Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[Palathadric]

Because it isn't really a rule. It isn't a solid guideline - just a very blurred line between what is muggable and what isn't. It has far too much room for interpretation.

But do we need a solid guideline? Well, I guess I do follow, for the most the rule of enemies dropping gold, give gold in muggings, but perhaps the people who drop the gold should be decided by the power of Common Sense. That actually does make more sense...I think.

[Endgame]

But do we need a solid guideline? Well, I guess I do follow, for the most the rule of enemies dropping gold, give gold in muggings, but perhaps the people who drop the gold should be decided by the power of Common Sense. That actually does make more sense...I think.

A rule, in my mind, really shouldn't be left to the interpretation. A common sense rule is up to interpretation, which makes no sense. So a common sense rule makes no sense.

...Dammit, paradox.

Edited July 7, 2013 by Endgame

[swils]

Fields of Glory are open to all heroes, no matter if they sign-up individually or as a group. There will be no change or special rules to the Fields no matter what the outcome of this discussion is.

I could have sworn it was party sign ups. My mistake, heh.

[Palathadric]

Well, your way is more or less based on Common Sense as well (that should totally be a job trait by the way ) because you are relying on the QM's common sense to decide which enemies drop gold and which don't. If we go with plan Endgame, I still think it is unnecessary to have enemies that normally wouldn't drop gold, suddenly start dropping just to make the quest more attractive for rogue-based classes. Unless there is a good reason for an animal to drop gold, I think there is no reason for them to do so.

[Endgame]

Well, your way is more or less based on Common Sense as well (that should totally be a job trait by the way ) because you are relying on the QM's common sense to decide which enemies drop gold and which don't. If we go with plan Endgame, I still think it is unnecessary to have enemies that normally wouldn't drop gold, suddenly start dropping just to make the quest more attractive for rogue-based classes. Unless there is a good reason for an animal to drop gold, I think there is no reason for them to do so.

The thing is, we still want Rogues to be able to harvest money. Just not as much. I don't think whether or not that killer flower can logically drop gold was ever the center of the debate - it is being able to reward the Rogues gold, but be able to keep it in check. If humanoids only (or, heck, even common sense) is put into place, then there are several quests where Rogues can't mug people at all. Meanwhile, every other class can use their ability in every other quest.

[Chromeknight]

My suggestion is,

All humanoid enemies are muggable by default.

And Some other enemies may be muggable (QM's decision)

And Some humanoid enemies might not be muggable, just as some are Ancient or SP-piercing or insta-kill immune.

This way QMs that put thought in can control some gold flow, others who don't want to hassle about it can run with 'if its a regular fig, it can be mugged'.

Yes I know it seems I'm trying to have it both ways,

Edited July 7, 2013 by Chromeknight

[Pandora]

Yes I know it seems I'm trying to have it both ways,

I think that's called 'compromise', and compromise is often the solution.

[swils]

No, the core of this debate is finding a way to lower the Rogue's income to a more reasonable level in a kore reasonable way. Plenty of things in Heroica make no sense at all.

I just don't think we're addressing that problem directly. We're applying another band-aid. It was already changed from damage-dealt converted to gold, to enemy level. Now there's a ton of factors that affect enemy level. Certainly, rogue-based characters that have had plenty of gold to spend on upgrading their weapons have caused an increase in enemy health values and defenses. Plus there's probably some threat added in the form of levels and specials so that they pose a threat to the 'squishy' rogues. But there's also the fact that as players level up, enemy levels must scale at an accelerated rate to continue to pose a threat across the board. There's also the tank classes. Without naming names, *cough*Docken*cough* some characters are just so strong that, if enemies weren't in some way scaled to them, the fights would be almost completely trivialized.

What if we take an approach that doesn't have the potential to completely gimp a rogue's side-income if a quest has no or very few humanoids (or monsters that would make sense to have gold on their persons, if we go that route).

Rogues steal an amount equal to each enemy target's level, up to but not exceeding their own level

or even steal an amount from each targeted equal to their own level.

Rogues' income would scale directly with their character progression but they wouldn't be able to make some obscene profit from a cluster of enemies that are high level out of necessity.

I'd agree, it still doesn't make sense to steal gold from a rat or a beggar, but there's plenty of stuff that doesn't make sense, as has been mentioned, so why start here?

[Palathadric]

My suggestion is,

All humanoid enemies are muggable by default.

And Some other enemies may be muggable (QM's decision)

And Some humanoid enemies might not be muggable, just as some are Ancient or SP-piercing or insta-kill immune.

This way QMs that put thought in can control some gold flow, others who don't want to hassle about it can run with 'if its a regular fig, it can be mugged'.

Yes I know it seems I'm trying to have it both ways,

More or less what I'm trying to say.

[Brickdoctor]

All humanoid enemies are muggable by default.

And Some other enemies may be muggable (QM's decision)

And Some humanoid enemies might not be muggable, just as some are Ancient or SP-piercing or insta-kill immune.

Isn't that just the Common Sense rule, with general starting guidelines?

[Palathadric]

Isn't that just the Common Sense rule, with general starting guidelines?

Shh. I'm trying to pretend like I'm not forcing the common sense rules.

No, really I do think that we should follow Endgame's amendment, but I think we should have rules as to whom drops gold, otherwise it's just completely random who is mug-able and who isn't. For instance, I think almost all humanoids should drop gold and should be mug-able and, for the most part, very few others. If you have a quest without many humanoids then you may not get many rogues on it, but tough.

