ArchSenex

The change to impaler was mentioned on the tech support forum, one of the devs stated that it was changed per paizo during their implementation cycle. It sounds like maybe paizo told obsidian directly.

This is actually backwards. The physical cards lists the non-proficiency penalty, so the game mechanics were implementing that properly. The issue was that the card image in the game DIDN'T include the penalty text found on the physical card. Unless there's been an errata somewhere that I missed? (I just took a look, and didn't find it anywhere) Impaler has since the first edition been changed by Paizo to be consistent with other Spears, so the original printed version was wrong for having the penalty included, and the 1.0.3 version reflects the most recent official version of the card.

So, need to get the attention of somebody official for the bug, which sounds like it's that soldier is working on both strength and melee, when it should just work on melee.

I've seen several threads, but not sure if I've seen an official acknowledge. Be nice if it can be added to the known (hint)

You have a source for that one? I know all cards that replace a check add their traits, but I don't know of a case where I've seen it say that they add their skills. Most weapons for example have Melee as a trait, so that would be redundant, same with spells (they have arcane or divine as a trait on the spell). I haven't seen anything that ever keys off of having Diplomacy as a trait, for instance (although lots of things key off diplomacy checks). In fact, I can't think of anywhere other than Seoni at the Thassilonian dungeon where such a rule would ever really apply, so it seems oddly specific.

The issue here comes from thinking of Skills as being attached to Stats. Remember that it's fully possible (although to my knowledge it doesn't exist) for a character to have Melee Skill under Charisma. More common is how Arcane and Divine bounce around a bit, and there are also Strength based Ranged characters. As soon as Sajan uses his power, his combat check changes from either a Strength or Melee check (since you can default to either when unarmed) into a Dex check, which is no longer a Melee check. However, it's still a Dexterity based combat check, which is why Erastil is such an awesome, awesome blessing for him.

This one is known. They ARE applied, the problem is that it's added silently (since the app can do that), and you have to notice that they're getting a bump by knowing what the base was. Some indication that the number printed isn't the base would absolutely help, but so far I haven't seen a reported case where there was an SS that showed it was incorrect after this was accounted for.

I prefer the change. Printed Acid Arrow makes little sense why you'd have an elite spell that's the same power as a basic.

Glad for all the fixes, but I hope the issue with Seoni can be fixed quickly/easily (The fix says it's now adding Arcane, but it should be adding Magic, which was what was missing). Edit: And it was a note error, so yay!

This is actually wrong. Arcane blast wasn't properly adding the Magic trait, and is not supposed to add the Arcane Trait.

Any chance for confirmation / acknowledgment of this bug? It is distinct from the character dying bug. If not fixed it will leave quest mode severely hampered.

That actually doesn't work. ONLY my druid is highlighted to receive the first card, which goes fine. Then I click the blue arrow on the right, and ONLY Ezren is highlighted with the gift of the bouncy untap-able card Ah, most people who get this seem to have 2+ characters getting the first card, so I can see why that wouldn't work. Not really sure what to do for you, honestly. Mixed level parties are all kinds of screwed up (it's even worse for feats, which haven't been confirmed fixed yet, you can miss out on them entirely)

For your first question, click on them, and then on the portrait you should see a red button with "..." in it. Click it, and you'll find the option to delete.

I think I'm going blind. Where is everyone getting their info on patch 1.0.3 from? I can't find it anywhere on the forums?! It's in the "Known Issues" thread on this forum, pinned. It's supposed to be updated as bugs are confirmed, and there are remarks about ones that are fixed in the next release.

No announced date beyond "this month" You should be able to work around it, just select a different card for your first character and that usually clears it up. Bit of a pain, but not the end of the world.

