Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[Scorpiox]

Why not?

I can't be bothered to deal with this situation. From what I can gather, my opinions are welcome, so long as if they are what people want to read.

[CMP]

Maybe I'm just missing the point of this whole debacle. What's the problem everyone wants solved? That Sandy has too much power? That people should be able to change the rules however they want? Initially I thought the issue was that Sandy doesn't have to run any changes by any of us before making them, but I'm starting to get the idea people are just upset about the way things are run. I thought things have been great since this topic got created. People share rule ideas and opinions and build on them and Sandy either accepts it and applies it or points out some sort of flaw in it. I've never seen any issue with that. If we all were somehow able to change the rules (disregarding how much of a complete mess that would be) we'd be changing things a thousand times more often than they already are. Eventually we'd end up playing a completely different sort of game.

And I haven't once seen anyone suppressing anyone else's opinion, just saying that not every single person is going to get their way. And that's never going to change, we're all human.

Edited November 18, 2013 by CallMePie

[Scorpiox]

And I haven't once seen anyone suppressing anyone else's opinion, just saying that not every single person is going to get their way. And that's never going to change, we're all human.

I'm sorry for sounding rude just earlier, but I was just getting fed up with the way Zepher insinuating that I couldn't change the rules the way I see fit, or that if I did, everyone would get the same right.

You can disagree with my rulings, and I've never said I'm infallible, but there's a limit to what you guys can affect. If I say something stands despite initial disagreements, then it stands.

I'm sorry, but I didn't like these statements at all, not one bit. I think that I'd probably just enjoy the game more if I didn't bother trying to fight a losing battle.

[CMP]

I think that I'd probably just enjoy the game more if I didn't bother trying to fight a losing battle.

So rather than accept the reality your opinion isn't always going to get agreed with or lead to a rule change, you're just not going to voice it anymore?

I hope you don't take that to mean Sandy doesn't value everyone's opinion. If that were the case, we wouldn't have any impact on anything. That's the whole point of this topic, isn't it?

[Sandy]

Every single player of this game is entitled to voice their opinions about everything in this game. I never want that to change. You just have to accept that I have the final say in the matter, because there's no way this game would work otherwise, as CMP pointed out.

As for the adjustments, sometimes I ask opinions about rule changes in advance, sometimes I don't. That's something you have to accept as well. Sometimes your disagreements may persuade me to change my views, sometimes they won't. This time they didn't, and when people didn't seem to understand that, I got mildly irritated.

I'm trying my best not to let the power "get to my head" (as some of you seem to fear), but this game is also my baby. I have to look after it. Despite it being a community project as well.

This is our game, but I'm the game's manager. We can't all be managers, sorry!

[Scubacarrot]

I'm not sure what my own stance on the thing, but I get where Scorpiox is coming from. From what I can tell, the problem seems to be that Sandy changes rules even if a bunch, majority (am I correct in saying no one besides Sandy agreed with the thing?) of people say it's a bad idea. Now the issue is that it's Sandy's game, and yes, Sandy can do that. To some of us, that breeds annoyance, but yeah, you gotta deal with it, if you want to stay in the game. So I guess some people would see a bit more democracy maybe? I don't know, I'm not for either democrary or autocracy. I'm a total moral wreck when it comes to running things.

[Sandy]

Does anyone really want to see a poll put up for every minute rule change made? This rule change affects one expert class, which only a handful of players have access to.

I promise there will be no more rule adjustment this year, at least from my initiation. Maybe this issue can be laid to rest with that?

There is, however, an entirely new expert job class!

I'm pleased to introduce the Marauder, designed by CallMePie!

[Waterbrick Down]

Does anyone really want to see a poll put up for every minute rule change made? This rule change affects one expert class, which only a handful of players have access to.

I promise there will be no more rule adjustment this year, at least from my initiation. Maybe this issue can be laid to rest with that?

As has been stated, the issue isn't so much the rule change as was how it was implemented and at least one of the reasons it was implemented. We understand that as the creator you are totally in the right to make any changes you see fit to your game, however we generally like a little discussion about something before it occurs that's all. No need for polls just a some discussion before hand.

[Flipz]

As has been stated, the issue isn't so much the rule change as was how it was implemented and at least one of the reasons it was implemented. We understand that as the creator you are totally in the right to make any changes you see fit to your game, however we generally like a little discussion about something before it occurs that's all. No need for polls just a some discussion before hand.

