Recommend
8 
 Thumb up
 Hide
161 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [7] | 

Gloomhaven» Forums » Rules

Subject: Rolling modifier disadvantage when having advantage? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Florian Stock
Germany
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When I read the rules correct, having a rolling modifier in the deck is a disadvantage (not in the rules sense, just in the probability sense) when having an advantage.

E.g. I play my scoundrel, and when leaving invisibility and want to bring my double damage to the enemy. So my idea is: pimp your next attack with an advantage, that way I assure that I make twice as much damage. No "Fail"-card can stop me.

Works, as long as I dont have rolling modifiers. Their intention is to make the deck better, but actually I get the opposite behaviour:
Now my attack can actually fail: In case I draw the Fail-card it actually fails, when the other is a rolling modifier (or both are rolling, and the 3rd is the Fail). (In general, the advantage when one of the cards is a rolling modifier is removed, the behavior is exactly the same, as when not having the advantage: I add both (or all three) cards together, no choice for me. Using the rolling modifier alone would yield the same result).

Wouldnt it be better to have (house/alternative) rule for rolling cards and advantage, that improves the deck and not worse it in some cases?
Anybody has there some suggestions (e.g. I could imagine to treat it as "two slots" and each rolling modifier only works on its own slot, and afterwards I decide which slot I want to take)?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andreas Kortegaard
Denmark
Kbh N
flag msg tools
Pretty sure you do two full pulls from the deck, including up to multiple rolling modifiers. So for example:
Rolling Stun + Fail (is worse than second pull) Rolling Pierce + (+)1.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berg
Germany
BaWü
flag msg tools
富士山
badge
Take a closer look
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
flolo wrote:
Wouldnt it be better to have (house/alternative) rule for rolling cards and advantage, that improves the deck and not worse it in some cases?
Anybody has there some suggestions (e.g. I could imagine to treat it as "two slots" and each rolling modifier only works on its own slot, and afterwards I decide which slot I want to take)?

This is just discussed in another thread.
Note that if you use your proposed houserule, you wouldn't neccessarily get to chose which slot you'd take, unless the comparison was ambiguous
edit: ignore that last part.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berg
Germany
BaWü
flag msg tools
富士山
badge
Take a closer look
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
robertflatt wrote:
Pretty sure you do two full pulls from the deck, including up to multiple rolling modifiers. So for example:
Rolling Stun + Fail (is worse than second pull) Rolling Pierce + (+)1.

That's not how the rules as stated work right now. According to the rulebook, you only get to draw for rolling modifiers if both cards from advantage are rolling, and you would have to apply the first non-rolling card drawn. As Florian stated above, this does have the effect that you can no longer guarantee a hit with advantage, if you have any rolling cards in your deck.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moose Detective
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
Than Sense
badge
Is it a moose that became a detective ? Or a detective who searches for moose?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
robertflatt wrote:
Pretty sure you do two full pulls from the deck, including up to multiple rolling modifiers. So for example:
Rolling Stun + Fail (is worse than second pull) Rolling Pierce + (+)1.


This is incorrect.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andreas Kortegaard
Denmark
Kbh N
flag msg tools
My bad, sorry for the incorrect statement.

Guess you're suggestion looked more logical, than the actual rule. I'm somewhat new to the content, so the examples from the attack modifier section had me think they concerned rolling modifiers, not actual +/- cards with effects on them.

Can't really see your suggestion being unbalanced, as long as it is treated equally for advantage and disadvantage. Gives a bit more variance, and makes the parsing of which one is actually better/worse a bit harder. Maybe assign .5 value to effects?

Would love to hear a reasoning for the rule, since it, as you say, have multiple possibilities for reversing the positive or negative effect of advantage and disadvantage respectively.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Furry Fox
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is the a comment by Isaac somewhere where he explains his reasoning behind this? I find the rule rather illogical but I'm sure there is some reasoning behind it.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Florian Stock
Germany
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
EternalFury wrote:
I find the rule rather illogical but I'm sure there is some reasoning behind it.
Same here. Not only give this the "Rolling Modifiers" a hidden disadvantage, but also is the rule complete counter-intuitive: As we played and got to this situation everybody of my group assumed, that I would draw a card until I draw a non-rolling card for the "first slot" and then perform the same for the "second slot", and afterwards choose the better "slot". When I explained/showed them the rules how rolling & advantage is handled, they first thought I would joke.

