Jump to content

Jobu

Members
  • Content count

    855
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jobu

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    New York, 0, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah, you can see that on "A Chance Encounter" (although you would take an AoO from playing "A Chance Encounter") You are making me wonder about Leo. As an aside, if I played Ever Vigilant, would I potentially take 4 AoOs? On the other hand, I don't think anyone is saying you take an AoO from triggering Bill-Ys ability.
  2. The actual action name is "Play" This is an unfortunate side effect of action names sometimes matching the results of those actions. This is probably the worst oversight they made in the game design. Evade is an action that you take. Depending on the results of a chaos bag pull, you may or may not evade an enemy. Note the use of evade in the second sentence is not referring to an action but the outcome of that action. Fight is an action that you can take. Depending on the results of a chaos bag pull, you may or may not inflict damage on an enemy. When you take a Play action, you chose a card, pay its cost and play it. The 1st "Play" is an action, the 2nd "play" is the results of that action. What worse is that paying a cards cost is part of the Play action and not part of the act of playing the card. On Bill's card it is clarified that he has to pay the cost. On Leo's it's implied that he does so at -1. Ditto for Ever Vigilant. I guess without these clarifications those cards would go into play for free. Plus we have bold statements that make it clear that it is an action but that can also be phrased as X action.
  3. While I am frustrated at this minutiae, if Leo's card was worded "Take a play card action to play an Ally asset, reducing its cost by 1. ", he would suffer an AoO as well. But it doesn't so he doesn't. Frankly it strikes me more of lose wording that then got interpreted by rules text after the fact than intentional design. FFG never does that, do they?
  4. Okay this gets tricky: Leo says: (reaction) After your turn begins: Play an Ally asset, reducing its cost by 1. This does not provoke an AOO since its a reacton. Ursula says: (reaction) After you move to a location: Take an investigate action. (Limit once per round.) This does trigger an AoO because it says "Take an investigate ACTION" instead of simply "investigate" At least thats my understanding. EDIT: This type of nuance drives me up a wall. I wish they made it cleaner so you didn't have to analyze.
  5. Bait and Switch more or less does that. Well more actually. Snare Trap also has some of those features, although it requires provocativeness. Eavesdrop is for Finn. We may get more options later on, but yeah its for Finn.
  6. Yes, and they are very good. I lost my Jenny Barnes mini earlier this year and the replaced it gratis. https://parts.asmodeena.com/partsrequests/
  7. Just saying. The big question is do we get it before or after LoL? Personally I would be really happy if we got it before end of June, but I am not holding my breath.
  8. Jobu

    Thinking About Finn

    He also seems to have a lot of moxie... My build has a fair amount of resource generation, so he could make good use of skill pumps. I am not to hot about using his 5 slots on Will mitigation. I already think Pete S should be there for both horror soak and Agility so I would rather use the remainder on investigate boosts. If you had to chose between Pete and Leo dL, which would you prefer? I think he could also use some elder sign amulets as the game goes on.
  9. Jobu

    Thinking About Finn

    I saw that one. It looks solid, you just need to hold them for when you need them. Knowing the encounter sets will help a lot.
  10. I have been looking at my older decks and my newer decks and I have noticed some shifts in them. 1. Due to the much larger card pool than even say a year ago, when building decks now I have so many choices. This is leading my design thoughts to be less about "what works in this deck?" and more "what do I want this deck to do and what is the best way to get there?" 2. Skill cards. Back in the day 6-12 cards would be skill cards with an emphasis on neutral skills. Now unless I am making a specific deck (Minh), I am down to 2-6. My view of them has changed as well. They are less about passing checks and more about getting an ability that costs no actions and has no cost. This is because I have other options for effects. 3. Related to the above, when playing I am much more likely to throw an asset or event to boost a skill check more now than I have been in the past. Anyone else notice any changes in general deck building as the game evolves? Also, I still can't make a deck with Skids that I am really satisfied with, has anyone else?
  11. So I have been thinking about a Finn deck now. High level thoughts are he is an evader, investigator, can do serious damage but a one will and 7 sanity. So Burglary and Pickpocket are no brainers. How much are people putting into Horror mitigation? He needs some help on Will for those treacheries that stick around until you pass a will check, but is it a lost cause? Do you try to pump Will or do you just try to have cards that lets him soak it/avoid those persistent treacheries? Seems like a L0 Pete S will help him a lot. Are there other choices I am missing? Anyone have any thoughts?
  12. Jobu

    Alert keyword

    That would be a good level 1 or 2 card especially in multiplayer.
  13. Jobu

    Question on Corrosion

    Items, but yes.
  14. Give it a try and see how that works out. I am skeptical about it. Even if you are not eliminated, Rex gets about .75 trauma a scenario (my estimate). For 7 scenarios, that number is 5, which is manageable. For 10 that number is 7-8 plus another 4 from night of the zealot. While you will come through NotZ okay and start the next campaign strong, the chances of making it to the end of that campaign seems small to me. Now in my mind an investigator doesn't need to make it to the end of a campaign to be successful. The investigator just needs to carry his weight enough so the rest of the group is in a good place when they expire. Now there are some scenarios that if you are eliminated early during (Where Doom Awaits, for example) you will really disadvantage the group.
×