I just went through 6-5D with my local group and it is rough. We went through with 4p each, and I don't know how 5-6p would handle it.
First time, our team had a relatively high explore velocity and was able to get it on the last turn. The other team (we have 2 tables of 4) missed it by 1 explore (and they had a relatively low one).
Second time, we swapped the groups around, my team was able to finish due to the second last henchman being on the top, but the villain was in the last location and we may not have finished.
My group didn't like it. The combination of Hostile and the extra 2 monsters in each location really made it a slog.
Did other groups find this to be the case?
What, you don't like it when your ranger has to discard her hand after encountering a level 5 melee weapon? ;)
Luckily (?) there are mostly banes in 6-5D, or Hostile would be much worse. Regardless, it's an extremely unfriendly wildcard.
Our 5p pbp group (link) managed to win 6-5D on the first try, but Radillo is a hyper-exploring menace to society and we have a decent amount of scouting (Alahazra/Quinn).
Also, as mentioned elsewhere, Embiggen makes any scenario easier.
I'll admit, Hostile was a bit less, well, hostile in its original design due to the later change to require you to roll on boon acquires. You could just opt to not even attempt. In fact, the close/guard language was added to make it more on par with Desperate, since armor was often enough to negate most damage from an acquire you were actually trying for but barely missed on.
I'll ponder that a little.
Hostile also makes barriers like Trapped Chest a bit more tense.
You unlock a chest and find a pile of treasure - which kills you! Surprise!
Stupid angry treasure.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If anyone is available to test a changed Hostile, I'd like to know how this would work out:
"When you fail a check to acquire, to close, or to guard, suffer 1d6 (max #) combat damage."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If anyone is available to test a changed Hostile, I'd like to know how this would work out:
"When you fail a check to acquire, to close, or to guard, suffer 1d6 (max #) combat damage."
Added it to the Wiki as a playtest note and linked back to here. Maybe that will help remind myself and others to try it.
Should Legendary difficulty's increase of # for banes also apply to the wildcard? I feel like it definitely should!
Played this a couple weeks back now, but just reviewed the results. Unfortunately for testing purposes, Zetha and Estra encountered and acquired most of the boons.
Looks like there was a single miss during the scenario and that was from Fumbus and it looks like we forgot to roll the damage, based on rolls after it would have been 4 combat damage. That being said, he missed it by 1, so original wording would have worked out better for us in that case. Neither effect would have changed the outcome of the turn though since he had Steel Ibis Lamellar in hand at the time.
Estra and Zetha definitely skew any results though with Zetha's ability to make most anything a Stealth check, and Honaire backing up Estra on the skills she's terrible at.