So its additional/irrational rule in addition to the "expected"/"intuitive" rule, and makes something which is supposed to be good bad (the rolling modifiers), in a sneaky way. So I think there is some intention behind it, and I am curious what it was (e.g. to weaken high level play).
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anon Y. Mous
msg tools
mbmb
flolo wrote:
EternalFury wrote:
I find the rule rather illogical but I'm sure there is some reasoning behind it.
Same here. Not only give this the "Rolling Modifiers" a hidden disadvantage, but also is the rule complete counter-intuitive: As we played and got to this situation everybody of my group assumed, that I would draw a card until I draw a non-rolling card for the "first slot" and then perform the same for the "second slot", and afterwards choose the better "slot". When I explained/showed them the rules how rolling & advantage is handled, they first thought I would joke.

So its additional/irrational rule in addition to the "expected"/"intuitive" rule, and makes something which is supposed to be good bad (the rolling modifiers), in a sneaky way. So I think there is some intention behind it, and I am curious what it was (e.g. to weaken high level play).


If you have 2 multi-card modifiers like that, they're almost guaranteed to be ambiguous, so the end result is the same as drawing one.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Wilbur
United States
Oregon
flag msg tools
I've noticed this before actually.

But I've come to this conclusion.

I play a level 8 Scoundrel, every perk unlocked.
My attack deck is STACKED with rolling modifiers.

Advantage guarantees I draw at least 2 cards. One or more being rolling modifiers.

The difference is, should I draw one of my few non-rolling cards right off, I would normally just be stuck with it.

But with advantage, I would roll again until I received a non-rolling card.

Thus this interesting situation has happened recently.

Draw 1 - (+1) flat
Draw 2 - (+1) Draw again, (+3 Pierce) draw again, +Poison draw again, (+2) Flat - STOP
+2 is inherently better than +1, it and all the rolling modifiers are chosen.
I received +3, +3 pierce, + poison total for my advantage roll.

This has balanced out with the opposite very frequently.

Draw 1 - (+1) draw again
Draw 2 - Null/+0/x2/+1/+2 - Flat - STOP

Whatever I draw I stop at. No second card. But statistically. I have No negative cards in my deck, a few 0's, Null, x2, and Bless cards from donating, as well as a few +1/flats and +2/flats.

Advantage still gives you a wicked edge statistically.

I have pulled off
Smoke bomb + Strengthen (enhanced)/ 8 atk card + 1 Poison + Roll advantage = +1 flat/// +1 draw again, +1 Draw again, +1 Draw again, +3 pierce, + invisibility , + Wound, + muddle, x2 Bless STOP

This turned into a 12 ATK x2 smoke bomb = 24 x2 Bless = 48 Damage strike
Due to order of operation
((8 atk +1 atk poison, + 3 attack cards)x2 Atk effect card) x2 Attack Bless)

The multiplications order are interchangeable due to math but based on the ruling of how the math works it could also be

8+1 poison = 9 x2 Smoke bomb = 18 +3 attack cards = 21 x2 bless = 42 Damage

This is where I get stuck with rolling modifiers and how things are calculated.

Advantage = Awesome.
1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berg
Germany
BaWü
flag msg tools
富士山
badge
Take a closer look
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
krovasteel wrote:

Draw 1 - (+1) flat
Draw 2 - (+1) Draw again, (+3 Pierce) draw again, +Poison draw again, (+2) Flat - STOP
+2 is inherently better than +1, it and all the rolling modifiers are chosen.
I received +3, +3 pierce, + poison total for my advantage roll.

Wouldn't this just result in a +2, without any further cards being drawn? Please correct me if I misunderstand your example, but I was under the impression you only kept drawing if both cards drawn under advantage were rolling modifiers.
Rules wrote:
If one rolling modifier card was drawn, its effect is added to the other card played . If two rolling modifier cards were drawn, continue to draw cards until a rolling modifier is not drawn and then add together all drawn effects


6 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wes Holland

North Carolina
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
krovasteel wrote:


Draw 1 - (+1) flat
Draw 2 - (+1) Draw again, (+3 Pierce) draw again, +Poison draw again, (+2) Flat - STOP

Bursting bubbles...
This is wrong. If you have advantage and draw a flat modifier and a rolling modifier, you stop, regardless of order. You treat the draw as if you had drawn the rolling modifier first.

This is why people are put off on rolling modifiers with advantage.
10 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stefan
Germany
flag msg tools
flolo wrote:
EternalFury wrote:
I find the rule rather illogical but I'm sure there is some reasoning behind it.
Same here. Not only give this the "Rolling Modifiers" a hidden disadvantage, but also is the rule complete counter-intuitive: As we played and got to this situation everybody of my group assumed, that I would draw a card until I draw a non-rolling card for the "first slot" and then perform the same for the "second slot", and afterwards choose the better "slot". When I explained/showed them the rules how rolling & advantage is handled, they first thought I would joke.

