So, 2 votes for The Great Endgame Compromise of 2013.. (or 3 votes? 1 wasn't very clear.) And 1 vote for the Common Sense Clause.

  On 7/7/2013 at 12:03 AM, CallMePie said:

Good. It's almost an undefeatable strategy, it should be costlier.

Toss some enemies with "Clears the field of all special effects on all combatants".

Honestly, I don't think it makes a difference. I go with Sandy's ruling whatever it may be.

Besides, I don't feel particularly affected having never quested with a tremendously drug-induced rogue.

I am not opposed to a nerf, despite being a Raider. If this was a democracy, I 'd vote for Endgames second suggestion, which allows gold to be stolen only when it shows up as a drop, as I believe the Humanoid one to be too limiting for QMs.

  On 7/7/2013 at 12:30 AM, Rumble Strike said:

I am not opposed to a nerf, despite being a Raider. If this was a democracy, I 'd vote for Endgames second suggestion, which allows gold to be stolen only when it shows up as a drop, as I believe the Humanoid one to be too limiting for QMs.

Indeed, in case it wasn't clear, I also vote for Endgame's second proposal.

I voted for Endgame's Great Compromise of 1787, too, if it wasn't counted. (And assuming the vote matters.)

I assume that you're not allowed to vote for yourself, so blank ballot.

Meh. I like it the way it is.

~Team keep it the way it is!

~Insectoid Aristocrat

  On 7/6/2013 at 11:38 PM, posades said:

I'm in favor of the Humanoid rule being implemented, but I think the Overkill Gloves should have a different nerf. They're magical gloves, after all, so they can make money out of thin air for all we know; but as they stand, I think they're slightly overpowered.

And passing/using consumables on other players isn't just a Rogue thing. I've done it in the past, as I'm sure others have as well that aren't part-Rogue. The thing is, we don't always have the spare money to buy multiple nostrums/meads/etc. if we want to upgrade our weapons/defense. No one is forcing Rogues to be hastened, lucky and encouraged every battle; if the nerf forces Rogues to keep their consumables, so be it (besides, that's more in-character anyways isn't it? ).

Wait, when did the Overkill Gloves get brought into the nerf? Those operate along a very different principle (both design-wise and, presumably, in-universe), and I've stated several times that they already have plenty of drawbacks. I do not support a nerf to them, if that's being considered. I put a lot of effort into making my build work well with them, and as Jebs has pointed out, Sandy has OK'd them twice already. I'd understand the concern if they were still available, but they aren't, and it'd be grossly unfair to both me and Fugazi to include them in the general nerf.

I know you were just joking with that last bit, but I really dislike the implication that you HAVE to roleplay a class a certain way. A lot, actually. It's like saying you have to act according to the stereotypes of the state or country you live in--the same (lack of) logic applies.

I just don't think that the rogue special is broken, or that any of the suggested nerfs keep it powerful enough. And I feel the same about the gloves. Maybe I just don't have a practical grasp on the economics-mechanic though.

~Insectoid Aristocrat

I, too, am on Team Hands-Off. Obviously I'm biased, but I plan to switch classes soon. Of course I can always hop back for some moneymaking, but then, where will I go? Gathering a Fields team to go on a money/exp run? Not likely, anymore. Even if I planned with my group to split earnings equally, it wouldn't matter if there's no gold to be had.

That is a good point--what OF the Fields? What purpose does it serve now? What purpose is it intended to serve? And--most importantly--will anyone bother to use them if they're no longer the source of good consumables and gold they used to be?

I'm still in favor of Endgame's proposal, simply because it puts the reins in the hands of the QM. QMs who hit the right ratio of loot to difficulty will find themselves successful, while those who don't will get complaints and either learn from them and improve or else ignore them and find fewer people willing to sign up for their Quests. But for something like the Fields...

Maybe a perk of the Fields should be that they keep the existing system? That would keep the Fields appealing, but since parties to the Fields are limited (despite it being the Unlimited Quest ), it shouldn't unbalance things too much.

