessing of Abraxas

    Feats
    +1 Blessing
    +1 Wisdom
    +1 Hand Size

    Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    wkover wrote:

    For what it's worth, not everyone is playing the "card substitution" rule the same. In some cases, people are playing that the original card has to be in your deck before you can substitute in the Core version - which in this case couldn't occur until AD2.

    I like your interpretation better. :)

    The official rule says "If your Class Deck box contains boons that have the same name as boons in the Core Set or the Curse of the Crimson Throne Adventure Path, in between scenarios, you may replace these boons with the Core or Curse versions. ... If the replacement card’s level is higher than your tier, you can’t replace that card until you’re allowed to put cards of that level into your deck."

    (Guide 6.1 was supposed to be published last week, but it appears to have gotten stuck somewhere. I'm trying to unstick it...)

    Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

    I feel like this is going to get way more complicated than anyone really wants... especially once we move into season 6 and the Core Set is the norm. Replacing cards just seems like a good way to get things mixed up, though I suppose the fact that the only duplicates are Blessing 0s which won't ever be found in our CDs (at least until the next round of Class Decks) would help on that front.

    Anyways, Celeste:

    Skill Feats: +1 INT
    Power Feats: Combat Check veterancy, automatic arcane spell shuffle
    Card Feats: +1 Ally, +1 Blessing

    Spells:
    Fire Snake [0]
    Phantom Shield [0]
    Steal Book [0]
    Life Drain [1]
    Pyrotechnic Blast [1]

    Items:
    Flame Staff [0]
    Shining Wayfinder [0]
    Bloodbound Hat [1]

    Allies:
    Alaeron [0]
    Appleslayer [0]
    Zae [0]
    Rodrick [1]

    Blessings:
    B. of the Ancients [0]
    B. of the Gods x2 [0]
    B. of the Spellbound x2 [0]


    Vic Wertz wrote:
    "...If the replacement card’s level is higher than your tier, you can’t replace that card until you’re allowed to put cards of that level into your deck."

    Is the "replacement card" the original card or the new Core/CotCT card?

    To me, "replacement card" sounds like the newer Core/CotCT card, but then the phrase "replace that card" suggests the opposite - the original card that is being replaced.

    Lone Shark Games

    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Good question: I understood it to mean the new card, so as to avoid creating an illegal deck, and tested accordingly.

    So, at tier 1 you could replace higher level cards in your box with new Core/Curse cards of the same name, as long as those cards were level 1 or 0.

    That said, as always, I am not a rules arbiter; that's Vic.


    wkover wrote:
    Vic Wertz wrote:
    "...If the replacement card’s level is higher than your tier, you can’t replace that card until you’re allowed to put cards of that level into your deck."

    Is the "replacement card" the original card or the new Core/CotCT card?

    To me, "replacement card" sounds like the newer Core/CotCT card, but then the phrase "replace that card" suggests the opposite - the original card that is being replaced.

    And this is why words matter. Pathfinder does a pretty good job, but far far from perfect.

    Also, this is why legal documents are full of explicitly telling you what parties/objects will be referred to as ("henceforth referred to as"). Because when a word can have multiple meanings, then the entire document can have multiple interpretations.

    Thankfully, this is just a game, so a developer type person saying "Yo, this is what we meant" after the fact is plenty of resolution (at least for everyone who finds the post).

    Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

    The replacement card is the new card.

    Merriam-Webster wrote:

    replacement noun

    re·​place·​ment | \ ri-ˈplās-mənt \
    Definition of replacement
    1 : the action or process of replacing : the state of being replaced
    2 : one that replaces another especially in a job or function


    Vic Wertz wrote:

    The replacement card is the new card.

    Merriam-Webster wrote:

    replacement noun

    re·​place·​ment | \ ri-ˈplās-mənt \
    Definition of replacement
    1 : the action or process of replacing : the state of being replaced
    2 : one that replaces another especially in a job or function

    "the state of being replaced"

    A replacement can, in fact, be referring to the object being removed. It isn't absolute 100% perfect English, but neither is a lot of what gets said (including in rulebooks).

    Thank you for the clarification, I'll have to crack open my core box and see what would actually qualify in a helpful manner for me here.

