Hi, Edit: This seems like intended behaviour, provided curses/negative statuses can be removed like this. http://www.cardhunter.com/forum/threads/lack-of-stacking-with-righteous-frenzy.409/#post-5114 Sorry I didn't find that first time around. Game: ROSE 496 (probably not relevant). Apologies if this is a duplicate (I couldn't find it). It looks like the maximum number of cards that can be displayed as attached to a character is 3, is that correct? If not, at some points I'm missing a way to check what cards are currently active on my character, in this case a warrior. He currently has Unholy Wellspring, Martyr Bless, Combustible and Dastardly Curse. Since Dastardly Curse was the first card applied, it now can't be seen on the three cards under my character - does that mean I've removed the curse? Actually having just applied Fire Spray and Burning Fingers to my warrior, I can see that once the card has gone from underneath, the effect goes as well, so presumably this is an intentional mechanic that I just missed? That's quite neat, if the idea is that I can use small damage cards that attach (e.g Burning Fingers) to remove Path Of Knives etc. Was that explained anywhere, am I just being daft?
I don't think the "Rule of Three" was explained anywhere ingame, but I think Sir Knight did on another thread when discussing how effects stack, or not. You can hover the mouse over any character and a little window opens showing what cards are attached. Space opens that window up for detail as I remember.
Oops, I had a feeling I'd seen it somewhere before, failed on the search. Thanks =D I didn't know if it was intentional that I could remove curses in that way, could perhaps use a bit more tutorial clarification. Ooh, presumably I can unhalt/unstun my characters in the same way. I had been using that method to check attached cards, but I was wondering if there had indeed been (4+) attached, if I was missing a way to view them. Since there aren't more than 3, no worries there
It most recently came up in the "hints and tactics" thread, where a re-quote of old dev diary discussion revealed the clutter-based reasoning:
