Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[CMP]

Why not? All 'Necromancer' means is magic through use of the dead, there is no reason my one cannot apply this same power that can restart and control living things to inanimate machines.

Inanimate machines aren't dead, so necromancy doesn't apply to it.

[Kintobor]

So you're saying we need a new class that can control machine? Like a mechromancer?

I like Endgame's "Shade" technique for the etherial, holy and demonic creatures, and I disagree with the two types as well, since it makes encounters more limiting. I will say that it doesn't make sense for it to be controlling machines, but what about cyborgs? I believe you hinted Shanxian getting robot legs? Technically she should be able to be resurrected: just detach her from the waist. Have her crawl about. Gross, yes, but practical and effective.

I really hope you reconsider this one, Sandy.

[Sandy]

I really hope you reconsider this one, Sandy.

I don't know why I should: it gives more emphasis on enemy types (making them mean more than just what element the players should use on them), as well as make more logical sense. Sure, it restricts the Necromancer class somewhat, but not prevent it from enjoying the benefits of the skills.

But I can meet you half-way: if an enemy has two types, one of which isn't raiseable and one of which is, it's up to the QM to decide whether that enemy is raised or not. Pure demon, ethereal, holy or mechanic enemies cannot be raised as an undead.

[Endgame]

One of the problems with that is enemy encounters usually contain only one to two different types, for the most part. If you're in a quest about dismantling automatons, a necromancer is nigh worthless. It's the same reason that I wasn't a fan of the "Humanoid Mugging" clause: It pretty much rips a class's innate abilities right out of their hands in certain battles. What if Hunters could only favor beasts, for example?

That, and two consecutive nerfs to a class you acknowledged as not very OP is pretty overkill.

[Scorpiox]

Inanimate machines aren't dead, so necromancy doesn't apply to it.

Why not? I ask again. It makes no less sense for a machine to be manipulated by dark magic than a dead creature.

[CMP]

Why not? I ask again. It makes no less sense for a machine to be manipulated by dark magic than a dead creature.

Necromancers specialize in reviving dead...it wouldn't be necromancy if it was just controlling stuff.

[Sandy]

That, and two consecutive nerfs to a class you acknowledged as not very OP is pretty overkill.

Please, I wouldn't be making these changes if I didn't think the class was problematic. Not all problems stem from overt or lacking power, anyway.

Besides, I created the class (and the game), so I hold the right to change it. Many times the problematic details can only be detected when the mechanics are tested out in play.

Necromancers specialize in reviving dead...it wouldn't be necromancy if it was just controlling stuff.

My point exactly. Necromancers turn enemies into undead, so there's little sense in having undead demons, spirits or machines.

I know I should've thought of this beforehand, but such is life.

[Scorpiox]

Necromancers specialize in reviving dead...it wouldn't be necromancy if it was just controlling stuff.

No, it would be necromancy plus the logically sound step of also being able to control broken machines.

[CMP]

No, it would be necromancy plus the logically sound step of also being able to control broken machines.

I don't claim to be an expert in the logic of magic but I think raising and controlling dead bodies is a far cry from manipulating complex machinery.

[Flipz]

But I can meet you half-way: if an enemy has two types, one of which isn't raiseable and one of which is, it's up to the QM to decide whether that enemy is raised or not. Pure demon, ethereal, holy or mechanic enemies cannot be raised as an undead.

That much seems fair.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Flipz

[Kintobor]

I don't claim to be an expert in the logic of magic but I think raising and controlling dead bodies is a far cry from manipulating complex machinery.

Which is why we need mechromancer.

[Flipz]

Which is why we need mechromancer.

Engineer. Lion Knights, Lord Knyghton.

[Jebediahs]

This discussion needs a "nerf rogues" from zakura heh hehe. In addition to the double "nerf" or "fix" maybe necromancers can get another situational adjustment like their presence grants a chance to stun, enamor or hex an undead enemy.

[JimBee]

But I can meet you half-way: if an enemy has two types, one of which isn't raiseable and one of which is, it's up to the QM to decide whether that enemy is raised or not. Pure demon, ethereal, holy or mechanic enemies cannot be raised as an undead.

I would just leave it completely up to the QM, or like what was suggested before, just have certain enemies be immune. I'm not a fan of the enemy type specializations, sense or no. The same goes for the Sylvan Ranger's Taming. What's next, Aura doesn't affect dragons and giants because they're too big?

Also, I disagree with rule change/clarification on throwing weapon retrieval. A lot of things don't make sense from the back row, such as attacking with a dagger. If you can't reach your thrown weapon from the back row, then you can't score a hit with a five-inch blade, either.

If we base all the rules on what's the most realistic, we are going to have a big mess. Since when have RPGs ever made perfect sense with mechanics?

[Myrddyn]

So are the corpses semi-repaired by the darkness magic and then mind-controlled, or does the darkness magic manipulate the corpse like a puppet?

[Kintobor]

So are the corpses semi-repaired by the darkness magic and then mind-controlled, or does the darkness magic manipulate the corpse like a puppet?

Depends, really.

I aways played Hexed on rolls of Mass Illusion as the Witch has to control their opponents. So I don't see why Necromancer can't be any different. Depends on the characterization.

[Sandy]

Also, I disagree with rule change/clarification on throwing weapon retrieval. A lot of things don't make sense from the back row, such as attacking with a dagger. If you can't reach your thrown weapon from the back row, then you can't score a hit with a five-inch blade, either.

You can think of it so that the time and covering of distance it takes to attack from back row with a non-ranged weapon reduces the power of the blow. Likewise, retrieving something that's on the enemy's "side" would take too long for one turn, so you have to be in the front of the battle to be able to reach it in the given time.

Logical as heck!

[Tachyon]

This discussion needs a "nerf rogues" from zakura heh hehe. In addition to the double "nerf" or "fix" maybe necromancers can get another situational adjustment like their presence grants a chance to stun, enamor or hex an undead enemy.

Just for the sake of it. Nerf Rogues !!!!

[Scubacarrot]

You can think of it so that the time and covering of distance it takes to attack from back row with a non-ranged weapon reduces the power of the blow. Likewise, retrieving something that's on the enemy's "side" would take too long for one turn, so you have to be in the front of the battle to be able to reach it in the given time.

Logical as heck!

Not really. Defensive actions and healing players on the front row should be done likewise then, but they are not. It just seems like something that doesn't help anyone with anything.

[Scorpiox]

I don't claim to be an expert in the logic of magic but I think raising and controlling dead bodies is a far cry from manipulating complex machinery.

If you want to think about it that way: the human body is the most complex piece of 'machinery' known to man, I would think it far easier to use magic to just make a robot move and hit things than to restart a creature's organs and cells into motion whilst making sure one keeps control.

[CMP]

If you want to think about it that way: the human body is the most complex piece of 'machinery' known to man, I would think it far easier to use magic to just make a robot move and hit things than to restart a creature's organs and cells into motion whilst making sure one keeps control.

Necromancers aren't bringing people back to life, they just reanimate corpses. If they're dead you don't need to concern yourself with organs and such, unlike a machine which will need constant maintenance no matter what.

I think leaving it up to QM interpretation is the right call here.

[Scorpiox]

Necromancers aren't bringing people back to life, they just reanimate corpses. If they're dead you don't need to concern yourself with organs and such, unlike a machine which will need constant maintenance no matter what.

I think leaving it up to QM interpretation is the right call here.

Of course it's up to the QM, but I'm enjoying this.

One might not need to actually bring a person back to life to use them in this fashion, but in that case, is this not exactly the same situation as using a machine? A machine's functions only act as mechanical replacement for thought and reaction, so if those things are not of use to a necromancer, neither is repairing a machine. No matter how you think of it, if the necromancer is actually bringing the minion back to life/reactivating the machine, the two require vastly different skills. Or if the necromancer is only using them as a puppet, which I think is how the class works in Heroica, using magic to control a machine is no more difficult than an organic counterpart.

[CMP]

Of course it's up to the QM, but I'm enjoying this.

True, but it's the wrong topic for it now.

[Flare]

All this crap is getting so complicated that I'm sort of getting nervous of the idea of hosting a quest again... maybe I will just have to avoid hosting higher leveled heroes...

[Zepher]

I think tweaking a rule because of a problem arising in one of your quests is a little bit unfair.