Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[swils]

And the opportunity for non-stealers to get more gold!

I do not foresee the two going hand in hand. Unless there's a change in attitude where rogues get a smaller share of the loot because of their ability to steal, then any gold dropped will still be split across the party. Barring that, rogues will still receive an equitable amount to that of their party members' shares, plus any stolen gold. QMs will surely take this into account and limit the number of enemies able to be stolen from so that rogues don't remain several lengths ahead of the others. If they instead cater to the rogues a bit and add more enemies with gold drops, then rogues will maintain that large gap in income (with good rolls).

Of course, that's assuming that the issue was other classes not getting enough gold. If people don't mind the rogues staying significantly ahead, just so long as they have more in their own pockets, then by all means, increase the amount of gold dropped while simultaneously ensuring that there are plenty of opportunities to steal.

Although, if that's reasonable with everyone, then I maintain my belief that this whole thing could have been addressed with an attitude change and not a retooling of the mechanic. /innocent-whistling

[UsernameMDM]

Negative Nancy.

[swils]

Devil's advocate, analyst, pessimist.

[UsernameMDM]

Devil's advocate, analyst, pessimist.

Cry baby, whiner, complainer.

Besides, you're a Dragoon now and can't steel anymore.

[swils]

Doesn't mean I can't look out for the up-and-coming hopefuls!

[Sandy]

Devil's advocate, analyst, pessimist.

Cry baby, whiner, complainer.

Besides, you're a Dragoon now and can't steel anymore.

Doesn't mean I can't look out for the up-and-coming hopefuls!

This is exactly the kind of posting I don't want to see in this topic. In the future, please use the General Discussion topic to insult each other.

[Sandy]

Here's a few updates on the FAQ:

Q: Can I attack without a weapon?

A: Yes, you can. In that case your attack power will only consist of your level. Technically speaking, your WP is 0 when fighting unarmed, so your Critical Hits and damaging Shield-skills will also do damage equal to your level in that case. Mages cannot cast spells unarmed, since they need their weapon to channel the spells, but clerics can heal (restoring health equal to their level on every successful roll). Note that Chi Monks are especially geared towards unarmed fighting, so their attacks work differently.

Q: How does it affect my attacks if an enemy is said to be fighting from the back row?

A: If you have a ranged weapon or can cast spells, there is no penalty. However, using a melee weapon you will only do half damage to that enemy from the front row, and a quarter of the normal damage if you are on the back row yourself. An enemy standing on the back row usually has ranged attacks, so it can attack both front and back row without penalty. If it isn't ranged, the same rules apply to its attacks.

Q: What does stealing gold only from enemies that carry gold mean?

A: Rogues and other classes with stealing skills can only gain gold from enemies that drop gold. However, the stolen gold is not taken from the drops, but instead from a "hidden stash". So rogues can steal more gold from the enemy that it drops, and the enemy will still drop the designated amount of gold.

[PsyKater]

What changes were made to the SHIELDS mentioned in the announcement? (e.g. Hunter)

[Sandy]

What changes were made to the SHIELDS mentioned in the announcement? (e.g. Hunter)

Here's a rundown:

- Ether cost added to the Shield-skills of Cleric, Mage, Battle Mage, Sage, Druid, Witch, Mystic Knight, Evoker, Sorcerer, Chi Monk and Prophet

- Power boost to Berserker, Raider and Hunter.

- Power nerf to Black Knight.

- Gold-gaining method changed for Rogue, Assassin, Raider, Sorcerer and Witch (and for Raider, Sorcerer, Beast Warrior and Infiltrator's "4"-skills).

- Other changes to Battle Mage, Mystic Knight, Sorcerer and Witch.

[-obelix-]

Sandy, would you mind clarifying "Immune to Magic" as a hero's ability a little!? In the last round on #75, when Fiery-eyed Lion dealt 35 fire damage to all our heroes, you calculated the damage normally and the rules for I.t.M. say "The target does not take damage from elemental attacks or attacks that consume ether." Shouldn't Thalion be immune to that damage; Lion was not attacking per se, but he was counter-attacking all heroes? Does that immunity come into play whenever damage is being dealt to a hero, only when free hits are being dealt by the enemies who have any element in their type(s), when a special damage is rolled against an enemy that has ether or when a special damage is rolled against an enemy that has ether and does elemental-based attack on that roll?