    Lone Shark Games

    I'd encourage you to look at two at a quick glance:

    Celeste:
    Flame Staff

    Imrijka:
    Boots of Friendly Terrain


    Keith Richmond wrote:

    I'd encourage you to look at two at a quick glance:

    Celeste:
    Flame Staff

    Imrijka:
    Boots of Friendly Terrain

    I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Celeste just added the Flame Staff to attempt to help (and it's in her deck list as posted here), and Imrijka has the boots already.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Viro Melchior wrote:
    I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Celeste just added the Flame Staff to attempt to help (and it's in her deck list as posted here), and Imrijka has the boots already.

    I think Keith is suggesting that you might use the Core/Crimson Throne versions of these cards - if you aren't already.

    Flame Staff can now be used repeatedly, and the Boots help with closing.

    Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

    We definitely haven't been using any Core/Crimson Throne cards yet; I don't think we'd even totally grokked that that's an option. It feels like that's going to break some stuff in, say, the Monk deck (where spells have rather high deck numbers), but if swapping in the Core cards is a valid thing...

    Hmm.

    I feel as if proxy cards are likely to be something we need longish-term simply because, although my table *does* have access to two Core Sets and one Crimson Throne, one of those Core Sets and the Throne are going to be the box we're running future seasons out of, and obviously if I'm swapping my own cards at that point, it's going to interfere with the Vault. Oof.

    Not gonna lie, I hope more class decks are coming at some point, simply so that more of the Core-style cards are out there.


    James Sinnett wrote:
    I feel as if proxy cards are likely to be something we need longish-term simply because... obviously if I'm swapping my own cards at that point, it's going to interfere with the Vault.

    I asked the proxy question a few days ago, for the same exact reason (link).

    The players providing the boxes for OP can use proxies instead of the original Core/CotCT cards, but the preference is for the original card to be displayed and proxies to be placed both in your deck and in the vault.

    (I'm not entirely sure why box owners can't just put a photocopy of the card in their decks - because it might be doctored? - but that's the response so far.)

    More on replacement language in Guide 6.1:

    As far as the "replacement" verbiage goes (in the new Guide), here's a quick example about what is confusing.

    Say I have an old dull knife and a new sharp knife (recently purchased). The new knife is the replacement. We all agree on that.

    But when you say "we need to replace that knife", "that knife" is the old knife, not the new one. So using both "replacement card" and "replace that card" can cause confusion about which card you really mean, because the former refers to the new card and the latter refers to the original card.


    wkover wrote:
    I'm not entirely sure why box owners can't just put a photocopy of the card in their decks - because it might be doctored? - but that's the response so far.

    No, because copyright technically doesn't allow for it. And I don't think the CTO of the company that owns the copyright is going to say "it's totally okay to violate this."

    Having a proxy may look functionally the same, but I don't believe that copyright law cares.

    As Keith mentioned in the Gencon panel, the class deck form factor isn't the only one we have to consider. I'd be happy with a product that's 220 or 330 cards that allowed for a lot of different characters instead (similar to the Dragonfire character packs).

    Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

    "If the replacement card’s level is higher than your tier, you can’t replace that card until you’re allowed to put cards of that level into your deck."

    If we're talking about a card called Knife:

    "If the replacement Knife’s level is higher than your tier, you can’t replace the Knife until you’re allowed to put cards of that level into your deck."

    Venture-Agent, Oregon—Corvallis aka HikariStarshine

    Maybe that ought to be worded as 'Either the original or replacement card's level', because I guarantee you, people are going to look at the level 0 Cure in the Core Set and ask why they can't replace the level 3 Cure in Monk, as the tier allows it. :)


    James Sinnett wrote:
    Maybe that ought to be worded as 'Either the original or replacement card's level', because I guarantee you, people are going to look at the level 0 Cure in the Core Set and ask why they can't replace the level 3 Cure in Monk, as the tier allows it. :)

    They discussed that a little when the rule was proposed. (Guide 6.0 Released.)

    Lone Shark Games

    I don't see any reason you can't replace the level 3 Cure in Monk with a level 0 one, then take it earlier. Or taking a Dogslicer 1 at 0 in Ranger. It's a new card at a new balance point, and the reasons for those cards to be at those levels are mostly thematic ones that don't quite jive with the newest edition of the RPG anyways.


    Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

    It's also very relevant with Fortune Teller and Pit Gladiator, where the Core/Curse printings are significantly weaker but also about 3-4 levels lower than their pre-Core printings (depending on your Class Deck).

    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Adventure Card Society / 5-1E under 6.0: how is this possible without a team full of clerics? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.