Heroica RPG General Discussion

[Endgame]

Ah, okay - good to see we're on the same page, then.

And even then, to be honest, if they're well contructed, I don't mind those either. I like seeing characters develop. I follow a fair number of PCs, so I like any sort of output.

[CMP]

And even then, to be honest, if they're well contructed, I don't mind those either. I like seeing characters develop. I follow a fair number of PCs, so I like any sort of output.

I love seeing characters develop. Having them follow a predetermined path or delivering backstory through scenes that you can't really react to isn't really development.

[Endgame]

For scenes that heroes aren't/couldn't/shouldn't be around to see, though? I prefer cutscenes to just a retelling, but that's just a personal preference.

[UsernameMDM]

Cut scenes for the plot/quest story = ok. Cut scenes for PCs = not so much.

[Kintobor]

Alright, I'm out for the weekend! 105, 109, if Party Leader could take over Karie's action I'd appreciate it. See you all on Sunday evening!

Edited August 15, 2014 by Kintobor

[Duvors]

What I want to know is, was that battle even winnable in the first place?

[Endgame]

Which one? The one in Quest #100?

If that is the one you're referring to: Yes, it was possible. Filled to the brim with insta death while you were only a party of 2, but yes, it was doable. The HP was low enough that you could conceivably win.

Unfortunately, though, you lost because of a 1/36 chance. Had you not rolled Special Damage, or flipped the battle order, you would've one. Probably would've been done dofr in the next battles, but you would've won nonetheless. Although one could theoretically make the argument that since the entire enemy party perished, Throlar shouldn't have failed, but what is done is done.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Endgame

[Emjajoas]

I've written my reponse in 105 like 5 times and it just keeps bugging out for me; whether it's my computer of the forum, I'm not sure. It'll post eventually, but it's frustrating to have written out something and be happy with it only to have it disappear.

[Endgame]

Yeah, the RTE is a menace. Try flipping the light switch to switch it to a normal editor, and post it like that.

[Emjajoas]

That worked. Thanks for the tip.

[Flipz]

What I want to know is, was that battle even winnable in the first place?

Yes, it was. You had a good strategy going against Loc, and with better rolls you could easily have turtled away against Orokai, the dice just turned on you. Also note that your competitors deliberately sent the most difficult of the Fantastic Four against you.

Don't know if this pertains directly to QMing.

I have no problem with players diverging from the path like Throlar actually, but the problem is, I personally can't plan for two different quests at once, despite one of my biggest goals as a QM being to offer as much choice as possible. Maybe I'd find a way to make it work, but players are generally pretty reasonable when it comes to the party wanting to make a different choice than their own. See Karie in Quest 84 or I think Benji in Quest 33. They're not stubborn and they understand their choice, while in-character, would kind of hold things up in the quest itself.

Then again, you have to consider the stakes, and the situation. If Arthur was on our side maybe we could've kept Hans or Gnash alive. If a party member stabs me in the back again Atramor is going to attack them. With Karie/Benji/Throlar (sort of), they were offered an outright choice, they just didn't choose what the rest of the party chose.

As far as just the solo roleplaying thing goes (which I think is what you mean by putting your own interests/fun above others) it generally doesn't directly detract from the fun of others, it's just sort of...there. Sorrow in 93 and Karie in Quest 93 and 105 suffer from this. I feel it was kinda the same with Arthur in Quest 53. The only issues with it are that it clutters the topic, and nobody even seems to care, which kind of defeats the purpose of roleplaying. It makes other characters trying to interact with them awkward and kind of uninteresting.

