elcoderdude

Hold on a sec. I seemed to remember that being the MC's power, and that's one of the things that confused me initially. However, MY Club in the app currently says: "...: you may additionally discard a card from your hand to add another 1d10" Dang. I didn't read the digital card that closely. I haven't gone back to check, but I believe you. I quoted the card version. There is no FAQ on this, so that's a straight-up change. Not sure why they did that, since this weapon works differently than any other weapon anyway. Given this, I fully agree with Longshot's evaluation. Note that if Valeros discards any card other than the Club to power the Club, he could't recharge/shuffle THAT card, because he isn't playing it.

I'm a little confused by some positions being taken here. Valeros should not be able to discard and recharge the Club itself to get an extra d10. The club's power doesn't support that. Valeros is not playing the card he discards to add a d10 using the Club's power, because he is not performing an action specified by that card. So he can't recharge it.

Longshot -- you make good points, but if you send a character with any items in their deck to the Vault, and they don't acquire an item on their first turn there, but they use any cards, then boom. You're faced with potentially burning a turn to avoid this problem we shouldn't be having in the first place.

Siding with Longshot based on the cited Vic quote. I don't see the Golden Rule applying, because the ally was never discarded. If you do A instead, you did not do B.

While I fully support they finally implement "decline to acquire", what I don't get is - why doesn't anyone in that location just discard their own items (so they have nothing to banish, if the location is triggered)? Am i missing something? Yeah, the first time I was caught by surprise, because I had completely forgotten the location power (from playing the card game), and I misread it (in the digital game), so I thought it was the typical "When you acquire an item, banish an item", not "banish another item". The second time I didn't have this excuse. I will point out your approach causes you to burn turns. If you draw items, you have to not explore in order to pitch the items. Of course, you only have to do this while there are items in the deck (but there are a lot). But it could be painful to a large party. I was playing the "I can choose a bad skill and avoid the acquire" game. But Lini still made a Strength 5 check with a d4+1.

Um.... maybe it is in particular broken with Valeros? I'm playing a cop-and-a-half playthrough with Valeros and Lem. I put Mokmurian's club in Valeros' deck, realizing it was a little silly since he can't recharge it for its effect. Then, Valeros was fighting the succubus queen in deck 5 and I played Mokmurian's club. I was wondering how I'd designate the card I was discarding for the extra d10. I clicked the Discard button on the club. Poof! It discarded itself. And I got the extra d10. Then, after the combat, Valeros was able to recharge it. Yay! It works in his deck! But it shouldn't.

This worked for me. Solo Lini

Hmmm. I've only played this scenario solo with Lini, normal difficulty, and Jordimandus behaved as expected. Lini encountered Jordimandus Lini encountered summoned monster Lini defeated summoned monster Lini did not have option of diplomacy 14 check because she lacked weapon/Attack spell Lini defeated Jordimandus by combat check Jordimandus escaped (not cornered) Lini encountered Jordimandus Lini encountered summoned monster Lini defeated summoned monster Lini discarded Attack spell to do Diplomacy 14 check (this was a mistake, I was thinking it was Charisma; couldn't back out) Lini defeated Jordimandus by Diplomacy check (Had +10 manual, and wasn't at Sloth, or it wouldn't have happened) Jordimandus was banished (cornered) I'm concerned others are having so much trouble. No clue why it worked for me.

Arrggg! Just hit the "banish another item" scenario. This is extremely frustrating. By adventure 5, your deck is well-honed: if you have an item, you want it, and probably pretty badly. Right now what I'm doing is forfeiting if I really want to keep the item. It's a royal pain. Can a developer explain WHY the app contradicts the card game rules and forces you to attempt to acquire?

Bold move posting a bug report using an unsupported configuration (Android emulator). Shows chutzpah, but I doubt you'll get any attention from Obsidian on this one. (Still, obviously the community will try to help.)

It's a completely valid case. But I can see how the developers missed it.