So its additional/irrational rule in addition to the "expected"/"intuitive" rule, and makes something which is supposed to be good bad (the rolling modifiers), in a sneaky way. So I think there is some intention behind it, and I am curious what it was (e.g. to weaken high level play).


Lets just compare to see what the difference between the "normal rule" and Isaac's special rule for the rolling modifiers is:

Situation 1) You draw one rolling modifier and a normal card:
In the most cases, the rolling modifier (or, if not that, then in a few cases even the second card) will contain an ability or element enhancement. With this, any comparison with a second draw would either be better or ambiguous, which makes a second draw just useless because you are forced to take the first result anyways.

Situation 2) You draw two rolling modifier cards:
You would continue drawing until you get a non modifier. But again, unless all the rolling modifiers are cards without abilitys or element enhancement you would afterwards have a better result with the first draw or are not able to determine which draw is better and therefor also would have to chose the first one.


So the result is, there is no rolling modifier weakening created by the additional rule in comparison to using the more intuitive normal rule (unless you only have rolling modifiers that don't add abilities or elements, which is relatively rare), just the number of cards that you would needlessly draw is reduced, which spares you alot of time for drawing, comparing and shuffling.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andreas Kortegaard
Denmark
Kbh N
flag msg tools
danom wrote:

So the result is, there is no rolling modifier weakening created by the additional rule in comparison to using the more intuitive normal rule (unless you only have rolling modifiers that don't add abilities or elements, which is relatively rare), just the number of cards that you would needlessly draw is reduced, which spares you alot of time for drawing, comparing and shuffling.


I think the argument was that advantage was weakened as a benefit by rolling modifiers, not that drawing rolling modifiers made an attack with advantage worse than one without it.

Considering actual draw order: x is normal card, o is rolling modifier

option 1) xx = "normal" advantage, avoid worst result.

option 2) xo = Add one modifier to a normal hit, strictly better than without advantage, but if x is -2 or null, probably worse than option 1.

option 3) ox or oo = exactly the same outcome as without advantage, and like option 2, possibly with a worse result than option 1.

edit: I believe you're right that it is made for streamlining and quickness/ease of play, it just feels weird. To be honest i think a lot of rules in Gloomhaven are made with this in mind, and I generally applaud them. This one is for me, maybe just a step to far.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jakob Kaine
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
After reading this discussion, I'm seriously beginning to think I should avoid rolling modifiers altogether; or at least place significantly less weight on them unless my character can bless routinely. You could stack your deck with tons of modifiers from perks and pull a chain of 8 modifiers with the last card a nill. That would completely suck! But, the exact opposite can be said if you pull 8 modifiers and then a crit.

I've always been a fan of removing the negative cards first, but now I'm thinking of deliberating throwing battle goals when rolling modifiers are the only perks left to choose with no way to bless myself.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jarad Bond
United States
Anchorage
Alaska
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JakobBGG wrote:
After reading this discussion, I'm seriously beginning to think I should avoid rolling modifiers altogether; or at least place significantly less weight on them unless my character can bless routinely. You could stack your deck with tons of modifiers from perks and pull a chain of 8 modifiers with the last card a nill. That would completely suck! But, the exact opposite can be said if you pull 8 modifiers and then a crit.

I've always been a fan of removing the negative cards first, but now I'm thinking of deliberating throwing battle goals when rolling modifiers are the only perks left to choose with no way to bless myself.

Or just house rule that you aren't forced to put the rolling modifier in your deck, even though you have checked the perk. Or "forget" to add it?

I guess you could sabotage yourself in a more profound way in order to play the game "correctly", but that sounds way more messed up to me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron Chien
United States
Rancho Cucamonga
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the intent is so that advantage + rolling modifier cards don't get out of hand.

It *is* confusing though, to have to remember to not flip another card, which is what one naturally wants to do when one sees the rolling symbol.

Perhaps an easier solution with this case is to keep rolling until a non-rolling has been drawn, then drop the worst single modifier card.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mathue Faulkner
United States
Austin
TX
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zeede wrote:

Perhaps an easier solution with this case is to keep rolling until a non-rolling has been drawn, then drop the worst single modifier card.