[Kintobor]

Shh. I'm trying to pretend like I'm not forcing the common sense rules.

No, really I do think that we should follow Endgame's amendment, but I think we should have rules as to whom drops gold, otherwise it's just completely random who is mug-able and who isn't. For instance, I think almost all humanoids should drop gold and should be mug-able and, for the most part, very few others. If you have a quest without many humanoids then you may not get many rogues on it, but tough.

I once again stand by Trolls and Dragons being in that group. Humanoid's just too broad. The QM now has to plan a quest around rogues, instead of just planning a quest. It's no longer "how cool is the encounter?" and more of "do I have a humanoid that the rogue has a 1/6 chance of mugging?" I like the idea that the amount of money mugged is the level of the hero, but by level 25, that becomes a lot of gold.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

I think the Trolls and Dragons are included in the Common Sense rule. Of course, it is up to interpretation, but I think the QM is the best judge of what should be muggable in his own quest- not some overlord rule that's one-size-fits-all. I'd like to see it implemented, maybe like this:

Welcome to Capt.JohnPauls' quest! The great quest that lets you steal from dragons, trolls, and humans! (In signature or something like that, or profile.)

I can decide what is common sense in my own quest. If you disagree, don't go on my quest.

[KotZ]

I agree with the Common Sense idea (though I do like my banking system). No fees, just a new topic like the embassy based on an honor system. Then, what we could do, if people are worried about money caps, We could leave it up to the QMs to say how much gold is capped in the quest. Recommended to start well below the cap in the beginning, so hopefully by the end you would have reached the cap.

[Zepher]

Gold in drops. Easy to notice, easy for QMs to add in, will allow for more gold in drops anyway, which will make things better for everyone. Since we're all voicing opinions.

[Waterbrick Down]

If you want a specific vote, I'm for Endgame's Second Proposal, keep discretion in the hands of the QM's, allow for more gold drops, and still achieve some balance with the gold issue.

[Dannylonglegs]

If there has to be a change, ChromeKnight's suggestion is my favorite. I still think that it can be made sensical to find gold while attacking other things, as I've said multiple times earlier. Dragons have gold embeded in their scales from their loot, Sharks with friggin' magic-lazers on their heads ate a treasure chest, the Briggand had a secret pocket of gold hidden away on his person... The whole point is that Rogues find money where others simply wouldn't, whether that means money not listed as loot due to being hidden somewhere no one else would look/find it (from gold-dropping opponents) or money no one else saw hidden carefully in the crook of a tree or on the bones of the monster's previous victems (non gold-dropping/sentient opponents). The money they get is seperate from loot to begin with and shouldn't in most cases be considered to come from exactly the same place as the loot money, or else in-character players would call foul.

~Insectoid Aristocrat

Edited July 8, 2013 by Dannylonglegs

[Palathadric]

I do think that mug-able enemies should be made clear to the party in the battle, maybe that's obvious though.

[Waterbrick Down]

I do think that mug-able enemies should be made clear to the party in the battle, maybe that's obvious though.

Exactly, so tack on 1 Gold to their drop and they become mug-able.

[Palathadric]

Exactly, so tack on 1 Gold to their drop and they become mug-able.

Good enough for me, but are enemies who drop gold decided at the QMs fancy or not? I suppose that is the question.

[Waterbrick Down]

Good enough for me, but are enemies who drop gold decided at the QMs fancy or not? I suppose that is the question.

I would assume so, that's the point of Endgame's second proposal, letting QM's still have some influence on what is mug-able as opposed to making QM's include Humanoid enemies to make a quest fair for rogues.

[Endgame]

Good enough for me, but are enemies who drop gold decided at the QMs fancy or not? I suppose that is the question.

Yes, it is.

[UsernameMDM]

What about:

Only enemies with gold as a drop

AND

Only steals gold from each target equal to PC's level

Makes sense in both realistic terms and RPG terms. You can only steal gold from those who have it, and you get better at what you do the more experience you have. Also, this may get QMs to drop more gold for the non-thieving classes.

As far as the Overkill Gloves go; that was just not a well thought out drop. It should probably be nerfed. As much as I hate to say that. Sorry Flipz.

Edited July 8, 2013 by UsernameMDM

[Endgame]

Makes sense in both realistic terms and RPG terms. You can only steal gold from those who have it, and you get better at what you do the more experience you have. Also, this may get QMs to drop more gold for the non-thieving classes.

That is practically a double nerf to Rogues, the second being incredibly severe - since some people think it is fine now, I don't think that slamming a class with two major nerfs at once isn't a good idea.

Besdies, Nerf 1 would still get QMs to drop gold. \

[UsernameMDM]

That is practically a double nerf to Rogues, the second being incredibly severe - since some people think it is fine now, I don't think that slamming a class with two major nerfs at once isn't a good idea.

Besdies, Nerf 1 would still get QMs to drop gold. \

So a level 20 rogue/rogue hybrid getting at least 20 gold (or 20 gold per target) for a special is a bad thing? Man, as a knight, I was lucky to end quests with 100+ gold. I think rogues just got SPOILED.

Something needs to happen though. There is a huge disparity mechanics wise in the game now. After level 10 (or so, not exact science here), if everyone was a rogue, there would be no use for other classes. Just rake in the gold and get liquored up every battle.