The best way to counter Pierce in my opinion is not Valyndra's Aurium Plating, Ironbound or Golems. Granted those are some of the ways, and they may be the right way in certain situations, such as when reinforcements are unfavorable to small monsters or you must defend a key target from a blitz from the heroes.

However, far more often whenever you want to deal with pierce, or high damage in general, I would agree with Whitewing in that you should use large numbers of smaller monsters .Don't even worry about their weaker defense pool. All the piercing in the world isn't going to help them kill these much faster, as they are likely to die in one hit with or without the piercing and much of that just goes to waste.

Goblin Archers are awesomesauce, but Skeleton Archers are excellent too when the Goblins aren't available. The master Skeleton Archer cares not for the heroes' puny 7 damage with Pierce 4. He will tank that like a champ, and then if you shoot him again he is still coming back as a Minion ready to pop them in the face along with his 4 buddies!

Sorcerers are sweet for this too.

My complaints about Treasure Hunters don't come from Pierce or Logan Lashley's synergy with it, but from the class' ability to amass tons of treasure chests and high value search cards for the party without even a significant action penalty. And it just gets compounded on if you play with normal Rumor rules. Zachareth laughs in the face of this of course.. but then you're stuck with Baron Z all the time. Boo. He may a godly lieutenant, but he's kinda boring.

Whitewing and I disagree on how overpowering the TH is in this regard, but I think we do agree that stacking pierce, while annoying, is hardly undefeatable. Adjust your strategies and I believe you'll be fine.

Crossbow comes with piercing 1, his ability Sleight of Hand gives piercing 2 with exotic weapons.

And yeah, he can do high damage if he gets the crossbow, but I have a player regular who chooses Logan Lashley as the treasure hunter every single campaign and I still usually win. I've had him get the crossbow in a treasure chest in the first quest before and I've still won. You're overreacting. And I never use the Valyndra deck, if I feel like ensuring I win I use Baron Zachareth, followed by the Olliven Brothers or Skarn. Using Basic Deck 2 (I always use Basic Deck 2) makes a big difference as well. Imploding Rift does well, using swarms of high speed high damage monsters to blitz him when he steps away from the group does well (and if he doesn't split he's not collecting treasure), he's just a glass cannon.

And why wouldn't I use Ironbounds? They're one of the obvious counters, when I need a monster to hold a specific location on the map vs someone with lots of piercing they're the obvious choice. If you're going to shoot yourself in the foot then you deserve it.

You wouldn't use Ironbounds because they're part of shadows nerekhall which came out a good while after LoR if something isn't OP then you don't need to buy a whole new expansion specifically to deal with that OP thing. You're advice to someone wanting to defeat Logan shouldn't be "oh he is fine as long as you buy shadows of nerekhall, and the Baron Zachareth Lt, or the Olliven brothers, or skar LT packs, oh and also consider picking up crusade of the forgotten" if you gotta pick up that kind of stuff in order to deal with Logan, then he is textbook OP. That means that during the time before that stuff he was OP too. Also I highly suspect like other have said on here, that your hero play was probably suboptimal if logan got crossbow on the first quest and you still won the campaign.

What was the hero composition, what campaign was it, and what was the final mission loadout?

He plays it every time, so upwards of 10 campaign finales with a variety of loadouts. I usually win, although I have occasionally lost. It was never because the group had a ton of gear though, a mistake on my part was to blame.

The Treasure Hunter with Logan Lashley is strong in Act 1, but becomes dramatically weaker in Act 2. It doesn't scale well at all, and doesn't have any particularly good 3 exp abilities. There are no act 2 weapons nearly as good for him as the act 1 crossbow, so he either misses out on dice or doesn't synergize as well. Honestly the best thing to do is just position your monsters well, don't give him an easy shot at anyone, and let him split off to look for treasure. As soon as he splits off from the group, you can blitz him with high speed monsters. Also, use large groups of small monsters rather than big monsters. He might kill one or two in a turn, but that leaves you with 2-3 left over to murder him rather than him just popping off your big monsters quickly.

And there are other plot decks besides Baron Zachareth's that work well against him. Try Raythen's or Rylan Olliven's plot decks. If Baron Zachareth's deck is too strong in your opinion and you want more of a challenge, try one of these two against him.

Frankly though, Logan Lashley is a glass cannon with the crossbow as the treasure hunter. He is oh so very squishable. Any large group of fast monsters can blitz him down in no time. Target his weaknesses, not his strengths.

Frankly, I think the runemaster is more obnoxious to play against than Logan Lashley as the Treasure Hunter, and it doesn't even really matter too much which hero it is (unless it's Dezra the Vile, she's probably the worst hero in the game).

I feel like we've had this conversation before, Whitewing, and every time we have it, I do my best to be polite and you take insult at it. So please, don't take this as hostile or negative...

