click to see it i didnt resize the image

also i forgot to mention its a 1 dot card for the resurgence of the dragon lords mission/event

How is this card broken? It makes perfect sense to me. In fact, I think it's a really cool mechanic and I look forward to playing it.

Let me know about EXPENSION more!!!!

Lack Lack~

Style75 said:

I'm a couple months behind on this reply, but having just played this scenario with a friend, we agreed that this card is RIDICULOUSLY broken. I quickly rushed to the forums to see how other fared against it, and this particular reply boggled my mind as I couldn't understand how anyone could question how broken this card is.

As mentioned, it's a 1-dot card, meaning it'll be out in play as early as the end of the first round. With the two of us, at the start of the next event phase, it'll be attacking us both for 5, and then for 6 each the following round. And given it takes 25 strength to defeat, we have to get extremely lucky to have a handful of high strength cards (in fact, it'd be easier to take out the objective and win the game than to take out this card!). Also keep in mind that the scenario that uses this card requires all players share a single home realm. So unless we're willing to give up every unit in our hands each turn, we'll have lost the game in a matter of a few turns. In our particular game, this card came out as the event of round 2, and we were completely helpless to it, just delaying the inevitable as we mitigated the damage until we lost by round 5.

I'm stumped as to how we're expected to survive, much less defeat this enemy.

Daedalus said:

I've only lost once against the co-op of Resurgence and have played it several times now. In fact, to my surprise, I killed it using the Undead and Chaos Beasts. Not broken and I think it makes the co-op a constantly fun challenge.

it actually only attacks one of you each event phase. Read the expansion variant rules again. One of you defends against it and then you play through your turns.

and remember that after the event phase, the player who defended against it can draw back up to 5 cards…

I played this scenario for the first time last night. I played it twice solo as the dwarves. I got close the second time, but both times I eas finished off by Kraxonis. Stil, it feels doable. I don't feel he's too powerful. Maybe I'd feel differently with more players.

I don't believe the brown tier-1 cards are meant to be played solo for Dragonlords, unless you mean you played more than one faction yourself.

Tromdial said:

Oops.

Seems stupid to me. If you can defeat this card (not easily done) you may as well beat the objective. Getting hit by 10+ (it gets to 10 quickly) each turn is just too much.

Indeed, this card's purpose is only to "push" the players towards the objective. You don't want to kill Kraxonis, but to beat the objective. It's not broken : objective has its importance, this card is more of a timer.

Remember : when you play with the brown cards, there is only one kingdom card and each time a card says "it attacks each player", only one of the players has to defend (chosen by the first player). When the event phase is over, all players draw up to five cards.

Has anyone brought up the fact that his health doesn't stay at 25. They are called "damage tokens" for a reason. The dragon's original power of "25" goes down for each damage token. So say in a three player game, he comes out. He gets 6 damage tokens and he's now at 19. Now with his ability he's going to swing for 6, then 7, then 8, and so on, but also his normal power (when it's your turn to attempt to attack him) also goes down from 19, then 18, then 17. So You don't have to survive that long. He is strong for a one dot, I would still say a two dot is better, but he's not as bad as you make him out to seem.

ASimpleLotus said:

Good thought, but I don't see anything in the rules that suggest that the above interpretation is correct. In fact, if this were the case, Invasion From the Abyss becomes a simple card to deal with, since you just wait till it has 7 tokens on it and then attack it with more than one strength. No, I believe damage counters are so called because they are usually used to represent damage on home realms, but they are also used as generic counters for the enemies.

Besides, the amount to beat is the lower right number of 25. That number doesn't change. The upper left number is the one with the question mark, and that's the number that changes with damage counters. So you must attack it with 25 or higher to beat it no matter how many damage counters are on it, but its attack is dependent on how many damage counters it has.

I've not tried this co-op yet (hell, Rune Age has barely seen the light of day this year so far…) but looking at it, I don't think it's impossible, no. The Uthuk Y'llan strategy of Flesh Rippers wounding Berserkers usually gets me a fairly decent amount of strength to attack with, and with the addition of mythic units providing legendary amounts of strength (if you can get them out), to say nothing of having a Demon or using Battle Cry, if everyone is attacking the swine, you should be able to beat the 25 fairly easily (thankfully he has no attrition die!)

But that's only in theory of course…

alecoi01 said:

+1 to all this.

After a half dozen play throughs of this scenario, I'm convinced that Kraxonis is really just a timer mechanism. Once he hits the table, you know you're on the clock and have to finish the scenario as quickly as possible. I don't think this monster was ever really supposed to be a target for the players. FFG really should have drawn attention to this fact.

Also the bit in the rules about the brown cards attacking only one player is very important. Read the new FAQ to clear this up.

yeah, if you're playing this co-op scenario with only one home realm, there's got to be some way for the game to try to beat you. This card is that way. If it wasn't for this card, there would be nothing damaging your home realm. No challenge. And although this is a challenging scenario, we've beat it several times…

illygraham said:

Nothing damaging your home realm ?

You have an instant attacking you with Strengh 9, another one attacking you with Strengh 12, another one dealing 3 unblockable damage, another one dealing 2 damage per other enemy on the board.

4 cards out of 12 is not nothing.

Indeed, this card's purpose is only to "push" the players towards the objective. You don't want to kill Kraxonis, but to beat the objective. It's not broken : objective has its importance, this card is more of a timer.

This right here is what answers your problem perfectly. The point of Kraxonis is to act as a sort of timer for the scenario. The reason his strength is so high is because you're not supposed to kill him. If you can kill him, you have enough strength to end the game, so why bother attacking him?

We ran into this roadblock as well and went searching for an answer, there is a post on BGG that explains it.

In Short, HE HAS DAMAGE TOKENS ON HIM. Each token you add, reduces his health. We cross referenced this with other cards, and this is the only card that specifies the tokens placed on the cards as DAMAGE tokens.

We ran into this roadblock as well and went searching for an answer, there is a post on BGG that explains it.

In Short, HE HAS DAMAGE TOKENS ON HIM. Each token you add, reduces his health. We cross referenced this with other cards, and this is the only card that specifies the tokens placed on the cards as DAMAGE tokens.

I don't know what thread you were reading on BGG (didn't find it with a search), but I'm pretty sure that is incorrect. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, he has two numbers on him: the defense score in the lower right, and the attack score in the upper left. The attack score is a question mark so it is the only variable number. The defense score is always 25. As others have stated, he's a timer; you're not meant to kill him because if you could, you might as well take out the objective.

Would you mind please linking to the article you read on BGG? I'd really appreciate that.

This is the thread , and I was referring to Eric Pietrocupo's Post.

However now that I'm not in the middle of the game going WTF!? and reading some of the other post it seems he was proven wrong and that it is indeed intended as you say. My bad

That's a great thread. I wonder why I couldn't find it using the BGG search ...

I'm glad you're all set with this scenario. I'd love to hear a brief session report after you've played it, if you have the time.