Heroica RPG General Discussion

[Scubacarrot]

Making gold was not my objective in that fight, at all. And I doubt it was anyone's, honestly.

When we visit a shop I will buy a bunch of consumables. Which I will use for the good of the party. If that's not good enough for some people, then that's too bad.

[Myrddyn]

I've always thought that a rogue should supply tools.

[swils]

And often, they do. I may be remembering wrong, but didn't Guts use two Essences that fight? Talk about coming prepared. In truth, even if a rogue (a damage dealer) only comes equipped with stuff that helps him get more shield rolls more often, that still benefits the party. Sure, they'll be raking in tons of gold, but they're also doling out some substantial AoE dpr.

Honestly, it annoys me that this "RP situation" brought this discussion back into the spotlight. I guess it's fine if a player and their character share a vision, but try and have some IC perspective. As per the original Rogue design, the rogue pickpockets gold. That's being stealthier than the victim can detect. Surely in the flurry of combat, if an NPC can't realize they're being manhandled, then a fellow PC might not notice it? Though later iterations of gold generation don't share the name, I think it's fair to extend the idea. In my head, Hoke shouldn't have even been aware of the exact amounts looted by the rogues. If nothing else, let that be a rationalization for not cutting the rogues' share of the loot.

[Scubacarrot]

And often, they do. I may be remembering wrong, but didn't Guts use two Essences that fight?

Three, actually.

[UsernameMDM]

Three, actually.

It's not like you or other rogues are the only ones to use Phoenix Essences. Tell me, what is the difference between splitting loot gold among non-rogues vs making the rogues pay for the party's consumables? I also don't see how some of you expect the Black Knight to dump his Shield Roll stolen loot into the loot pool, but not the farmed gold from other rogues. I want rogues to keep what they get. I don't want rogues to pay for the party's consumables. I do expect rogues to forgo some or all of the loot pool gold, especially if it such an insignificant amount. Like the fight as an example, rogues farmed 2,400 + gold. Of the 500 loot gold, I distributed some gold to Alexandre and Benji who both farmed gold, but didn't get a lot, and everyone got loot. If there was more loot gold, I would have split it up with the rogues at a 1/4 rate or something like that. I just can't fathom that a player who farmed between 200-800 gold IN ONE FIGHT would feel slighted at not getting 50 gold, so that non-rouge classes could get a respectable amount in a fight.

I posted the chart as an explanation to why I set up the loot distribution as such, but I guess even after seeing the numbers, some of y'all are still make any excuse to get all the gold you can FOR YOUR PC. Your PC maybe a rogue, but you aren't supposed to be. If you want to scratch every imaginary gold piece you can into your imaginary PC's pocket with no thought of the other you play with, then you have problems beyond this game. If this were a single player game, then have at it, but this is supposed to be a team based game.

[Flipz]

I need to re-read the numbers--did MDM's loot distribution ask for Gold out of the Rogues' pockets or not? Or did it simply let the Rogues forego gold from the loot pool?

[Sandy]

If this were a single player game, then have at it, but this is supposed to be a team based game.

I agree with UMDM about the issue itself - those who have earned gold via stealing etc. should not be slighted if they do not get an equal share in the loot as those that don't. Feeling slighted for not getting virtual currency is arguably silly, in any case.

However, since this is a roleplaying game, the characters can be as greedy as their players want. It's just a matter of knowing what is roleplaying and what is voicing personal opinions through a mask of roleplaying.

[Flipz]

I agree with UMDM about the issue itself - those who have earned gold via stealing etc. should not be slighted if they do not get an equal share in the loot as those that don't. Feeling slighted for not getting virtual currency is arguably silly, in any case.

However, since this is a roleplaying game, the characters can be as greedy as their players want. It's just a matter of knowing what is roleplaying and what is voicing personal opinions through a mask of roleplaying.

I think the main issue is that (according to what some people insinuated) MDM's loot distribution asked for the rogues to take money out of pocket to add to the loot pool. I haven't run the numbers myself, so I don't know if that's actually the case.

[UsernameMDM]

I need to re-read the numbers--did MDM's loot distribution ask for Gold out of the Rogues' pockets or not? Or did it simply let the Rogues forego gold from the loot pool?

I want rogues to keep what they get. I don't want rogues to pay for the party's consumables. I do expect rogues to forgo some or all of the loot pool gold, especially if it such an insignificant amount.

Rogues keep what they steal. Even the Black Knight's Shield Skill. Period. I am not asking rogues to lose the advantage of their Shield Skills but to understand I consider that as claimed loot from the loot pool.

Here's the chart for reference. There was 500 gold in the loot pool. All stolen gold stayed in the rogues pockets and everyone got loot:

Edited December 18, 2013 by UsernameMDM

[Jebediahs]

As per the original Rogue design, the rogue pickpockets gold. That's being stealthier than the victim can detect. Surely in the flurry of combat, if an NPC can't realize they're being manhandled, then a fellow PC might not notice it? Though later iterations of gold generation don't share the name, I think it's fair to extend the idea. In my head, Hoke shouldn't have even been aware of the exact amounts looted by the rogues. If nothing else, let that be a rationalization for not cutting the rogues' share of the loot.

