More adventures coming when?

[King_Momo]

Hi everyone,

 

Just wondering when the next few adventures for adventure path 1 are being released. I know the game just came out but I've been hooked on the game and can't wait for more adventures. Hopefully Hook Mountain Massacre is released soon so I can finally stop encountering those annoying sticks (quarterstaff) and kitchen knives (dagger) by removing them from the game entirely when they are banished.

 

Also, is there an option to purposefully fail to acquire a boon?

 

Thanks everyone!

[LunarWolf]

As I understand it (and unless this has been changed), you will not get to pick which cards are banished. Instead, when you play a more advanced scenario, the game will throw out a certain number of basic cards before generating the location decks.

[Namyra]

Additionally, there is currently no option to pass on acquiring a boon, but this will be added soon™. (I really hope it's soon, the wildcard that discards a blessing from the blessing deck whenever you fail a check to acquire a boon is an absolute nightmare without this feature.)

[Hannibal_PJV]

The pass to accuire is auto fail, so that wildcard is still a Nightmare. But it will still be usefull so you can avoid taking non usefull cards to your deck during the scenario.

But yep it may be coming. But still the game will randomly remove those basic and elite cards From the box. It is so calli autoculling. They have not desided how Many % of basic card will be removed From the game during ad3.

 

Or at least that was the original plan.

[Namyra]

It's not autofail, though. The rules state, upon encountering a card, "If the card is a boon, you may try to acquire it for your deck", the keyword here being "may". If you decide to pass on that, you do not try to acquire it, thus you also do not fail to, so the Night Approaches wildcard shouldn't trigger.

[Hannibal_PJV]

Hmm... You may try to accuire it. I am not sure what it is considered to be. Then you neither could banish it, because you did not try to accuire it. I would still consider it as auto fail, so that you can banish it if you want to.

If it is not a fail you can not banish it.

[da_mayor]

Here's the text from the AP card in the card game:

 

After you begin The Hook Mountain Massacre, whenever you banish a bane with the Basic trait, remove it from the game; whenever you you banish a boon with the Basic trait, you may remove it from the game. After you begin Sins of the Saviors, do the same for cards with the Elite trait."

 

So, if they follow that pattern, Basic Banes will auto-remove after the first time they are banished.  (Note that closing a location causes all cards in the location deck to be Banished, but completing a scenario causes all cards left over (be they in location decks or leftover from rebuilding decks) to be returned to the box (which doesn't trigger "Banished" actions).

[Hannibal_PJV]

Yep, that it what happens in real game. In digital game They will use somekind of autoculling of cards. Certain persentage of cards will be removed From the "game box" . Bropably because you don't have to "remember" what cards Are removed.

In society games you can remove all basic cards when playing society games, so this is a variation of it.

[Brainwave]

Huh. I kind of liked the card game method - *especially* in a video game format where the game can remember which cards have been removed more easily for you. I wonder if this is related to the current inability to pass on acquiring a boon.

[Hannibal_PJV]

Most propably yes. This game is a living one so it may be possible that things change in the future in Many ways!

[LunarWolf]

Huh. I kind of liked the card game method - *especially* in a video game format where the game can remember which cards have been removed more easily for you. I wonder if this is related to the current inability to pass on acquiring a boon.

 

No it's because you can have different parties with the same characters in it, so it would be almost impossible to keep track of which character has which cards removed from their box.

[Borissimo]

Hmm... You may try to accuire it .. Then you neither could banish it, because you did not try to accuire it. I would still consider it as auto fail, so that you can banish it if you want to. If it is not a fail you can not banish it.

 

Hannibal! My buddy, my man! Is it already time for our monthly tradition? You know, the one where you state an incorrect fact about how boons are encountered, and then I post a link to the Paizo FAQ explaining why you're wrong? Y'know, the same exact link I already posted on two previous occasions?

 

Occasion 1

 

Occasion 2

 

By golly, I suppose it has been another month. My, how the time flies! Aaaaand here's that link to that same FAQ entry again:

 

Wheeeeee

 

You really should read it. Great stuff! Especially this part:

 

Resolve the encounter ... If you succeed at a check to acquire a boon, put it in your hand; otherwise, banish it."

 

When you encounter a boon, one of three things is going to happen:

 

1) You attempt the check and succeed

 

2) You attempt the check and fail

 

3) You don't attempt the check at all

 

It is 100% incontrovertibly, unambiguously evident from the FAQ's use of the word "otherwise" if that if #1 happens, then the card goes into your hand; OTHERWISE -- meaning, whether you failed the check or didn't try it at all -- the boon is banished.

