|
If the group decides to go to the Warehouse, you won't actually do a road event, since it's linked to (and physically located inside of) Gloomhaven. e: voting on previous page
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:22 |
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Welp, I was wrong about the city event. Agreed. gently caress the police, make money
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 15:30
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Give the money to Rocky and have them both donate and buy a war hammer, superceding my previous vote. He should be throwing rocks most of the time though. I guess since it's one use per scenario that's ok since he's almost always going to be in a punching situation every scenario.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
The warhammer really shines when you can stun multiple targets with it though. Brute can put the warhammer to good use with the bottom of Trample + Boots, potentially hitting and stunning 5 targets. The cragheart may hit 2 when paired with the top of avalanche of explosive punch. For the Cragheart card, I really think we're going to get more use out of Sentient growth in our group. If we do buy a warhammer for Rocky, we can use the bottom attack 1 to stun every adjacent enemy with a bottom action, too. Reik fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Feb 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
Yeah, the vast majority of items are one use per scenario or one use per long rest, so you only need one or two cards they work with to make them pop. I can see the argument for the bow, but I think the hammer would have more mileage in the long run, since the Cragheart already gets a fair amount of options for ruining shielded enemies, and having an emergency stun can often save the party's bacon.Reik posted:The warhammer really shines when you can stun multiple targets with it though. Brute can put the warhammer to good use with the bottom of Trample + Boots, potentially hitting and stunning 5 targets. The cragheart may hit 2 when paired with the top of avalanche of explosive punch. Explosive Punch also targets 5 hexes, though it's not as easily set up as Trample. On the other hand, the Cragheart has a melee attack which targets 18 hexes. Zulily Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Feb 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
I have never regretted going Explosive Punch on my Cragheart, even though our group has no healer other than me. It has good initiative (for a Cragheart card, anyway), good movement, and it's one of the most damaging attacks available to the Cragheart. That last part is a sort of weakness of Rocky's; he's good at dealing moderate to low damage to multiple targets and good at killing high shield low HP enemies, but not all that good at dealing good chunks of damage to one or two targets. The damage is a loss card which isn't ideal, but clearing an obstacle can be situationally very useful and it combos extremely well with a card we'll be picking up in a level or two.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
Explosive Punch is a good card, and we won't be screwed/disappointed if we take it. It pairs a situational top with a solid bottom and initiative; it's very similar to Fatal Advance in that way. I just think there's more upside to sentient growth in the double melee + Cragheart composition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
The top really isn't all that situational, especially once we pick up some more ways to make obstacles. Going slow in one round to make/throw some obstacles next to a clump of enemies then move up and go fast on the next round to blow up the obstacle you just made/threw and you can easily take out even some really tough enemies. Sentient Growth meanwhile really suffers from the fact that it's very low yield. Attack for 2 and heal for 2 are both going to get pretty outdated pretty fast. Neither is a bad card, don't get me wrong, but the numbers on Sentient Growth just have never impressed me. Maybe it works out better in play than on paper, I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 16:49
|
|
|
I mean, the name of the card alone is rad as hell. EXPLOSIVE PUNCH
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 17:37
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:I mean, the name of the card alone is rad as hell. That was all it took for me as well. Then I've managed to clear a room with Clear the Way+Explosive Punch over 2 days and I've never looked back. Also I was playing with Crag+Mindthief+Tinkerer, so having a more melee focused CH was necessary. Btw this is not an endorsement, I think both cards are good, depending on party composition an role taken! Also please if you're changing a previous vote, specify what you have voted before (and what you are voting now) so that I'll be able to change on the fly without having to compare your new vote to your old one 
That Italian Guy fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Feb 20, 2019 |
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
Why are you guys so focused on the Warhammer? It seems highly mediocre to me. Explosive Punch Fatal Advance Shield for Brute, donation for Craggy. Divide money 5/5 between them. Gloomhaven Warehouse No road vote because no event.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 18:04
|
|