I think that by itself could be too strong. If I decide that it's an issue in our group, then I may just rule that Advantage ignores the Null....meaning it counts as zero instead of Null when used with advantage. It may not be as clean, but I think it's effective without changing much else in the game...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcus S
Canada
Calgary
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
So if a Null card is drawn as any part of the "addition" string, that attack does zero damage no matter what, but all the special effects of the rolling modifiers are still applied. Is that correct?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Latimore
United States
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
CarcuS wrote:
So if a Null card is drawn as any part of the "addition" string, that attack does zero damage no matter what, but all the special effects of the rolling modifiers are still applied. Is that correct?


Correct!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mathue Faulkner
United States
Austin
TX
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CarcuS wrote:
So if a Null card is drawn as any part of the "addition" string, that attack does zero damage no matter what, but all the special effects of the rolling modifiers are still applied. Is that correct?

Right. I'm playing Tinkerer, and that type of string probably wouldn't bother me much, but it seems like some of the crazy single target characters like the Scoundrel could find such an attack more than just a little discouraging...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stefan
Germany
flag msg tools
Have you guys ever played Descent? There your strongest attacks could also miss and the chance for that was not 1/20 or less, but it was an X at one side of a D6 and if you had a miss, not even conditions were applied there.

I see you guys complaining, because with rolling modifiers in your deck, there is a tiny tiny chance now that your best attack could do 0 damage even with advantage. But to be honest, how often would that be the case in the entire time of playing Gloomhaven? And... if you don't like that, why don't you simply use the variant rule for reduced luck? I mean, you are acting like because of this tiny tiny chance to miss, the rolling modifiers would make your overall deck worse. But this is simply not true. You will much more often benefit from them compared to the very rare cases where they would be responsible for a worse outcome (how often do you attack with advantage? and then also you would need really bad luck in combination with that).

And also I think the problem with advantage becomming less and less powerful is caused by ability cards in general. The more element enhancement and ability adding cards you have in your deck, the higher is the chance to have an ambigious draw which makes both advantage and disadvantage behave like a normal attack with just drawing an additional unused card.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berg
Germany
BaWü
flag msg tools
富士山
badge
Take a closer look
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't see anyone in this thread complaining, we're just discussing a weird rules interaction, that can lead to some extremely counterintuitive results. I can only speak for myself, but I would not want to play with the reduced randomness variant, because I love the tension of there always being a chance of missing or critting on your attacks.

For most classes, this won't be a factor because the positive effects of rolling modifiers are still going to take effect, and you're usually not that dependent on any one particular attack doing damage anyway (especially if you can also stun/disarm/immobilize/muddle).

For the Scoundrel (and possibly other, locked classes) this is a little different, because so much of your damage potential rests on single attacks that you have to prepare with other abilities and need the correct positioning for. If those attacks miss, it is a big matter - but that's fine too, because you can prepare for that by using equipment or other players help to get advantage, which eliminates that chance... ...until you add rolling modifiers to your deck. Suddenly, your insurance (which didn't come for free) may not work anymore, because of something beneficial you added to your deck. And you may not even have the consolation of your rolling cards appyling, because about a third of the Scoundrel's modifiers (+1 rolling, Pierce 3 rolling) aren't going to do anything unless the attack hits.

I don't think this is a game-breaking issue, and I agree with you that this isn't going to come up all that often (my brain refuses to do the math for that) and that the benefits far outweigh the potential negative. I just wish there was a better way to handle this situation. For the records, I haven't really seen that way, because the suggestions for house rules tend to result in an increase in power that I don't think is needed.



4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berg
Germany
BaWü
flag msg tools
富士山
badge
Take a closer look
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I asked a friend who understands combinatorics a bit better than me, and he gave me a figure of about a 6.4% chance that a fully perked scoundrel with no blessings or curses (10 +0/+1/+2s, 1 Crit, 1 Null and 13 various rolling modifiers) would get a Null when drawing with advantage. Compared to 1/13 = 7.7% 1/12 = 8.3% if you don't have advantage.

In other words:
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Florian Stock
Germany
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Garou wrote:
I asked a friend who understands combinatorics a bit better than me, and he gave me a figure of about a 6.4% chance that a fully perked scoundrel with no blessings or curses (10 +0/+1/+2s, 1 Crit, 1 Null and 13 various rolling modifiers) would get a Null when drawing with advantage. Compared to 1/13 = 7.7% 1/12 = 8.3% if you don't have advantage.


And what is worse (and that is I complain a little bit about): When not fully perked and not having rolling modifier in the deck, the chance is: 0% when having advantage. Then it is an huge advantage (and personally I wouldnt use the googles, there are better ways to get as scroundel advantage, like the moving ability card (I guess its lvl4, dont remember its name) or an ability card enhancement in the previous round that "strenghtens" you).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [7] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.