These questions are not about the results of that round, I am fine with them as they are, but since this is my first time having that ability in play (and immunity to healing which was discussed earlier) I would like to be clear on the rules for what it does precisely.

[Sandy]

Sandy, would you mind clarifying "Immune to Magic" as a hero's ability a little!? In the last round on #75, when Fiery-eyed Lion dealt 35 fire damage to all our heroes, you calculated the damage normally and the rules for I.t.M. say "The target does not take damage from elemental attacks or attacks that consume ether." Shouldn't Thalion be immune to that damage; Lion was not attacking per se, but he was counter-attacking all heroes? Does that immunity come into play whenever damage is being dealt to a hero, only when free hits are being dealt by the enemies who have any element in their type(s), when a special damage is rolled against an enemy that has ether or when a special damage is rolled against an enemy that has ether and does elemental-based attack on that roll?

Sorry, it seems I missed that immunity of Thalion's. I only looked for immunities against Fire... But yeah, Thalion shouldn't have taken any damage from the attack - but he did get confused all the same.

I'll go fix it now.

[-obelix-]

Dont worry about it, it doesn't make much difference, as you said, he got confused no matter what .

As I said, I just want to be sure what the ability does.

Edited July 28, 2013 by -obelix-

[Sandy]

As I said, I just want to be sure what the ability does.

It does what it says it does in the rules: protects the hero from all elemental attacks or attacks that use ether. That usually means enemy Special Skills, since very few enemies have elemental attacks by default.

I've posted clarification to how confused works when not attacking into the FAQ, as discussed earlier:

Q: How does the confused-effect work in the case of the confused hero targetting an ally or himself, for example with healing or an item?

A: The point behind the effect is that the confused hero becomes disoriented and has a chance of mistaking an ally for an enemy. This works the other way around as well - he might just as well mistake an enemy as an ally. To better phrase it, the confused hero has 1/2 chance of using their action to a random target on the unintended side. This does not apply when the confused hero targets himself, though, so he can use a Remedy on himself without care.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

* Previously unannounced, I have decided to give all shield-type equipment the ability to have a 1/6 chance to block physical enemy attacks (as described in the DEFLECTED DAMAGE battle result). This felt important to me because there was complaints about the knight-related classes becoming worthless due to all the SP-giving artefacts around. I know it's another thing for QMs to worry about when rolling for battle results, but I believe it was necessary. Now knights have a new reason to shine as the tanks in this game!

Is this ability available only to knights? Because if not, I think knights could be even less valuable. If someone has SP:2, and a Knight has SP: 10, the knight is certainly better. But if everyone has a 1/6 chance to block the damage regardless of how powerful their SP is, then the reason for a knight with high SP is slightly not needed as much. Right?

[CMP]

Is this ability available only to knights? Because if not, I think knights could be even less valuable. If someone has SP:2, and a Knight has SP: 10, the knight is certainly better. But if everyone has a 1/6 chance to block the damage regardless of how powerful their SP is, then the reason for a knight with high SP is slightly not needed as much. Right?

It's for shields, not SP artifacts.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

It's for shields, not SP artifacts.

I'm so stupid, thanks for clearing that up.

[CorneliusMurdock]

I like the shield change. It makes becoming a shield-bearing class more useful but doesn't make them invincible.

I think it makes a lot of sense from a roleplay perspective as well since with knights actively protecting themselves.

[joeshmoe554]

OoC: Everyone who isn't immune to confused effect: provide a secondary action in case you are inflicted qith the effect. Use a potion on an enemy and hopefully it will actually work on an ally and still target the enemy.

I thought using items on enemies did not count as targeting that enemy.

[Waterbrick Down]

I thought using items on enemies did not count as targeting that enemy.

Unfortunately it doesn't.

[PsyKater]

Only using items on yourself, I think.

[Flare]

I thought using items on enemies did not count as targeting that enemy.

Oh, sorry

[JimBee]

This has probably been asked before, but does the Confused-effect affect counterstriking?

[Brickdoctor]

This has probably been asked before, but does the Confused-effect affect counterstriking?

Yes; it happened to me in the Fields.

[Sandy]

This has probably been asked before, but does the Confused-effect affect counterstriking?

I thought about it, but I just couldn't do it to the heroes of Quest#75, who were already in deep trouble.

In normal circumstances I would probably have confused affect the Counterstrike Gloves, too.

[Rumble Strike]

Thanks Sandy, but I think it should be a consistent rule one way or the other.