That is how it should be but unfortunately when it comes to loot, most people turn Docken.

[Waterbrick Down]

It seems like I'm surprisingly well-equipped for the Arena. Which is odd, because I so rarely use it.

No more arena for you after this one though, you're making my brain hurt with all the convoluted rulings I'm having to figure out.

What's wrong with rogues demanding an equal share of the loot? Loot distribution should be a vacuum to some extent not taking class features into account, we do that with every other class so why not rogues? A slight variant on all of this would be to expect mystic knight's to forgo gold because they happened to roll a few enchants during the battle and therefor don't need the gold, weapons, SP granting equipment because they've already upgraded their equipment.

[Flare]

Simply put: a rogue who earns a lot of gold during a battle demanda to get the same share of the gold loot as the ranger, cleric, mage, etc, who had earned no gold during the battle. Sheesh. Really. Its just not ethical. The ranger, cleric, etc, gets nothing out of the battle but the loot. The rogue who reaps huge amounts of gold is getting doubleor more.

Another example which keeps getting brought up is Enchantment of the Mystic Knight - fine. So they won't be getting any high leveled weapons from the loot selection. This really has little to do with the gold loot issue.

[UsernameMDM]

What's wrong with rogues demanding an equal share of the loot? Loot distribution should be a vacuum to some extent not taking class features into account, we do that with every other class so why not rogues? A slight variant on all of this would be to expect mystic knight's to forgo gold because they happened to roll a few enchants during the battle and therefor don't need the gold, weapons, SP granting equipment because they've already upgraded their equipment.

I've already said Shield Skills are good to go. If someone wants to give SP or WP granting equipment to a non Mystic Knight, then go for it I say. But I think you should distribute loot to those that it will benefit the most. Guts had given Nerwen 2 Mulled Wines. Why? To boosts SP from 3 to 6? Hoke gave the extra Mulled Wine to Tesni to boost her SP from 14 to 28. That's a real viable difference in a battle, especially for a PC who is a front line fighter and may have to absorb Free Hits. And I did not even consider Tesni for the WP 20 greatsword because she already has a treasure trove of high WP weapons.

[Kintobor]

No more arena for you after this one though, you're making my brain hurt with all the convoluted rulings I'm having to figure out.

What's wrong with rogues demanding an equal share of the loot? Loot distribution should be a vacuum to some extent not taking class features into account, we do that with every other class so why not rogues? A slight variant on all of this would be to expect mystic knight's to forgo gold because they happened to roll a few enchants during the battle and therefor don't need the gold, weapons, SP granting equipment because they've already upgraded their equipment.

It was Flipz's idea to go into the arena, not mine! Just saying that now!

I agree wholeheartedly. If a party leader pulled that on me, guess who isn't getting my help when it comes to being healed.

Rogues make money. That's what the class does. Everyone else has a beneficial skill, so why do rogues get the shaft so to speak when they're doing what they're supposed to be doing? If I made lots of money, hand me some of the consumables and let the rest of the party take the gold, because grand tonics are expensive. It costs money to upkeep a spell caster during a quest. I'm not saying give me all the consumables, but something's nice.

[UsernameMDM]

I agree wholeheartedly. If a party leader pulled that on me, guess who isn't getting my help when it comes to being healed.

Rogues make money. That's what the class does. Everyone else has a beneficial skill, so why do rogues get the shaft so to speak when they're doing what they're supposed to be doing? If I made lots of money, hand me some of the consumables and let the rest of the party take the gold, because grand tonics are expensive. It costs money to upkeep a spell caster during a quest. I'm not saying give me all the consumables, but something's nice.

Pulled what? Sounds like you haven't read the entire dialog. No one is saying rogues should have anything taken from them. Tell me what you disagree with from the distribution chart I posted.

And no, I am not advocating that this be some hard & fast rule that every Party Leader and QM should follow. I think it's a viable option to make sure everyone in the party has a fair shot at a healthy upkeep and improvements. I will be keeping tabs on 88 & 89 to see how much gold a rogue can steal in a quest vs how much is handed out.

[Kintobor]

Sorry, wasn't talking about the chart. Just in general. Sorry if I offended you, it wasn't my intention.

As in giving less to a rogue who racked in money. There's alternatives to giving him gold, usually, like I said. I think the chart looks fine, although Alexandre could have skipped the 25 gold, seeing as how he's got a fancy new sword, but other than that, it looks fine to me.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Kintobor

[Scorpiox]

Everyone else has a beneficial skill, so why do rogues get the shaft so to speak when they're doing what they're supposed to be doing?

Because the rogue special skill benefits the rogue.

[Scubacarrot]

Mulled Wine deals with Health by the way, and whose to say Nerwen's going to use it on herself? In battle, it's generally strategically better to have a character buff someone else than to buff themselves. I think there's bound to be disagreements with this, and there's no way everyone's going to be happy all the time, that's why loot distribution is not democratic, and there are party leaders for that. I personally think some classes skills being taken into account (except for Black Knight) is not something that should be desirable, although I do find it weird that those that DO follow that line of thought would not include a mystic knight's enchantment.