Agreed, which is why we're pushing for that one. The whole discussion is about supporting how the Warchanter is what is wrong BECAUSE all those other identical cards work the way we expect, so either it's behavior needs to be changed to be consistent, or the phrasing needs to update to match the behavior. Absolutely. I trust Obsidian will make the functionality clear on the card text while they're revamping it with its new special effects, because it really is unintuitive and goes against established card behaviour. I guess the best way to counter any arguments against clarifying the card itself is to put it this way: if you encountered the Warchanter card in the physical game, why would you think for even a moment that you had to roll for each character? Nothing on the card itself indicates you should. After some more digging, the problem is that Rise comes from back when they had "before the encounter" cards. They don't use that phrasology any more. The standard pattern is... "Before you act, do X" which makes a BIT more sense. So yeah, if the "you" rule was applied then, it would apply to any character that wants to act (although the BEST pattern is "Before acting, a character must do X"). Odds are good that if they were re-written, Warchanter would be: "Before you act, Check Wisdom..." And the Sinspawn would be "Before you encounter Sinspawn, Check Wisdom" That would make the behavior consistent, follow the ruling, and explain the difference. Most cards have been re-written to say "Before you encounter, X does damage" and the like, using the encountering as the trigger. However, in Rise, cards like the Enchanter etc. just said "before THE encounter" and that's the root of all the problem. So yes, I fully understand the intent, just that it needs more than the ruling to make it work, it needs the ruling AND the modern phrasing.

Agreed, which is why we're pushing for that one. The whole discussion is about supporting how the Warchanter is what is wrong BECAUSE all those other identical cards work the way we expect, so either it's behavior needs to be changed to be consistent, or the phrasing needs to update to match the behavior.

It's a known issue and remarked as fixed in 1.0.3

The argument here is "IF The warchanter functions this way, THEN you have to change every other card to be consistent." Nobody who is saying to change the other cards thinks the Warchanter should work that way. The problem is that people in this thread and others are trying to say that both the warchanter and other cards are different in execution, despite having the same set of rules, and the same phrasing. All we're trying to do is request constency, but because some people still insist that the warchanter affects all characters, we have a logical disjoint. In essence, what we're saying is this: We've been presented with two statements. 1+1 = 2 (Sinspawn), and 1+1 = 3 (Warchanter). For the vast majority of people, they assume the first one, which is how the sinspawn behaves, and how we expect it to behave. However, because of a rules interpretation around "You" we have been told that the second is true, the rules interpret that the Warchanter does not behave how it is written, but instead behaves (closer) to how it's implemented in the game. What we're saying is that, for consistency, if 1+1 = 3 is a known fact, then 1+1 Must equal three in all cases. The point, as has been mentioned many times, is that rather than adding in some silly, silly rule about "You" that breaks more cards than it fixes, the Warchanter should be re-phrased to function however it's supposed to function. Until it is, no amount of rules interpretation will change the fact that we have a logical inconsistency. That's ultimately what myself, Brainwave, and others are trying to point out. We have a logical inconsistency, nothing more. If 1+1 DOES equal 3 in this universe, I can live with that, but then it must ALWAYS be 3, and thus consistent. It can't be one way sometimes, and another way sometime, without another factor (for instance, 1+1+ X = 2, 1+ 1+ Y = 3). However, there's no X or Y present in Sinspawn vs Warchanter to establish that difference to justify the logic change. The question I have is this.... If the Actor needs to roll to make this work, then it's fine, but if ANY OTHER CHARACTER needs to roll to make this work, then it's still inconsistent. I actually don't see how this should be any different than any other pre-combat check. Many banes have "before encounter make a check or your check to defeat is increased by X" and it's handled by just making the check, applying a modifier, and then popping the modifier off after the encounter. This card, as worded, should be identical, scope to just the acting character, and de-scope at the end of the encounter. Overall, that's all we're arguing is that things should be consistent, we can't just assume that words mean one thing on one card, and another thing on other cards. Edit: Adding cards broken down to be even more formula. All three of these SHOULD follow the same pattern. When (First Group) (Make Second Check) (Price of Failure) Nothing establishes who the actor is, it's implied in every case, so it should imply the same. (Before the encounter) (succeed at a Wisdom or perception 6 check) or bury 1 random card from your hand (Before the encounter) (succeed at a Wisdom 8 check) or you may not play spells with the attack trait or weapons (Before the encounter) (succeed at a Wisdom 6 check) or the difficulty of your checks is increased by 1 for the rest of the turn

I'd be pleasantly surprised if it is, but I would plan to make new characters. The dying bug is fixed, but the mixed level feat bug has yet to be confirmed, so if it isn't fixed there will still be issues, so here's hoping.