All right, Pie, which Quest do I sign on to get that Maurader class?

[Sandy]

As has been stated, the issue isn't so much the rule change as was how it was implemented and at least one of the reasons it was implemented. We understand that as the creator you are totally in the right to make any changes you see fit to your game, however we generally like a little discussion about something before it occurs that's all. No need for polls just a some discussion before hand.

I kinda guessed what the feedback would be like, so I just went ahead with it.

I'm satisfied with the way Necromancer plays now. It's lost some of it's charm, sure, but at least people will now give the other expert classes the time of the day as well.

[CMP]

All right, Pie, which Quest do I sign on to get that Maurader class?

I'll have to get back to you on that after Quest 89. Unless I come up with another short one like Quest 82, it'll probably be the next one. Won't be for some time.

[Darkdragon]

From what I can tell, the problem seems to be that Sandy changes rules even if a bunch, majority (am I correct in saying no one besides Sandy agreed with the thing?) of people say it's a bad idea. Now the issue is that it's Sandy's game, and yes, Sandy can do that.

Every single player of this game is entitled to voice their opinions about everything in this game. I never want that to change. You just have to accept that I have the final say in the matter, because there's no way this game would work otherwise, as CMP pointed out.

...

This is our game, but I'm the game's manager. We can't all be managers, sorry!

Like Sandy said, it's not his game it is the community's game, but there needs to be a manager and it can't be everyone. This wasn't really set up as a democracy, and it shouldn't be. We can all express our opinion, give our reasons for that opinion, and then wait for the ruling. Sandy has been fair, and he knows the game overall better than any one of us. Just because we don't get our way doesn't mean it is the wrong decision, it could mean that we don't see the bigger picture for the situation or just that the reasons aren't worth the change (or cancellation of the change).

It seems selfish for anyone to actually be upset that Sandy doesn't do what they want, he always listens and takes it into consideration.

Does anyone really want to see a poll put up for every minute rule change made? This rule change affects one expert class, which only a handful of players have access to.

Please no. What a mess that would be.

[Scubacarrot]

I guess that's where the problem lies though doesn't it. People feel like they are not being heard and the right decisions are not being made. Not saying that's how I feel, but this whole discussion wouldn't be there if that was not the case.

[Kintobor]

I'm really digging Marauder! Not my kind of class, but still very cool!

The "high risk/high reward" aspect is pretty neat.

[Darkdragon]

I guess that's where the problem lies though doesn't it. People feel like they are not being heard and the right decisions are not being made. Not saying that's how I feel, but this whole discussion wouldn't be there if that was not the case.

The bigger the game becomes, the more likely there are going to be people that don't understand how hierarchy works and will feel that decisions are a personal affront to thmeselves. Though I haven't been posting much this year, I do keep my eye on things and I'd have to say that even though some folks feel they are being slighted, i can't really agree that it is happening.

Nobody can control another's feelings, each of us must take personal responsibility for how we react to the things that happen throughout life and the forum games

[Dragonfire]

I'm really digging Marauder! Not my kind of class, but still very cool!

The "high risk/high reward" aspect is pretty neat.

Agreed! Avalanche is looking forward to a quest which offers it...

[Scorpiox]

I've stood back, reflected and decided to re-evaluate the situation. I don't think that it was this particular decision or the overarching way things are run that irritated, it was rather more a couple of things that certain people posted that really rubbed me the wrong way. It's not worth anybody's time continuing this feud of sorts, so I'm happy to move on and just pretend that this particular thing wasn't posted at all. I understand why affairs are as they are, and it was more the way that somebody described them, in a way that I know doesn't reflect reality, that I found irritating. I will say no more.

[Zepher]

I'm afraid I have not been clear with my statements, either. Such is the way of the internet. So this post will hopefully be brief, to the point, and clear up confusion as to what I was bothered by.

Sandy, I meant and mean no disrespect. We're pals. You've created and maintain a great game. I furthermore agree with you - discussion of rules past your final ruling is a waste of time and disrespectful. It was not the change to necromancer I was complaining about, and I don't believe I ever really did. It is simply the way the change came about. You changed it for one of YOUR quests. When the manager of the game uses that power to directly improve one of his quests, that's when it becomes an issue. You are both QM and Manager, but when they bleed into each other, than it doesn't seem fair.