Phelddagrif posted:If the group decides to go to the Warehouse, you won't actually do a road event, since it's linked to (and physically located inside of) Gloomhaven. Last time, I've ran the Road Event during the last City Update - after the Scenario had already been chosen - but that means our active players had to send Step A orders without knowing the outcome of the Road Event. This time, I've ran the Road Event in the intermediate City Update, but that means we don't know if the Scenario we pick is linked to our current location. I know we've previously chosen to "always go back to Gloomhaven" even if the next Scenario is linked to the previous one (like 1 and 2 are). I see 3 options: 1) We do one City and one Road event in between each Scenario, no matter what; the Road Event outcome is revealed before the start of the Scenario so the players can react to it. 2) We run the Road event only after the Scenario has been chosen, but we don't delay one extra day. This means the StepA card selection for our players is "blind" (AKA: they start with damage or a condition, they may want to address it immediately). 3) We run the Road event only after the Scenario has been chosen, and then we wait for it to be solved before the players have to send their StepA orders. This will add one day of "down time" but will allow our players to react to the outcome.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
You're supposed to pick your destination before you draw the Road Event though, so that would be working as intended?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 18:11
|
|
Some Numbers posted:You're supposed to pick your destination before you draw the Road Event though, so that would be working as intended? It is but, again, if we wait for that to be a known factor we either: A) wait for the event to be resolved, delaying the scenario start 1 day or B) we don't wait, and the active players have to submit their card selection for Round1 without knowing if the effects of the event are relevant to their choices In normal gameplay you just pick your destination and you draw a road event and you resolve it in a few minutes total
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 18:25
|
|
|
You could run a road event, and apply it to the next scenario that isn't linked to Gloomhaven. It would be slightly different than the actual campaign rules, especially once we start hitting retirements and shuffling the deck, but would keep you from having to slow down the pace of the LP.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 18:53
|
|
|
I thought we decided to always do a road event even if they were linked for more content?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Zurai posted:The top really isn't all that situational, especially once we pick up some more ways to make obstacles. Going slow in one round to make/throw some obstacles next to a clump of enemies then move up and go fast on the next round to blow up the obstacle you just made/threw and you can easily take out even some really tough enemies. Sentient Growth meanwhile really suffers from the fact that it's very low yield. Attack for 2 and heal for 2 are both going to get pretty outdated pretty fast. Even if you have a way of making the obstacle, both you and the enemies have to still be adjacent to it on your next turn. You also have to hit at least 2 people to get value from it, and if we just want to hit 2 enemies with an Attack 4 we can use Avalanche.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 19:00
|
|
Reik posted:I thought we decided to always do a road event even if they were linked for more content? Yes and no. We've voted to always go back to Gloomhaven even if the next scenario is linked...but in this case, we're already in GH. I would go for the "always run Events for extra content", since it also makes things easier for the update cycle. But if anyone has a strong opinion against it, I could do what Phelddagrif is suggesting and keep this vote for the next time we'd be running into a Road event.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
There are enough road events, I'd say let's just do one between every scenario regardless. More content!
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Reik posted:Even if you have a way of making the obstacle, both you and the enemies have to still be adjacent to it on your next turn. You also have to hit at least 2 people to get value from it, and if we just want to hit 2 enemies with an Attack 4 we can use Avalanche. Avalanche has a terrible initiative and very niche bottom action, though, and it requires the enemies to be both adjacent to each other and to us, while Explosive Punch doesn't care about where the enemies are relative to each other or to you. I would never put Avalanche in a Cragheart's deck unless you have a specific and very good reason to be using the bottom of the card. And for the first part of your statement, that's why I said go slow on one round and fast on the next. It's actually not even a problem for us yet because until level 3 we have no way to create or reposition obstacles at range.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 19:18
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Avalanche has a terrible initiative and very niche bottom action, though, and it requires the enemies to be both adjacent to each other and to us, while Explosive Punch doesn't care about where the enemies are relative to each other or to you. I would never put Avalanche in a Cragheart's deck unless you have a specific and very good reason to be using the bottom of the card. And for the first part of your statement, that's why I said go slow on one round and fast on the next. It's actually not even a problem for us yet because until level 3 we have no way to create or reposition obstacles at range. You're trading the "be adjacent to an obstacle" situation for "be adjacent to each other" situation. Explosive punch definitely has a better bottom and initiative, and if we take it I imagine that's what it will be used for almost exclusively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 19:57