Oh, I don't mind players diverging from the planned path at all (I never intended the party of 104 to directly fight Tarban, but Kiray forced the issue with him and provoked a fight, and there have been more instances since where the party has improvised things beyond my initial plans), so long as it's kept reasonable as opposed to "I see you've put a lot of work into all this stuff, now I'm going to steal a ship and sail to a totally different continent". While I disagree with how it was brought about, I think that the design and structure of Quest 100 lends itself to a split party, since all the locations seem to have been prepared (or at least somewhat planned) in advance just in case the party wanted to visit them. (That's actually been a huge advantage for me, since I realized that the Lost Woods I was sending my party to was actually the same Lost Woods Sandy had prepared for 100. )

I'm more talking about deliberately antagonizing fellow players, whether that's constantly berating and lecturing them for EVERY single thing they say or outright sabotaging the Quest for them (both things I've done in 53). I might not have intended it that way, but I definitely antagonized CM and you and Pandora on 53 (and Scorpiox on both 38 AND 53), and then acted like a stuck-up moralizing know-it-all in the discussion topic and QM Lounge instead of asking you guys if I was going too far (and instead of listening when you told me I was). I'm still sorry I behaved that way, and I constantly find myself wishing I could go back and be more polite and patient and compassionate.

There's a general principle of RPGs that basically says "make sure your conflicts are with the character, not the player". When the hostility spills out into these discussion topics, it seems symptomatic of a lack of a lack of separation between player and character. I do love characters that are cantankerous and ill-mannered--not as much as some folks seem to (I can only handle small doses), but well enough. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone likes when players are cantankerous, hostile, and ill-mannered. No one likes to be hated, or to feel like someone is out to deliberately ruin their fun. My advice: even if deliberately ruining other people's fun is not your intention, if that's the impression people are getting of you, perhaps you ought to reconsider how you're treating them--try to see how your actions would feel from their perspective, and then make an effort to avoid making people feel that way in the future.

I actually think the perfect example of a character who's disagreeable without their player being disagreeable is Eric (Khorne). If you go back and look at Quest 58, you'll constantly see him checking in with Chrome and Scuba--whenever he knew his actions might be disruptive, he watched and asked his fellow players to make sure he wasn't taking away from their fun. That's being a good player, and it's one of the many reasons people are so happy to get a chance to play with Khorne--because they can trust that he's looking out for everyone's fun, not just his own.

[KotZ]

Oh, I don't mind players diverging from the planned path at all (I never intended the party of 104 to directly fight Tarban, but Kiray forced the issue with him and provoked a fight, and there have been more instances since where the party has improvised things beyond my initial plans), so long as it's kept reasonable as opposed to ...

I didn't mean to do that, I was hoping to double cross him later in the quest if possible and use Quarion (that's the head right?) as an emperor's skull and then take him down later or hand him over to some authority figure.

[K-Nut]

Yes, it was. You had a good strategy going against Loc, and with better rolls you could easily have turtled away against Orokai, the dice just turned on you. Also note that your competitors deliberately sent the most difficult of the Fantastic Four against you.

That's not entirely what I tried to do. I wanted to have a healer in our party plus the dwarf to help us with the bombmaker (though that didn't really pan out as well as I thought). Plus I thought Walbartan and Hodurr were the most interesting, so I didn't really want them to die.

I actually think the perfect example of a character who's disagreeable without their player being disagreeable is Eric (Khorne). If you go back and look at Quest 58, you'll constantly see him checking in with Chrome and Scuba--whenever he knew his actions might be disruptive, he watched and asked his fellow players to make sure he wasn't taking away from their fun. That's being a good player, and it's one of the many reasons people are so happy to get a chance to play with Khorne--because they can trust that he's looking out for everyone's fun, not just his own.

This is true. Khorne and I have checked in a few times in this quest about various things. He's able to pull off the stubborn and self centered roleplay, but he's even told me that he always makes sure that he's not crossing any lines.

[Emjajoas]

That awkward moment when you're torn between staying in character and making a terrible pun.

[The_Customizer]

Why not do both?

[Sandy]

Unfortunately, though, you lost because of a 1/36 chance. Had you not rolled Special Damage, or flipped the battle order, you would've one.

Throlar also could've just done nothing for the round, and he would've won. The die was merciless in that battle.