The purpose of the Fields is to gain XP quickly. If you want to make some Gold on top of that, that's offered as a reward for GP, and it only takes ten battles to get 500 Gold. (Which is not more than what a Rogue can make, but it's quicker and easier than the rewards for completing quests, and it's a bonus on top of the primary reward of the Fields.)

  On 7/7/2013 at 2:27 AM, Brickdoctor said:

The purpose of the Fields is to gain XP quickly. If you want to make some Gold on top of that, that's offered as a reward for GP, and it only takes ten battles to get 500 Gold. (Which is not more than what a Rogue can make, but it's quicker and easier than the rewards for completing quests, and it's a bonus on top of the primary reward of the Fields.)

That's an overall un-reward for Shadeaux fans, though. I guess really that's more a symptom of the appalling lack of Shadeaux reputation than a problem with the Fields, though...

EDIT: Wow, it took me five edits to get the grammar of that sentence correct. Good job, Flipz.

Edited July 7, 201311 yr by Flipz

  On 7/7/2013 at 1:56 AM, Flipz said:

Wait, when did the Overkill Gloves get brought into the nerf? Those operate along a very different principle (both design-wise and, presumably, in-universe), and I've stated several times that they already have plenty of drawbacks. I do not support a nerf to them, if that's being considered. I put a lot of effort into making my build work well with them, and as Jebs has pointed out, Sandy has OK'd them twice already. I'd understand the concern if they were still available, but they aren't, and it'd be grossly unfair to both me and Fugazi to include them in the general nerf.

I know you were just joking with that last bit, but I really dislike the implication that you HAVE to roleplay a class a certain way. A lot, actually. It's like saying you have to act according to the stereotypes of the state or country you live in--the same (lack of) logic applies.

The gloves were brought up at some point, it may have been scuba's original post since he hates them so much. :tongue:And yeah it was just a joke, although Heroica does seem to be full of stereotypes; if you look up the actual definition of rogue, you probably won't find altruistic listed as something that describes it.EDIT: Man, editing a post sucks on a phone. Sorry if formatting/spacing look off.

Edited July 7, 201311 yr by posades

  On 7/7/2013 at 2:27 AM, Brickdoctor said:

The purpose of the Fields is to gain XP quickly. If you want to make some Gold on top of that, that's offered as a reward for GP, and it only takes ten battles to get 500 Gold. (Which is not more than what a Rogue can make, but it's quicker and easier than the rewards for completing quests, and it's a bonus on top of the primary reward of the Fields.)

Exactly. I'm not a fan of the Fields in general since I feel like they go against the storytelling aspect of Heroica that makes it better then playing World of Warcraft.

Adding gold farming to the Fields breaks them, especially if the QM running them is running the battles quickly. If a change is implemented for rogues, the Fields should not be an exception to it.

  On 7/7/2013 at 2:39 AM, Flipz said:

That's an overall un-reward for Shadeaux fans, though. I guess really that's more a symptom of the appalling lack of Shadeaux reputation than a problem with the Fields, though...

Shadeaux fans don't have to go to the Fields, then. Nobody can get reputation from the Fields of any kind. It does affect the Dragoon-hopefuls more than the rest, but it's a tradeoff for everyone: do I get the reputation, do I focus on the Gold, or do I get the XP? The Fields are already incredible stat-boosters as it is; they'd be completely broken if you could get all the stats with no drawbacks there.

  On 7/7/2013 at 2:56 AM, CorneliusMurdock said:

Exactly. I'm not a fan of the Fields in general since I feel like they go against the storytelling aspect of Heroica that makes it better then playing World of Warcraft.

Heroica's going to be better than WoW no matter what because it's a LEGO RPG. (But I get your point.)

I am also in favor of Endgame's (second) proposal.

Alright so numbers time at least from quest 50 till now. Now take these with a slight grain of salt as some of these quests were extremely long and allowed for more battles, but also that some of these quests were extremely short and only had 2-3 battles. Additionally it should be noted that some of these quests also had opportunities to spend gold mid-quest which can affect the numbers. One pattern I think that is pretty obvious is that the higher level a character becomes the more the gold they reap and for the most part the Advanced classes are the ones getting the most gold.