|
|
|
Reik posted:You're trading the "be adjacent to an obstacle" situation for "be adjacent to each other" situation. Explosive punch definitely has a better bottom and initiative, and if we take it I imagine that's what it will be used for almost exclusively. Yep. Exploding obstacles with your fist, even if it's rare, is awesome and valuable and nobody else in the party can do it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Yep. Exploding obstacles with your fist, even if it's rare, is awesome and valuable and nobody else in the party can do it. It is, Sentient Growth is definitely the more boring of the two cards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
Reik posted:You're trading the "be adjacent to an obstacle" situation for "be adjacent to each other" situation. Explosive punch definitely has a better bottom and initiative, and if we take it I imagine that's what it will be used for almost exclusively. Honestly, low level Cragheart would probably take a card with a blank top 100% of the time if it had Move 4 and 28 Initiative on the bottom. That said, you're really underselling Explosive Punch's top. It's not at all difficult to get use out of. Every dungeon is populated with plenty of obstacles natively and in a lot of them it's harder for an enemy to not be next to an obstacle than to be next to one. There are a few wide open rooms in the game but they're a lot rarer than narrow corridors and small rooms littered with obstacles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Reik posted:It is, Sentient Growth is definitely the more boring of the two cards. To avoid spoilers for future scenarios, imagine how useful Explosive Punch would have been for destroying the tables in scenario 1 that caused a big bottleneck in the last room, doing a bunch of damage in the process. Imagine how much damage could have been done to the archers standing next to the sarcophagus in scenario 2, and getting that thing out of the way. Remember how rad it was when Rocky punched a skeleton into a sarcophagus causing it to explode like a Mortal Kombat fatality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:To avoid spoilers for future scenarios, imagine how useful Explosive Punch would have been for destroying the tables in scenario 1 that caused a big bottleneck in the last room, doing a bunch of damage in the process. Imagine how much damage could have been done to the archers standing next to the sarcophagus in scenario 2, and getting that thing out of the way. Remember how rad it was when Rocky punched a skeleton into a sarcophagus causing it to explode like a Mortal Kombat fatality. The top of Heaving Swing is a good way to deal 5 or so damage to an enemy standing next to an obstacle without losing a card. Explosive Punch lets us maybe do 8 if both enemies happen to be adjacent to the same obstacle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
That Italian Guy posted:Yes and no. We've voted to always go back to Gloomhaven even if the next scenario is linked...but in this case, we're already in GH. I would go for the "always run Events for extra content", since it also makes things easier for the update cycle. But if anyone has a strong opinion against it, I could do what Phelddagrif is suggesting and keep this vote for the next time we'd be running into a Road event. It seems like people prefer to do a road event every time, which is totally fine! I didn't consider that the format of the LP makes the rule for road events difficult to handle. I'd say go for it and just run events every scenario so people can see more of the content.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
Reik posted:The top of Heaving Swing is a good way to deal 5 or so damage to an enemy standing next to an obstacle without losing a card. Explosive Punch lets us maybe do 8 if both enemies happen to be adjacent to the same obstacle. lol what the gently caress is this weasel word poo poo what are numbers? idk man, sometimes 5 is more than 5 but an 8, well, you're lucky to get 8 out of it Explosive Punch for Rocky Fatal Advance for Bullwinkle All gold to Rocky Yes to Bullwinkle shield Yes to Rocky Warhammer
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
Speaking of tables, blowing up an obstacle which occupies more than one hex lets you attack anyone adjacent to either obstacle hex. Explosive Punch can easily hit at least two targets in any scenario, and loads more when circumstances allow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
Reik posted:The top of Heaving Swing is a good way to deal 5 or so damage to an enemy standing next to an obstacle without losing a card. Explosive Punch lets us maybe do 8 if both enemies happen to be adjacent to the same obstacle. That's true but there's also the utility of removing an obstacle in order to reshape the room to your advantage. Can't put a damage number or price on that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:lol what the gently caress is this weasel word poo poo The 5 damage from heaving swing is only varied by the modifier drawn. The 8 damage from explosive punch requires a more restrictive situation of having 2 enemies adjacent to the same object in addition to any variation from modifier cards, so the 8 damage has more volatility than the 5 (modifier volatility + additional target volatility). Explosive punch could do 28 damage if you punch a 3 hex obstacle with 7 enemies surrounding it, but I don't think that's likely to happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