Although one could theoretically make the argument that since the entire enemy party perished, Throlar shouldn't have failed, but what is done is done.

But the hero party perished too, at the same time. And that warrants for a lost battle, which means the quest failed.

I admit I didn't check Throlar's inventory before throwing him into the battle, I kinda assumed he had at least one Smoke Bomb to get himself out of the battle if things got rough.

The lesson for the day: always pack a Smoke Bomb with you. They're a cheap insurance.

[Khorne]

I actually think the perfect example of a character who's disagreeable without their player being disagreeable is Eric (Khorne). If you go back and look at Quest 58, you'll constantly see him checking in with Chrome and Scuba--whenever he knew his actions might be disruptive, he watched and asked his fellow players to make sure he wasn't taking away from their fun. That's being a good player, and it's one of the many reasons people are so happy to get a chance to play with Khorne--because they can trust that he's looking out for everyone's fun, not just his own.

Thanks, Flipz! Like it has been said, in an RPG like this, you need to work together and even if the characters don't get along or can't work together, that shouldn't mean the same for the players. I'd hate to take the fun out of the game for other players, just because my style of play with my character is annoying or difficult to work with. It's like K-Nut said:

This is true. Khorne and I have checked in a few times in this quest about various things. He's able to pull off the stubborn and self centered roleplay, but he's even told me that he always makes sure that he's not crossing any lines.

I try to set limits of character rudeness for myself. If I can achieve Eric's goals I'll try to do so by winning over the other players in my party. What I won't do, is doing whatever I want without other players' (semi-)consent. An example:

Eg.: if Eric were a party leader and he wants to kill some NPC and the party says no, I'll try to win them over in killing the NPC and siding with Eric. I don't need all PCs on my side, just a few, so I know that I'm not ruining the majority's fun. If none want to follow Eric's action (because he's a moron), then I just rest my case and try to RP my way out of the situation . In both cases, I RP'ed Eric's nature: he wants to kill the NPC for whatever reason and in both cases the party (and me )would be relatively happy with the outcome, so I, as a player, have not ruined the experience for the other players. Even though I wouldn't get what I want in the non-killing case, Eric would have made an RP point/statement, thus defining his character further.

I hope the example kind of made sense . Thanks for the positive feedback, though . I try my best .

[Flipz]

RE: Zepher's comment in 102:

The whole RPG seems to have bogged down recently--a lot of us seem to be busy and/or out of town. Hopefully that'll clear up in a week or two.

On another note, we seem to have a lot of Quests going--hopefully we'll have enough players in the Hall in a couple months when it comes time for the Halloween Special.

Edited August 17, 2014 by Flipz

[Flare]

Benji just loves this constant flow of new heroes

[Asphalt]

And Vindsval loves being one. Can't wait for his first quest to start.

[Lind Whisperer]

RE: Zepher's comment in 102:

The whole RPG seems to have bogged down recently--a lot of us seem to be busy and/or out of town. Hopefully that'll clear up in a week or two.

I'm hoping we get another #103 update on our next round of battle tonight - can't wait to make another shark pun.

On another note, we seem to have a lot of Quests going--hopefully we'll have enough players in the Hall in a couple months when it comes time for the Halloween Special.

I wonder if #103 will be done by then - that definitely sounds like something Lind could slip right through. Unless it's a chimney. In which case, he'd probably get stuck*...

*For everyone who hasn't followed #103, I got my arm stuck up a chimney for two or three turns. Don't ask.

[Endgame]

That was easily the best hilarious and deadly outcome that round could've possibly had in 105.

[Masked Builder]

Don't get me wrong Zeph, I'm loving the quest, the battles seem to be the slowest part.

[Flipz]

Ahh, I'm really looking forward to posting some of these PM chains at the end of Quest 104.

[samurai-turtle]

Ahh, I'm really looking forward to posting some of these PM chains at the end of Quest 104.

How gross are they going to get?