 

p.s. I have great love and respect for Hannibal. This boon stuff just really tickles me. <3

[Kgk4569]

 

Hmm... You may try to accuire it .. Then you neither could banish it, because you did not try to accuire it. I would still consider it as auto fail, so that you can banish it if you want to. If it is not a fail you can not banish it.

 

When you encounter a boon, one of three things is going to happen:

 

1) You attempt the check and succeed

 

2) You attempt the check and fail

 

3) You don't attempt the check at all

 

It is 100% incontrovertibly, unambiguously evident from the FAQ's use of the word "otherwise" if that if #1 happens, then the card goes into your hand; OTHERWISE -- meaning, whether you failed the check or didn't try it at all -- the boon is banished.

 

p.s. I have great love and respect for Hannibal. This boon stuff just really tickles me. <3

 

Incorrect, per your own snippet it ONLY states what happens if you ATTEMPT the check. For example, if you evade the boon it just gets shuffled back into the location deck.

[Borissimo]

Hmm, we have a legitimate disagreemnt here! It says in that FAQ entry that if you evade the card, then the encounter is over. Since passing on the check does not count as evading, then the encounter is not over, and that resolution step still happens.

 

Incorrect, per your own snippet it ONLY states what happens if you ATTEMPT the check. For example, if you evade the boon it just gets shuffled back into the location deck.

 

With respect, that FAQ snippet does not state what you claim it states. Here are the steps in full, with emphasis from me:

 

===

 

After you flip over the top card of the location deck, put it on top of the deck and read it, then go through the following steps in order.

 

Evade the card (optional). If you have a power or card that lets you evade the card you’re encountering, you may immediately shuffle it back into the deck; it is neither defeated nor undefeated, and the encounter is over.

 

Apply any effects that happen before the encounter, if needed.

 

Attempt the check. If the card is a boon, you may try to acquire it for your deck; if it’s a bane, you must try to defeat it (see Attempting a Check, below). If a bane’s “Check to Defeat” section says “None,” look at the bane’s powers, and immediately do whatever it says there.

 

Attempt the next check, if needed. If another check is required, such as if you played a boon with a check to recharge, or if your bane requires a second check to defeat, resolve it now. Repeat this step until you have resolved all such checks.

 

Apply any effects that happen after the encounter, if needed. Do this whether or not you succeeded at your checks. At this time, deal with any effects that were triggered by the checks. For example, If Ezren played a spell with the Arcane trait during the check, he may now use his power that allows him to examine the top card of his deck.

 

Resolve the encounter. If you succeed at all of the checks required to defeat a bane, banish it; if you don’t succeed, it is undefeated— shuffle the card back into its location deck. If you succeed at a check to acquire a boon, put it in your hand; otherwise, banish it."

 

===

 

Evading the encounter is a special thing that cuts the encounter short. Otherwise, all of the steps must be followed, including "resolve the encounter." It simply doesn't say anywhere in there that any of the steps apply only if the check was attempted.

[Kgk4569]

No, the word "Otherwise" in english is used to join a dependant clause to a statement. This sentence says: If you succeed at a check to acquire a boon, put it in your hand. If you do not succeed at a check to acquire a boon, banish it.

 

There is no mention of not attempting a check.

 

Also a semicolon is grammatically incorrect.

[Borissimo]

No, the word "Otherwise" in english is used to join a dependant clause to a statement. This sentence says: If you succeed at a check to acquire a boon, put it in your hand. If you do not succeed at a check to acquire a boon, banish it.

 

There is no mention of not attempting a check.

 

Also a semicolon is grammatically incorrect.

 

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. "If you do not succeed at a check to acquire a boon, banish it." That's your phrasing. If you didn't try to acquire a boon at all, then you certainly didn't succeed at a check to acquire it. Ergo, by your own paraphrase, the boon is banished.

 

"There is no mention of not attempting a check." But ... there is? It's even highlighted in yellow in my post! Again, I'm not sure where you're going with that.

 

So to sum it all up:

 

1. The FAQ explicitly states that 5 things must be done when a player encounters a card:

• Apply any effects that happen before the encounter, if needed.
• Attempt the check.
• Attempt the next check, if needed.
• Apply any effects that happen after the encounter, if needed.
• Resolve the encounter.

The FAQ mentions exactly one thing that would bypass these steps, and that is evading the encounter.

 

2. Under "attempt the check," the FAQ explicitly states that if the check is to acquire a boon, then it is optional.

 

3. Under "resolve the encounter," the FAQ explicitly states that if you didn't succeed at the check to acquire a boon, then the boon is banished.