Reik posted:The 5 damage from heaving swing is only varied by the modifier drawn. The 8 damage from explosive punch requires a more restrictive situation of having 2 enemies adjacent to the same object in addition to any variation from modifier cards, so the 8 damage has more volatility than the 5 (modifier volatility + additional target volatility). Explosive punch could do 28 damage if you punch a 3 hex obstacle with 7 enemies surrounding it, but I don't think that's likely to happen. Yes, but the destroying an obstacle and 4 damage on Explosive Punch is significantly less restrictive than destroying an obstacle and 5 damage on Heaving Swing. It's much easier to be adjacent to an obstacle which is adjacent to one or more enemies than it is to have an enemy sandwiched directly between you and an obstacle. EDIT: Also, corner case but Heaving Swing isn't actually an Attack 5. It's an Attack 3 which has a situational 2 true damage attached. That can be better or worse depending on the situation. And, again, 28 Initiative and Move 4 no loss no restrictions is solid gold for Rocky. Both types of speed are Issues for the Cragheart in general. Meanwhile, we have tons of multi-target Attack 2s and the targeting on Sentient Growth's heal is actually kinda poo poo -- you HAVE to target an enemy with it so you can only heal allies who are in melee with an enemy and cannot just use it as an AOE heal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 22:31
|
|
|
It's a bit better than that (since you can target an empty hex in range as long as there is at least one enemy in the template) but yeah, it's an attack so you have to hit something with it to trigger the heal.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:17
|
|
|
But with the current template, that necessitates the person you're healing being adjacent to the enemy you're attacking. The upgrade dot isn't particularly relevant yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Avalanche has a terrible initiative and very niche bottom action, though, and it requires the enemies to be both adjacent to each other and to us, while Explosive Punch doesn't care about where the enemies are relative to each other or to you. I would never put Avalanche in a Cragheart's deck unless you have a specific and very good reason to be using the bottom of the card. And for the first part of your statement, that's why I said go slow on one round and fast on the next. It's actually not even a problem for us yet because until level 3 we have no way to create or reposition obstacles at range. The bottom of Avalanche is invaluable for the Cragheart, especially if it builds towards an obstacle-focused approach at higher levels. Some scenarios give you plenty of obstacles, while others have few or none; being able to make your own for use is important, plus you can use them to channel monster movement. Granted, they're better alongside a character that lays down traps, because your obstacles can make the traps more effective. That's not to say anything about how good Explosive Punch is. Sometimes getting rid of obstacles is important. Sometimes keeping them is important. Explosive Punch is a loss card, so you can save it until you have an obstacle you're happy exploding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Yes, but the destroying an obstacle and 4 damage on Explosive Punch is significantly less restrictive than destroying an obstacle and 5 damage on Heaving Swing. It's much easier to be adjacent to an obstacle which is adjacent to one or more enemies than it is to have an enemy sandwiched directly between you and an obstacle. That's true that if you're going for a single target Explosive Punch is less restrictive, it's also a loss vs a non-loss. I agree 28 initiative move 4 is really good, and if we were playing with 2 players or with a less in your face group I would take it for the initiative and bottom action alone. I just think with 2 melee teammates we're going to run in to a lot of situations where we can get at least an attack 2 and heal 2 from the top of Sentient Growth. The bottom is also clutch for clearing poison/wound.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
Attack 2 heal 2 is terrible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:33
|
|
|
That's a good point on the bottom move+heal being an AoE dispell poison, given the party comp. Speaking of Avalanche, I think it's quite good in Round1 of a Scenario, to avoid being swarmed by enemies; that said, if you want to use it that way you'll have to burn one of the CH fast init, and you may still end up going after the monsters.
That Italian Guy fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Feb 20, 2019 |
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Attack 2 heal 2 is terrible. How so? Attack 3 or Heal 3 is pretty standard value for a top action at level 1, and this pretty regularly going to be a total attack+heal of 4, in line with a card like Stamina Booster, with a potential attack+heal upside of 6.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:22 |
|
|
edit: sorry wrong thread
the holy poopacy fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Feb 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 00:11
|
|