I've been comparing the roles for Lem and have been wondering - is there any reason to actually pick Charlatan over Virtuoso? I just don't see it, Charlatan seems to be almost strictly inferior in every aspect.
I mean, what does Charlatan get that Virtuoso doesn't?
- A passive bonus of +2 to acquiring allies / defeating henchmen / defeating villains - each of those costs a power feat individually. Compare that to the Virtuoso's ability to simply add his inspiration buff to himself on any check for bonus of (initially) at least 3 and up to 7 (assuming you invested into both upgrades before picking a role, and let's be honest, you'd be a fool not to) at the cost of only one power feat and a recharge (which is not actually that much of a cost, as it also helps you cycle your deck faster) - that's a clear win for the Virtuoso in my opinion.
- An automatic recharge of spells with the Mental trait - there are not that many mental spells in the game, and they are usually of the evasion variety. You'd probably not have more than one of them in your deck anyway for very specific tactical situations (especially in quest mode, where not defeating a monster means lost XP). So this ability won't fire often enough to be really worth a feat. And when playing Lem you'd be usually rather discarding the spells that really matter on purpose for recovery anyway - and the Virtuoso can do that twice per turn (at the beginning and the end). I just don't see the point.
- Hand size 8 - that's really the only objective advantage to this role (although it also makes you a little more vulnerable when a combat check goes terribly wrong, so it's not completely without drawbacks either)
So, with Virtuoso Lem can buff himself and can recover cards from his discard twice per turn - both awesome abilites that make his already high utility skyrocket. What would be a good reason not to pick that role - other than maybe the desire for a bit more variety, or to challenge oneself on purpose?
Edited by Thyraxus, 19 October 2016 - 06:17 AM.