 

4. If you elected not to attempt the check to acquire a boon -- which the FAQ explicitly states you are allowed to do -- then you didn't succeed at the check to acquire it.

 

Given these four facts, all of which are unambiguously supported by direct reference to the FAQ, two things follow logically:

 

A. If you do not attempt a check against a boon, then it is not an "auto fail"

 

B. If you do not attempt a check against a boon, it is banished

 

Short of a designer popping in here to say, "Nope, that's not what we meant!" this is an open-and-shut case, guys.

[trashcondor]

I don't know which interpretation is correct; but I'd like to point out that the use of "otherwise" is ambiguous in this context as it is not clear whether it refers only to its local context (the sentence in which it is present) or overall context (including the bit about may-avoid). This is what I think causes the confusion between you two.

 

I will, however, concede that there is no definition of what happens when you chose to avoid the boon if you do consider the "otherwise" as local only - so on that basis my vote goes to interpreting it by its overall context (so the boon would be banished).

[Kgk4569]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/otherwise

 

Otherwise is an adverb, it needs a verb to qualify it. The way they use it only has 2 possibilities (succeed or fail), and only after an attempt.

 

While it says you MAY choose to attempt, it says nothing about what happens if you don't choose to.

 

It is legitimately Schrodinger's Check. It is neither successful nor unsuccessful, play is immediately in a state of flux and can not continue.

 

Unless they have rewritten this somewhere it is unresolved.

[Borissimo]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/otherwise

 

Otherwise is an adverb, it needs a verb to qualify it.

 

Hmm, based on the link you posted, you're right. However, if you use a different dictionary, you get another option:

 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/otherwise?s=t

 

From that page, we get:

 

conjunction

4.

or else; if not:

Button up your overcoat, otherwise you'll catch cold.

[Kgk4569]

It is still the same. If you do button your coat you won't catch a cold. If you do not button your coat you will catch a cold.

 

Otherwise is a substitute for an either/or statement.

[Brainwave]

 

Huh. I kind of liked the card game method - *especially* in a video game format where the game can remember which cards have been removed more easily for you. I wonder if this is related to the current inability to pass on acquiring a boon.

 

 

No it's because you can have different parties with the same characters in it, so it would be almost impossible to keep track of which character has which cards removed from their box.

What? I'm assuming you're talking about the physical game, which is exactly what I was saying. I liked it but in a video game format the game can remember all of that stuff so it shouldn't be a problem to do it the way it was originally intended.

 

It sounds like you're arguing that it's hard to keep track of cards in the box with different parties and I agree it was - in the physical card game. In a video game it should be very doable which is why I don't understand why it would be changed for this.

 

Regarding the other argument about banishing boons, I'm not sure where that is coming from, as the concept of not having to roll for a boon and those boons being banished has been the accepted ruling for quite some time.

[Namyra]

Right, so, I pored over the rulebook (Wrath of the Righteous in this case, since it is the most up-to-date) again, and I was wrong earlier (apologies to Hannibal for that). Choosing not to acquire a boon does indeed count as an automatic fail, as written on page 10, second column, I quote: "Attempt the Check. If the card is a boon, you may try to acquire it for your deck; if it’s a bane, you must try to defeat it (see Attempting a Check, below). If you choose not to acquire a boon, it counts as failing to acquire it." Clear as day. Thus will indeed keep triggering Night Approaches, as horrible as that may be.

 

However, just as clear is that choosing not to acquire a boon does indeed banish said boon. Let's take a look at page 11, second column, I quote: "Each boon card has a section called Check to Acquire. This section indicates the skills that can be used in checks to acquire the boon and the difficulty of the checks. If you succeed in acquiring the card, put it into your hand. If you fail, banish it. You can never automatically succeed at a combat check." We've established above that it is absolutely clear that choosing not to acquire a boon fails to acquire it. And here it is written that failing to acquire a boon banishes it. Et voilà.

 

Everything clear? Don't think we even need the FAQ for that, though thanks for trying to clear things up, Borissimo et al. Can we put this thread to rest (or at least the thoroughly derailed part of it, it's quite the train wreck by now)? Yes? Thank you.

[Kgk4569]

:D

[Hannibal_PJV]

Rulemongers ;-)

[trashcondor]

Okay... so back to the topic. When when when? When are we getting the next scenario? When are we getting more new characters? When are we getting existing character expansions? When are we getting custom dice? When are we getting Wrath of the Righteous? When are we getting a Steam release (my phone battery suffers)?

 

More more more! (Did I miss anything?)