Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[UsernameMDM]

This is a thing that I've noticed more and more. Do we really, really need to lay down every single thing? Can QM's not be allowed to rule things for themselves anymore? As long as a QM is consistent in his own quest so players know what to expect, does every single little tiny thing have to be documented? It's a moderately sized pet peeve of mine.

That's why I proposed the question. Is a table needed, or can QMs apply their own interpretations as long as it is consistent within the quest?

[CMP]

And also, what happens if the target for High Assault is killed while the dragoon is in the air? I ran it as they just attack the next target in order, but I'm unsure.

[Waterbrick Down]

This is a thing that I've noticed more and more. Do we really, really need to lay down every single thing? Can QM's not be allowed to rule things for themselves anymore? As long as a QM is consistent in his own quest so players know what to expect, does every single little tiny thing have to be documented? It's a moderately sized pet peeve of mine.

I agree, the though issue is when people make rulings different than what was originally expected by the player. For instance, if I go building my character's stats in such a way that take advantage of one QM's rulings, I'd be pretty miffed if another QM didn't rule the same way. Edited December 16, 2013 by Waterbrick Down

[UsernameMDM]

And also, what happens if the target for High Assault is killed while the dragoon is in the air? I ran it as they just attack the next target in order, but I'm unsure.

I would agree to that since that applies to other actions as well.

[Scubacarrot]

I agree, the though issue is when people make rulings different than what was originally expected by the player. For instance, if I go building my character's stats in such a way that take advantage of one QM's rulings, I'd be pretty miffed if another QM didn't rule the same way.

What I would do in such a case if something happens unexpectedly for the player, maybe rule it once in his favor, and when he knows, do it your way the rest of the time. I doubt there are things you can to build your character that could impact a huge deal.

The player is a hypothetical he, in this case.

[Sandy]

So if a hero were Hastened and Slowed at the same time, they would get two turns every other round, or one turn every single round?

From the FAQ:

Q: What happens when a hero with "hastened"-effect is inflicted with "slowed"-effect, or vice versa?

A: The two opposing effects nullify each other, so the hero will return to acting once per round, as normal. The same applies to "lucky" and "jinxed", "encouraged" and "weakened", etc. Note that the effects are only negated, not removed.

And also, what happens if the target for High Assault is killed while the dragoon is in the air? I ran it as they just attack the next target in order, but I'm unsure.

That sounds like a good ruling.

This is a thing that I've noticed more and more. Do we really, really need to lay down every single thing? Can QM's not be allowed to rule things for themselves anymore? As long as a QM is consistent in his own quest so players know what to expect, does every single little tiny thing have to be documented? It's a moderately sized pet peeve of mine.

The problem with QMs doing pretty much what they want with the mechanics is that the players end up getting confused and what's actually in the rules and what is not gets muddled up. It has happened a few times during the history of this game, as you might remember yourself.

It is not a preferable situation, so I'd rather want that we solve the minor kinks out together and use the FAQ to remind us. Granted, the game is getting increasingly complicated so there will always be some situations where the rules and FAQ won't help, so that's when the QM's jurisdiction comes into play.

[Scorpiox]

Would Ognar's beard fit into the same slot as a hood?

[Scubacarrot]

Yes, it's Headwear.

[Endgame]

Something I was considering for my finale quest:

What if, for when a boss Turns Red in the quest, any hero who gets knocked out is permanently removed from the battle (not the quest)? It could definitely bump up the intensity, but I'm not sure it is fair. However, things that have removed a hero from a battle entirely have exited, so...

Did give you slight hint who will be using the passive special: Their name will be prefixed by the word Kaizo.

Edited December 21, 2013 by Endgame

[CMP]

As long as you give them something to do in the meantime (passing out in a desert does not, in fact, count ) it's reasonable, in my own opinion.

[Endgame]

As long as you give them something to do in the meantime (passing out in a desert does not, in fact, count ) it's reasonable, in my own opinion.

Roleplay! For their souls will be sent to HELL they'll be sent to a bad place where they can roleplay with the person who sent them there, as well as the others that have been sent to HELL the bad place.

[Myrddyn]

Perhaps a puzzle they must solve before they can rejoin the battle?

[Endgame]

It is only about 3/7 of the battle they would be missing, if and when they get knocked out - it is supposed to be a final rush, do or die situation; Coming back will not be possible until the battle is concluded.

I'd be happy to set up a write-board/shared pm chain to chat with the villain and any others who get KOed, however.

[Flare]

So there are 7 stages of the battle, pretty much?

[JimBee]

Bit of a random question on Marauders, does the skill "Two Are Better Than One" mean that one can upgrade a secondary weapon for free by the same amount of WP as the first one, or by only 1 WP? I'm thinking specifically about mythril/adamantite: if you imbued one of those into the primary weapon, would the free upgrade for the secondary weapon be 1 WP or 10/25 WP?

