Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[JimBee]

If you read the "Free Hits" section from the rules, it clearly says that one untargetted enemy gets a Free Hit on the first hero in the battle order, a second enemy gets to hit the second hero, etc. I think that's pretty clearly said that it doesn't matter how many turns one hero takes, he or she will always get one Free Hit unless the number of untargetted enemies exceeds the number of party members.

Right, I (and probably others) interpret each turn as an individual hero. Especially when a hastened hero's turns are separated in the battle order, like so:

Namyrra

Skrall

Amma

Namyrra

Namyrra would get the first and fourth free hits in this case. And if her turns were after another in the BO, then she would take two free hits in a row. This way makes the most sense to me, and is the simplest.

[Waterbrick Down]

Right, I (and probably others) interpret each turn as an individual hero. Especially when a hastened hero's turns are separated in the battle order, like so:

Namyrra

Skrall

Amma

Namyrra

Namyrra would get the first and fourth free hits in this case. And if her turns were after another in the BO, then she would take two free hits in a row. This way makes the most sense to me, and is the simplest.

I prefer it this way as it provides for some more strategic options, but I can see other's not being as in favor of it.

[Scorpiox]

If you read the "Free Hits" section from the rules, it clearly says that one untargetted enemy gets a Free Hit on the first hero in the battle order, a second enemy gets to hit the second hero, etc. I think that's pretty clearly said that it doesn't matter how many turns one hero takes, he or she will always get one Free Hit unless the number of untargetted enemies exceeds the number of party members.

Wasn't there a ruling during the Great Free-Hit Argument so that the first hero would have to tank all of the combined free hits? Has that ruling be changed?

EDIT: Maybe it happened at some other point, but I definitely remember such a thing.

Found it:

I thought up a new ruling to ease the SP problem that QMs are having (me included).

When several enemies get Free Hits on the same hero, their attacks are combined. The hero's SP is counted only once against this combo attack. E.g. two level 5 monsters get a Free Hit on a hero with SP of 5; the total damage is 10, of which 5 is inflicted on the hero. The free hit mechanic would otherwise be unaltered, so a party of three would have to get 4 free hits for this ruling to take place.

How would this sound to you guys?

Although it appears that I misinterpreted the whole thing.

Edited August 2, 2013 by Scorpiox

[PsyKater]

If you read the "Free Hits" section from the rules, it clearly says that one untargetted enemy gets a Free Hit on the first hero in the battle order, a second enemy gets to hit the second hero, etc. I think that's pretty clearly said that it doesn't matter how many turns one hero takes, he or she will always get one Free Hit unless the number of untargetted enemies exceeds the number of party members.

So basically, hastened does not apply to free hit and hastened PCs who counterstrike can only counterstrike once per round (unless the number of untargetted enemies exceeds the number of party members)? This shows that the understanding of that rule (whether "first hero in the battle order, ... hit the second hero" means once per hero or once per hero in the battle order) has a pretty big impact on strategizing.

Personally I have always read it as "Hero in the Battle Order" and it seems I am not alone. So if it has to be a fix rule that hastened does not apply to free hit battle order, it obviously needs to be clarified.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

Ya, I thought it was 'Hero in Battle Order.' The rules' grammar, if I could call it that, wasn't too clear. I think it said "The first hero in the battle order gets hit, then the second, etc." But what does the "second" modify? Does it modify the "hero" or the entire "hero in battle order?"

[joeshmoe554]

When I was looking through Heroica's past quests for precedent, it seemed about half of the QMs did one free hit per turn, while the other half did one free hit per hero.

[Waterbrick Down]

If the QM is consistent, I can't see it being too big of a challenge to strategize accordingly.

[UsernameMDM]

Is the SP on the flagpole upgradeable since it is a weapon and not an artefact?

Flagpole (WP:3, +3 SP to the whole party whenever equipped, lance)

[Flipz]

I would say "no", personally.

[UsernameMDM]

I would say "no", personally.

I am guessing the same thing since it technically does not have SP assigned to it, but, you never know!

[Sandy]

Is the SP on the flagpole upgradeable since it is a weapon and not an artefact?

Flagpole (WP:3, +3 SP to the whole party whenever equipped, lance)

No, since the Flagpole itself doesn't technically have SP in it, it just has the effect of giving 3 SP to all party members.

[UsernameMDM]

I am guessing the same thing since it technically does not have SP assigned to it, but, you never know!

No, since the Flagpole itself doesn't technically have SP in it, it just has the effect of giving 3 SP to all party members.

Great minds think alike.

[Endgame]

What would everyone think of a weapon that drops the target's level by 1 upon each hit?

[Capt.JohnPaul]

Hmm... like a Reverse Combrys. I think it would be neat.

[Endgame]

Hmm... like a Reverse Combrys. I think it would be neat.

Not exactly, because the level wouldn't be able to go back up. (Excluding some enemy specials, of course).

[Kintobor]

As long as the effect can't be enhanced with the blade, I think it's alright.

[CMP]

What would everyone think of a weapon that drops the target's level by 1 upon each hit?

One already exists, so I assume it'd be fine.

[joeshmoe554]

Not exactly, because the level wouldn't be able to go back up. (Excluding some enemy specials, of course).

How would it affect a player that was struck by that weapon due to hexed or confused?

[Brickdoctor]

How would it affect a player that was struck by that weapon due to hexed or confused?

Usually with Specials and weapons that affect stats such as Level, the effect is applied but the stat goes back to normal after the battle ends.

[JimBee]

What would everyone think of a weapon that drops the target's level by 1 upon each hit?

Already is one, it's called a Wrench.

[Palathadric]

Usually with Specials and weapons that affect stats such as Level, the effect is applied but the stat goes back to normal after the battle ends.

Tell Pie that about Erik's Lighter Armour.

[CMP]

Tell Pie that about Erik's Lighter Armour.

It was in an enemy's inventory at the time, sorry.

[Sandy]

Since enemies can now officially attack from different rows as well, the afraid- and enraged-effects can now be applied to enemies as well. The list of applicable effects in the FAQ has been updated accordingly.

[JimBee]

That's what I was referring to, the 4 should be included in the WP, thus {[2x(11+2+4)]+30}x2x2=256 not 440

Again, that's incorrect. Sandy has ruled multiple times that Power is different from Weapon Power, and the Critical Hit multiplier is "2x WP added to level". Your extra +4 towards Beasts is Power and not WP, unless the Hunter's Crossbow's description is worded incorrectly (it would make more sense for the +4 to be WP, but I didn't invent the weapon). This is the way I've always handled your damage output, and all of your AIMs have been (11+2=13).

Not that the 16 extra damage is a big deal, you KO'd the Hippogriff this round anyway, but I wanted to clarify how these multipliers work.

[PsyKater]

Hmm... I#d understand that it is WP:11 and +4(WP) against beasts. So that the +4 is referring to the WP. But I cant remember other weapons with WP+ or Power+, so I cant compare the wording