What you are describing is bad play on the part of your players. Not only that, but it sounds like they're making the SAME bad plays, campaign after campaign. Leaving a weak player undefended? Repeatedly overextending - and doing so with a character who has so much movement that he should be able to make it halfway across the board, search a token, then get safely back to the group? He's trying to take on a group of Goblin Archers (or whatever small monster) on his own? This isn't strong play.

As to your other arguments against the TH - The treasure hunter doesn't NEED any good 3 XP abilities (and I disagree that Finder's Keepers isn't good; it's not amazing, but it's certainly playable) because he has TWO extra-action abilities in the 1 XP slot. Honestly, after the 2nd encounter the TH doesn't really even need to buy any more abilities. (Okay, I'm exaggerating there a bit.) The Crossbow is more than powerful enough to be a good end-game weapon, and I've seen it used as such, quite successfully, especially with Slight of Hand to back it up. (And the Boomerang is a great replacement, anyway, but Act 2 items are always a crapshoot.)

Based on the play you've described, it does not surprise me that you're winning - but it also doesn't surprise me that you seem to consistently undervalue how much a Treasure Hunter can unbalance the game, if that's the kind of thing your party's TH does. So I'm suggesting to you that you may not have the full picture, and to take the opinion of the several other highly experienced players on these boards - the Treasure Hunter unbalances the game. He does this not because he is so offensively powerful, but because one of the central strategic tensions in the game is searching vs. achieving encounter goals. With his two incredibly powerful 1 XP abilities, the Treasure Hunter very quickly allows good players to search tokens - even far away ones - without the normal sacrifice of strategic power that would be expected. Additionally, the Treasure Hunter - unlike the Thief, for instance - doesn't really sacrifice combat power or anything else to get these things. In fact, Delver, right off the bat, makes him a heavy hitter. True, +1 damage doesn't scale through Act 2 as well as some things - but that's true for almost all classes' early abilities. What DOES scale is the multiple extra tier-1 items that your party will be able to afford because the TH is in your group.

No, they don't leave him undefended. I'm saying what you do if they do it. They don't split up anymore against me, so I punish that by simply rushing objectives and taking advantage of the fact that their speed strengths are nullified since they are only as fast as their slowest hero. I choose monster groups and position them to threaten punishment on splitting so they don't split. If they manage to force me into a bad position, then they split up and I can't punish it, which is well played by them. The gist of it is that you shouldn't be allowing the treasure hunter to run around the map collecting treasure willy nilly. If you are, you're being outplayed by your heroes and you deserve to lose.

No hero can move halfway across the map search and move back, you're way over-exaggerating. Further, he doesn't try to take on goblins by himself, but he knows if he goes after treasure alone, he has no choice, they'll blitz him.

My players are very smart, I'm suggesting what to do if the treasure hunter is giving you trouble. The treasure hunter player I've got is so scared of getting blitzed he won't move more than 3 squares away from the group unless there are no monsters anywhere nearby.

Stop making assumptions about my players.

Based on the play you've described, it does not surprise me that you're winning - but it also doesn't surprise me that you seem to consistently undervalue how much a Treasure Hunter can unbalance the game, if that's the kind of thing your party's TH does. So I'm suggesting to you that you may not have the full picture, and to take the opinion of the several other highly experienced players on these boards - the Treasure Hunter unbalances the game. He does this not because he is so offensively powerful, but because one of the central strategic tensions in the game is searching vs. achieving encounter goals. With his two incredibly powerful 1 XP abilities, the Treasure Hunter very quickly allows good players to search tokens - even far away ones - without the normal sacrifice of strategic power that would be expected. Additionally, the Treasure Hunter - unlike the Thief, for instance - doesn't really sacrifice combat power or anything else to get these things. In fact, Delver, right off the bat, makes him a heavy hitter. True, +1 damage doesn't scale through Act 2 as well as some things - but that's true for almost all classes' early abilities. What DOES scale is the multiple extra tier-1 items that your party will be able to afford because the TH is in your group.

Extremely well put. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Also, on many maps, search tokens are not far out of the way. In fact, many times they are lying around on the way to objectives as the heroes naturally move through the map.

Normally picking up those conveniently placed tokens still requires a precious action. If the OL is applying sufficient pressure to the heroes, then they may be unable to afford the action. If they do take it, then they fall behind in their goal of winning the map. This is a good trade off. Furthermore, they risk not even getting a very good treasure for their effort. I feel this kind of risk/reward is essential. The thief, while assisting the heroes with their treasure gains has to pay for it with actions. It feels balanced. If they really want the free search, they have to get Lurk, and that is a very significant exp investment that cripples his potential in other areas. The 'icing' on the card is a mere brown die, too.