Organized by Quest

Organized by Gold Gained

As far as the fields are concerned, I feel they are designed for XP and consumable/loot farming, not gold farming and should be subject to the same rules as the rest of the game.

First, let me say that I am in no way opposed to at least trying out some new rules. I completely agree that Rogues are overpowered because of their gold-gaining abilities. Gold can buy literally everything (we've seen plenty of backroom deals to get the best loot in quests Rogues weren't in - all it takes is an obscene amount of gold). However, I do not for one second regret minmaxing to my heart's desire. It's what I do in RPGs, and as long as the opportunity is there, I will take it.

But, that is not why I chose Rogue. At the very beginning of the game I'm sure we all thought the classes would be balanced, and no one even suspected Rogue classes would skyrocket above all others, even after the MSSN strategy came about (as an aside, Smelling Salts and Nostrums weren't even invented until around Quest 10). I chose Rogue simply because they seemed like the coolest class, and offered some neat roleplaying opportunities for a character I had already designed. The job traits were a nice bonus. I just don't like the vibes that I'm getting from some of this discussion hint at discontent with the people who chose Rogue to begin with.

That aside, I am in favor of the rule change for having only Humanoid-type enemies drop gold. It's worth a try, at least.

  On 7/6/2013 at 7:27 PM, Flipz said:

You know, maybe it's a really good thing that Rogues are getting nerfed. When Rogues have to look out only for themselves, maybe then the other classes will come to realize how much they've come to rely on the charitable Rogues.

  On 7/6/2013 at 8:05 PM, Waterbrick Down said:

I think Pandora and Brickdoctor have put it best in that it is not that we don't appreciate having rogues with lots of extra consumables or high weapon power, but that it undermines the value of other classes. Rogues can go into how high their upkeep budget is, but remember the rest of the classes do just fine without being jacked up on consumables all of the time

I'm agreeing with WBD and all the others who've said this - Rogues being charitable isn't necissarily a good thing, because it negates the need for any other class. You could have all Rogues playing this game and cover the healing with buying potions, cover the offense with buying gems, weapons, and upgrades, and cover the defense by buying high SP artifacts and imbuing scrolls and gems. No other class would be needed if the wealth of Rogues was taken too far.

  On 7/7/2013 at 2:56 AM, CorneliusMurdock said:

Adding gold farming to the Fields breaks them, especially if the QM running them is running the battles quickly. If a change is implemented for rogues, the Fields should not be an exception to it.

Except Rogues aren't the only class that can farm in the Fields. Mystic Knights can rest in between every battle to regain ether and basically get free WP/SP upgrades with their Miss roll. I personally don't have a problem with farming in the FoG; if you're going to invest that much time into straight battling, then you deserve the rewards. Some people play this game for just stats.

Humanoid rule pl0x.

I strongly, STRONGLY oppose the Humanoid rule, simply because it forces QMs to either be uncreative with their enemies or else be dicks to Rogues. In my opinion, enemy type is more about the QM's artistic choice than mechanical advantage, whereas something like Gold in the drops is purely mechanical in nature. I oppose the Humanoid rule as a prospective QM, NOT as a player, because the Humanoid rule limits my ability to create the Quest and story I want to create.

Case in point, Quest 48. I rest my case.

Besides, doesn't everyone gripe about the OP-ness of Darkness-elemental attacks anyway? Do we really want to implement a rule that makes it even MORE likely for all the enemies to be Humanoid and, thus, weak to Darkness?

I vote No Change to the current rulings.

Well if this nerf actually takes place, Black Knight becomes the most viable of the rogue advanced classes with its high amount of damage and ability to steal items and the SP to protect yourselves.(WPx6+Ignore SP+ Steal Item+Applies Weapon Effect=Stun).

Edited July 7, 201311 yr by Zakura

So far we have seen:

6 people in favor of the "Endgame Compromise".

4 people in favor of the "Common Sense" ruling.

1 person in favor of both of the above.

2 people in favor of the "Leave my gold alone and let me continue to become overly rich" standards.

See post on Page 6 for fixed statistics.

Edited July 7, 201311 yr by Flare

What about the Humanoid ruling?