You're a reasonable person. I trust that you see my point. Changing the rules of everything so that one of your quests moves smoothly isn't fair. When you nerfed necromancer summons to not absorb free hits, I was silent. It was a mechanical problem that needed fixing, and you fixed it as the manager. Right call. When you realized that one of your quests wasn't going to go the way you had envisioned, and changed the mechanics, that was the wrong call in my opinion. It was like when Endgame had a villain that was brought down by special mirror. He changed the enemy (which I also didn't support, but that's a separate discussion) instead of changing special mirror. Do you see the distinction?

And yes, you've spent hours, and it's your baby. I think you run the game correctly 95% of the time, but no one is perfect, and I think this was an unfair scenario. Don't think it needs to be changed back either. I'm just pointing it out now instead of being frustrated by it again in the future. Friends tell friends when they have problems, they don't remain silent because they aren't true friends.

Edited November 18, 2013 by Zepher

[Endgame]

It was like when Endgame had a villain that was brought down by special mirror. If he changed the enemy (which I also didn't support, but that's a separate discussion) instead of changing special mirror.

Definitely the most important lesson I've learned while QMing - To be honest, I usually know the stats of my enemies better than I know the stats of the heroes.

Edited November 18, 2013 by Endgame

[Cryos]

Marauder looks really neat, CMP! Two thumbs up.. :thumbup:

Can't see Baradock being one though,

[Zepher]

I've had similar situations. Special Mirror killed a minor boss in 30, and then in 68 a necromancer ruined the battle for me, but that was on ME. I didn't ask for the mechanics to change, and they shouldn't have.

[Endgame]

I've had similar situations. Special Mirror killed a minor boss in 30, and then in 68 a necromancer ruined the battle for me, but that was on ME. I didn't ask for the mechanics to change, and they shouldn't have.

The main reason I was so apprehensive on following the speicifc rule was that because the Oculoid Amalgam went through 16 different drafts by the end.

If you love something, though, sometimes you just gotta let it go.

Edited November 18, 2013 by Endgame

[JimBee]

Just to throw my two cents in, I agree with Zepher and Kintobor on this whole debate on rule changes. Of course none of us mean any disrespect, but it's not a really a community game if one person can change things how he sees fit, now is it? Now, I understand you made an informed decision based on experience in your own quest, but when the majority disagrees and offers alternative solutions, then I think you should take that into account. I don't think it's wise to change rules based on single occurrences without having a community discussion about it first, regardless of who created what or who devoted however many hours.

We, the players, also appreciate all the work you put in Sandy (very much!), but it's a two-sided coin. When you change the rules without a discussion, it discourages anyone from contributing and the viewpoint of one person can be flawed (even if you are the creator - again, I have to rub it in about Healing Staves and the Pheles Rod ). Now that we've had a discussion about said rule and you compromised at least a little, I can respect that you did eventually listen to what people were saying and took that into account, even if you didn't compromise completely. And regarding this rule in particular, it should bear warning that overcomplicating the rules discourages people from QMing, thus detracting from the community aspect of the game as well.

What's done is done, and in summary, I just think it's important for everyone to at least take into account the opinions of others regarding the rules of this game, creator or not, even if it doesn't entirely change their opinions. The community is what has kept this game running for the past 2.5 years, and I don't expect that to change.

[Pyrovisionary]

This is a post irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but relevent to the rules and to the game.

I would like to bring up the point of venom. In real life, venom is a dangerous substance administered by direct introduction to the bloodstream (I.e through a syringe or fang) so why and how I ask, do heroes get enemies to administer venoms themselves. I suggest that instead of applying a venom to an enemy, we apply it to a weapon, and the next time that weapon deals damage to any enemy, that/those enemies will become poisoned/badly poisoned.

Thanks

-Pyro

Edited November 18, 2013 by Pyrovisionary

[Endgame]

This is a post irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but relevent to the rules and to the game.

I would like to bring up the point of venom. In real life, venom is a dangerous substance administered by direct introduction to the bloodstream (I.e through a syringe or fang) so why and how I ask, do heroes get enemies to administer venoms themselves. I suggest that instead of applying a venom to an enemy, we apply it to a weapon, and the next time that weapon deals damage to any enemy, that/those enemies will become poisoned/badly poisoned.

Thanks

-Pyro

That's how it works.