The treasure hunter however throws the cost system totally out of whack. In addition to being a very strong combatant in his own right, he is able to, through the use of Dungeoneer, perform searches without any loss to the party in the action economy for a mere 1 xp. This is on top of Delver, arguably the most powerful starting skill in the game, with a damage boost and text which essentially reads: If you find at least 6 search tokens on this quest, your party will get a free shop item card, in addition to 200+ gold from the costliest stuff in the rest of the deck. Oh, and if you need a specific potion, you can get that when you want it too. Can spare time for a secret passage? Yep, you'll find that too.

That is whack . I have been fortunate that the players I've run with haven't used the TH excessively, so I haven't pulled my hair out about it, but I know I would if I had to face it regularly. My earlier proposal of 1 chest per act is aimed squarely at TH abuse. A non-TH party probably won't even notice the difference. A TH party will still get tons of gold, but at least they won't be getting constant free items.

Assuming similar strategic ability to the Overlord, heroes win or lose campaigns based on their gear. If you starve them of treasure, an OL victory is nigh. If the heroes get geared to the nines with mana weaves, rune plates, lucky charms, and act II weapons, you are doomed. The TH is just too powerful a force in accomplishing this when used correctly. And like I said, it sucks that Rumors are already a bad move in regular campaign play. A TH around just makes them a horrific prospect.

I'm not saying the TH is unbeatable. We have talked extensively about the possible counters to him. However, it should be clear to anyone who reads the proposed counters that you really are pushed to pick quests, lieutenant packs and OL cards all focused around suppressing this one member of the team. There isn't any other class in the game in my view, except the Marshal, that all by themselves makes the OL dance to their tune to this degree.

The Treasure Hunter with Logan Lashley is strong in Act 1, but becomes dramatically weaker in Act 2.

There are no act 2 weapons nearly as good for him as the act 1 crossbow

Bow of the Eclipse says hi!

I have found that a great way to deal with a powerful hero (regardless of hero, class or gear) is to give him/her something to do instead of popping off your monsters or run away to fetch every token in the game while your Shambling Zombies try to catch him (but when they do... nooooooooooo! argggghhh).

Anyways,

There were talks about splitting the heroes and I find that strategy as being the best way to give yourself a decent shot at winning virtually any encounter. Web Trap is great at this. I would actually not play this card to cover the most heroes possible, but rather try to catch the dude that is about to run 10 squares this turn to catch up with the group. Immobilized, then rip him apart with monsters, rince and repeat as long as he keeps standing up again, then suddenly the three heroes have to make a choice as for sending help there. If you use 1x2 monsters, they can nicely block corridors and force the rescue party to fight these in order to even reach the poor victim. By the time the hero team is put back together again, 4-5 turns have passed so that helps you getting to your objectives. You just need to dedicate monsters to slowing down the group as much as possible. Harpies are great for that. Rat Swarms are awesome at it, especially if they can re-spawn.

The real danger with this strategy though is if you have a Knight in the heroes party, and even worse Syndrael being the knight, as she gets free move through a ton of different means. That means she can be anywhere very quickly. You just need to know that, and who cares if she uses this to help out a hero as long as she doesn't spend said skills in the heat of the real battle over the objectives. Still, Advance is a pain for me.

I would actually not play this card to cover the most heroes possible, but rather try to catch the dude that is about to run 10 squares this turn to catch up with the group. Immobilized, then rip him apart with monsters, rince and repeat as long as he keeps standing up again, then suddenly the three heroes have to make a choice as for sending help there.

I lost a finale by not following this advice. I (finally) had Mok the Bard away from the party (they were racing to kill Mirklace) and attacked him with Rylan, and though he survived, I got the surges for Subdue- I stunned him- (never thought I'd say this, but) BIG MISTAKE. Reason? Syndrael only had 2 health left, which meant she COULDN'T attack Mirklace (she'd die from Aura 2.) By failing to immobilize Mok, he was able to get in range of Syndrael with 1 action, and then heal her (and everyone) 2 damage and 2 fatigue without needing another action. Syndrael then proceeded to attack Mirklace twice, winning the campaign. (The last hero already had 3 corruption, and I would have won at the start of my turn.)

On 27/09/2014 at 7:38 PM, Whitewing said:

(...) Keep in mind that if she's maxed out on fatigue, she can't use by the book even with zealous fire, since she needs to have stamina available to activate by the book and they'd resolve at the same time (she can't choose to activate by the book after zealous fire resolves), so if you can target her stamina it helps a ton.

(...)

Does this statement proceeds? I thought a hero could combo zealous fire + by the book on a fully fatigued Marshall to effectively prevent a OL card to be resolved.

Reviewing the RAW and erratas, I didn't get why is this maneuver prohibited. Both (zealous fire and by the book) trigger when the OL plays a card, not when it resolves .

Thanks in advance!

Those two skills could be exhausted together as far as I can see, as well. If the marshal failed the book check, she'd suffer a damage.