Thank you for this. I was feeling crazy or daft for seeing this as the most natural fix, in place of the travesty that was made of the word 'you'. Of course, the fact English language somehow up and decided to stop distinguishing between singular and plural 'you' doesn't help any... Yes, "before ya'all act..." would also work. And now I will hear every card with a southern drawl.

They're the same, because they're written the same. In both cases, they say before the encounter, make a check, or X applies to you, which is the same in both cases. Other than that, I'm failing to see how people see them as different. People assume that the warchanter means "If you wish to A, then make a check" but it's not written that way, at all. If it WAS written better, then it would work. "Before playing a card with X or Y this encounter, a player must succeed at" would work, or "Before you encounter Goblin Warchanter, all players must make a check..." would also work out really well. The short of it is they shouldn't propose a confusing rule about "you" when you = encounterer in pretty much every case, and cards like Harpy, which is almost identical, bother to say "All Characters." It would be better to just errata the cards that are confusing to be consistent, than to make a rule that actually makes the general assumption wrong.

Cross-Posting info: I did a little digging, and it turns out that the card is just phrased horribly. According to the clarification, "You" refers to whoever has encountered a triggering condition. So when a card says "Before you encounter Bob, roll X" since the encountering is the trigger, it's clear. Goblin Warchanter has TWO major issues. #1, it doesn't list the trigger, and #2 it doesn't list any expiration. It should read "Before the encounter, each player rolls..." to be consistent with pretty much every card, so that the roll becomes the trigger condition. Also, it should say may not play on that check, rather than effectively implying forever. There are other cards that are poorly phrased too, like Wrathful Sinspawn, which is "Before the encounter, succeed..." which ALSO has no explicit trigger. It should be "Before you encounter" which is how it behaves. Basically, each triggering condition should be required to list who is being referred to, and that sets the scope of "you" for the effect. However, a lot of cards don't. I would use the fact that most cards explicitly say "all players" to say that the interpretation should still be only the encounterer unless the text is changed. The "You" clarification seems ham-handed and creates more problems than it resolved (it was in the Skull and Shackles clarification, so it might also come up more in that set... which makes me worry (I haven't played S&S))

This is not true at all. "You" refers only to the player who is making the check, encountering the card, etc. They would not have changed this in the digital version from the tabletop version. Goblin Warchanter says "Before the encounter, succeed at a Wisdom 8 check or you may not play spells with the attack trait or weapons." Other players who are not encountering this card can help the player who is, but helping cards are not weapons or attack spells. Weapons and attack spells say "for YOUR combat check" which means other players cannot play those to help attack a monster anyway. Why would anyone at the location besides the player encountering this card need to make the Wisdom 8 check? Yeah, the card is just phrased horribly. So, according to the clarification, "You" refers to whoever has encountered a triggering condition. So when a card says "Before you encounter Bob, roll X" since the encountering is the trigger, it's clear. Goblin Warchanter has TWO major issues. #1, it doesn't list the trigger, and #2 it doesn't list any expiration. It should read "Before encountering, each player rolls..." to be consistent with pretty much every card, so that the roll becomes the trigger condition. Also, it should say may not play on that check. There is ONE scenario where it matters, playing Ranged weapons to help the check, otherwise you're 100% right, and the power will NEVER have any effects because all other plays of weapons or spells can only happen on your encounter. There are other cards that are poorly phrased too, like Wrathful Sinspawn, which is "Before the encounter, succeed..." which ALSO has no explicit trigger. It should be "Before you encounter" which is how it behaves.

You're possibly hitting two separate bugs (although it sounds more like the first, but you would have hit the second if they'd lived): 1) If a character dies, they get no reward, whether it's in Story mode or Quest mode. In quest mode, they still accumulate XP, which means that it will burn their rewards. 2) If you have mixed-level parties, it's almost guaranteed that the lower level character will miss out on their feat. It has to do with the UI being funky and not allowing you to select the proper feat, resulting in them missing it. There's also a cosmetic bug around card awards but you can fiddle with the UI to get around that one.