And of course, I think it should also be nothing more than logical than with the increased gold that those classes have, they could provide a significant amount of in-quest neccesities.

[Waterbrick Down]

Simply put: a rogue who earns a lot of gold during a battle demanda to get the same share of the gold loot as the ranger, cleric, mage, etc, who had earned no gold during the battle. Sheesh. Really. Its just not ethical. The ranger, cleric, etc, gets nothing out of the battle but the loot. The rogue who reaps huge amounts of gold is getting double or more.

Ethics has nothing to do with it, you're forgetting the point of the rogue class is to get gold.

[UsernameMDM]

I personally think some classes skills being taken into account (except for Black Knight) is not something that should be desirable, although I do find it weird that those that DO follow that line of thought would not include a mystic knight's enchantment.

Hey, I am all about it, for WP items. SP, not so much as a Knight class's function is to have SP and tank for the party. If a Bright Polish decides to pop up in quest 88, it will go to Hoke or Tesni with Benji in a distant 3rd. If a Grating Stone comes up, then Benji, Nerwen and Jess will have to duke it out. I would normal consider a Barbarian class for a WP boost, but Tesni doesn't need one with all the weapons she has.

I really do think class skills and roles should definitely be taken into account when distributing loot.

Ethics has nothing to do with it, you're forgetting the point of the rogue class is to get gold.

But again, this is a team based game. In my idea, no one is asking rogues for their stolen goods or to play Daddy Warbucks for the party. If, in that same fight, the loot gold would have been 1,000, I would have given rogues some, but given the majority to non rogues. If the loot gold was 10,000, same story. But 50 gold is a paltry amount when you consider one player stole over 4 times that much and another stole over 16 times that much.

Edited December 18, 2013 by UsernameMDM

[Waterbrick Down]

What about alchemists? If they create something for themselves, will they not be given as many consumables from the loot distribution? I guess the point I'm getting at is that you're penalizing a class (not giving rogues an equal share of the loot) based on something that is their class feature, something they cannot do anything about. If we carry this to an extreme, say a rogue made 8000 gold in a single battle, would a party leader forgo giving them any loot because they had made so much gold? Now if the rogue is generous, he will probably forgo any of the loot, the distribution should be dependent upon the rogue's generous behavior and not upon the party leader's idea of "fairness". Yes their is definitely a place for strategic loot distribution, but most of the time I feel gold falls outside of that consideration.

[UsernameMDM]

What about alchemists? If they create something for themselves, will they not be given as many consumables from the loot distribution? I guess the point I'm getting at is that you're penalizing a class (not giving rogues an equal share of the loot) based on something that is their class feature, something they cannot do anything about. If we carry this to an extreme, say a rogue made 8000 gold in a single battle, would a party leader forgo giving them any loot because they had made so much gold? Now if the rogue is generous, he will probably forgo any of the loot, the distribution should be dependent upon the rogue's generous behavior and not upon the party leader's idea of "fairness". Yes their is definitely a place for strategic loot distribution, but most of the time I feel gold falls outside of that consideration.

This is all based on gold, not loot (items, consumables, etc). Gold seems to be a lot harder to come by than loot.

Again, this generous thing pops up. I have yet to play in a party with a generous rogue.

Spreading the gold to the non-rogues makes sense. I have never ran out of consumables, but just about every quest, I have been short on gold to upgrade my equipment.

Gold is harder to get than loot.

[TheBoyWonder]

Often, I forego the loot, unless there is a nostrum or I haven't got any gold. I do agree with WBD in the sense that you can punish nearly every class like this.

Not using or giving potions to clerics, not giving gold to Rogues/Mystic Knights, not giving bright polish or grating stones to mystic knights.

The list goes on and on. If you penalize one class, then you must penalize every class based on their abilities. Otherwise, you are punishing ONE class,and that is just wrong.

Mizuki, Romulus and others have all avoided loot or have given things. Just because you haven't been on a quest with generous rogues yet, doesn't mean they do not exist.

I am being perfectly honest here, and I can imagine most rogue players agree. If I do not get considered for gold/loot based on my rogue class, that PL better not expect me to revive, heal or in any other way boost them. It works both ways.

[The Legonater]

Rogues keep what they steal. Even the Black Knight's Shield Skill. Period. I am not asking rogues to lose the advantage of their Shield Skills but to understand I consider that as claimed loot from the loot pool.

Here's the chart for reference. There was 500 gold in the loot pool. All stolen gold stayed in the rogues pockets and everyone got loot:

Oh, really? I was under the assumption you were asking the rogues to add their stolen loot to the pool. I'm fully behind giving up after-battle loot if I have a large income from that battle.

[UsernameMDM]

Oh, really? I was under the assumption you were asking the rogues to add their stolen loot to the pool. I'm fully behind giving up after-battle loot if I have a large income from that battle.

Nope. Look at the chart.