Yep, I saw that FAQ. It's true that being moved after taking a check to defeat and being moved during the before-you-act step are different things. But I don't think the difference is material here. The encounter with the Spectre is a nested encounter. The encounter with the Scribbler was never something happening after the encounter with the Spectre. The only reason Lini is encountering the Spectre is because she is in the before-you-act step of the Scribbler encounter. Note Lini was not moved in the middle of the Spectre encounter. She was moved by the resolution of the Spectre encounter -- in the middle of the Scribbler encounter. When the Scribbler question first came up, the technical director indicated he was at least leaning in the direction of just continuing the encounter at the new location (thread). The understood position on the paizo board is that this is the case (here and here). I found this. The technical director, Vic Wertz, indicates the encounter continues. [Edited after EG made me realize I didn't read my own example closely enough.]

Lini playing Story mode solo, scenario 5-A Trouble in Sandpoint. Encounters the villain Scribbler at Thassalonian Dungeon. Before-you-act power summons a random monster: Spectre. Spectre has a power that if your check does not have Magic it is undefeated, and also has a power that if undefeated you are moved to a random location. Lini defeats the Spectre without magic. Lini is moved to another location. The encounter with the Scribbler ends and he escapes. I'm not sure if this edge case was missed, or (what seems likely) it was deemed impractical in the digital game, but in the rules for the card game, the encounter with the Scribbler should have continued with Lini at the new location and the Scribbler at the old one. If Lini defeated the Scribbler, and it was the second time in the scenario he was defeated (due to his power), the Scribbler's location should have closed. I thought there was a FAQ on exactly this question, but I don't see it. The closest I find is: FAQ question. This clearly indicates a villain encounter continues when a character is moved during it. It's also possible the Scribbler is being treated as if failing to defeat the summoned monster causes you to lose the encounter with the Scribbler (but I doubt that). Note his card does not indicate that should be the case.

I really like that the game plays differently with a different number of characters. The physical game costs about $180 for the whole thing (and your costs go up if you sleeve your cards). The story is limited (33-35 chapters depending on the set). The fact that a 1-character game is very different from a 4-character game, which is different from a 6-character game, is a big plus. I'd agree that in Runelords you have limited control over when you encounter the henchmen and villains. I don't agree with the idea that you don't have much control over whether you encounter them (in the course of the entire game). You build a 6-character party for exploring. You maximize this. Health is less of an issue than it is for a small party. You have more powers and resources available to help with checks, so you fail fewer (although it's true, a blessing played on a check is a lost explore). It's much more likely the character trying to close a location is a good match for the closing requirement, so you succeed at temporarily- and permanently closing more often.

You are turning off the music and effects, right? Don't run anything you don't have too. Works fine on AmiDUOS on a PC.

Hmmm. Not exactly. Banes are villains, henchmen, barriers, and monsters. Villain and Henchmen also have a type: barrier or monster. This makes the language on cards like the one you cite much simpler -- imagine if a card had to say "a monster, villain or henchman" everywhere the a card just says "monster" now. Real estate is precious on these cards; it is important to save words. Also, not all villains and henchmen are monsters. You have to look at the type. (As it turns out, Runelords has no villains which are barriers, but later sets do. An example of a henchman barrier is Poison Trap.) Cards that work on barriers work on henchmen and villains of type barrier.

Rogue ape is a sentient being. It's not like a rogue elephant. "Rogue" is its class. Hence the Rogue trait on the card.

Can you provide a screenshot? Is the goblin still visible? And/or the monster in the closet?

Yeah, but if the app lets you use Holy Light on a check, that's definitely a Combat check. And you shouldn't be able to use cards that boost non-combat checks. (You could still play a blessing that adds 2 dice to non-combat checks, but it should only add 1 die.)

You sure about this? If so, that's a bug. Using the Crown of Charisma doesn't add Magic to the check, even though the Crown is magic. Paizo discussion of this

Actually even on heroic mode, she is always summoned. See previous thread

My feeling is a lot of the time a card is shuffled into a location deck, the card goes to the top. My impression is this happens at least 50% of the time. But I haven't actually tracked this.

I haven't played Ezren, so I can't comment on the digital game experience, but you are correct on the rules. Ezren's power enables him to examine the top card of his deck and, if it is a spell, put it into his hand as soon as he plays a spell. Not after it recharges.

You don't want to click it so it enlarges. Instead you want to drag it into you hand. The interface is very finicky about this. Sometimes the card disappears, and I have to hit the cancel X and try the whole thing again. But it always works for me in then end.

Yeah, because of the bug that banishes blessings, I wouldn't give Merisiel this power.