Also, if you upgraded the primary weapon without making a purchase (i.e. Grating Stone), would that also affect the secondary?

And I know it's a while before anyone can even think about becoming a Marauder, but I think it would be fair to allow the "Two Are Better Than One" skill to only include weapons that are equippable by the Marauder, That way they can't just abuse the power and upgrade their own weapon while upgrading someone else's for free. Not saying it would happen, but I'm not saying it can't either.

[swils]

Bit of a random question on Marauders, does the skill "Two Are Better Than One" mean that one can upgrade a secondary weapon for free by the same amount of WP as the first one, or by only 1 WP? I'm thinking specifically about mythril/adamantite: if you imbued one of those into the primary weapon, would the free upgrade for the secondary weapon be 1 WP or 10/25 WP?

Also, if you upgraded the primary weapon without making a purchase (i.e. Grating Stone), would that also affect the secondary?

And I know it's a while before anyone can even think about becoming a Marauder, but I think it would be fair to allow the "Two Are Better Than One" skill to only include weapons that are equippable by the Marauder, That way they can't just abuse the power and upgrade their own weapon while upgrading someone else's for free. Not saying it would happen, but I'm not saying it can't either.

Bah, let them upgrade others' weapons for a fee if they so desire. It'd be a nifty way to do business.

[CMP]

I'm talking strictly about regular upgrades. Upgrade a weapon by 1 WP, you get a free 1 WP weapon upgrade for a weapon of lower WP for free. Buy one get one at equal or lesser value. No, grating stones don't count.

[JimBee]

Bah, let them upgrade others' weapons for a fee if they so desire. It'd be a nifty way to do business.

Hmm, yeah that's a good point actually. I guess if someone would want to go through the trouble and cost to use the ability that way, it could be called fair game.

I'm talking strictly about regular upgrades. Upgrade a weapon by 1 WP, you get a free 1 WP weapon upgrade for a weapon of lower WP for free. Buy one get one at equal or lesser value. No, grating stones don't count.

Okay, thanks for clarifying!

[Sandy]

Since it's Year 2014, I promised I would solve the issue with poisoning.

Here's my suggestion, as gathered and reviewed from the discussion earlier:

- The poisoned-effect would be accompanied with a numeral, eg. "poisoned by 1", "poisoned by 15" etc., marking the health reduced by the poisoning.

- This would replace badly poisoned-effect and any other types of poisoned-effects that there might be around.

- Getting hit by a poisonous attack when you're already poisoned would increase the amount of poisoning by the number marked, whereas in the past nothing would have happened.

- Venoms could be stacked on a weapon, ie. using one Venom would make the weapon cause "poisoned by 1"-effect for one battle, while pouring three Venoms would cause "poisoned by 3".

- Deadly Venoms would cause "poisoned by 10"-effect, and other types of Venoms could be created as well to cause other values.

- Witch's attacks would automatically deal "poisoned by 1"-effect, but they could increase the number by using Venoms on their weapons.

- The Witch's Talisman would raise the Witch's basic poisoning to "poisoned by 10".

- The same could be applied to other effects that deal with health or ether, ie. blessed, transcended, cursed and bleeding.

If the general consensus agrees to this change, I'll begin to apply the change to the rules, the items at the Marketplace and the monsters in the Fields of Glory. Everyone would be responsible for making the changes to their own inventories and ask if there is an issue with some item or ability.

So, yay or nay?

[Zepher]

I like everything except the last bullet point - stacking transcended or other similar effects (such as reinforced, or inspired) could really make the game difficult. But if we keep it to poisoning and other things of that nature (bleeding/burning... though I guess burning would no longer be a thing ) then I'm all for the change!

We'd also have to review artifacts that protect against poisoned.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Zepher

[Kintobor]

I have no issue either way. I do agree with Zepher's statement though, just keep it to poisoned.

[Waterbrick Down]

I like everything except the last bullet point - stacking transcended or other similar effects (such as reinforced, or inspired) could really make the game difficult. But if we keep it to poisoning and other things of that nature (bleeding/burning... though I guess burning would no longer be a thing ) then I'm all for the change!

We'd also have to review artifacts that protect against poisoned.

Inspired and Reinforced operate on a different mechanism than poisoned. I think something like Blessed # would work well and keep such effects from becoming irrelevant. I'm for the poison change, though considering the potential for the massive stacking passive damage of deadly venoms potential, I might recommend a price hike.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Waterbrick Down

[Sandy]

Inspired and Reinforced operate on a different mechanism than poisoned. I think something like Blessed # would work well and keep such effects from becoming irrelevant. I'm for the poison change, though considering the potential for the massive stacking passive damage of deadly venoms potential, I might recommend a price hike.

Yes, I'm definitely only talking about stacking effects that deal a number of damage or heal a number of points, not those that multiply stats.

But we can start with changing poisoned, and see where it leads us.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

I agree with the others above, let's just start with Poisoned.

[CMP]

I like the poisoned solution.