Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[Brickdoctor]

Skirmisher doesn't really need a unique artifact, because it doesn't have any gimmicks that are detrimental. Buffing its special abilities with a unique artifact starts to make it OP. The best thing a Skirmisher can do is grab a decently high SP shield to share with the party, then invest in multiple polearms so he can consistently tank in the Back Row.

[CMP]

Skirmisher doesn't really need a unique artifact, because it doesn't have any gimmicks that are detrimental.

You can say that about almost any class. The unique artifacts just make them more interesting.

[Flipz]

Probably the best Skirmisher-specific Artifact would be something that allowed Assistance to share all effects the Skirmisher has to the affected Heroes, as it'd make for a great risk-reward strategy (since negative effects would also be shared).

Either that or something that lets them retrieve throwing weapons from the Back Row.

[Waterbrick Down]

In case I forget, was there any rule about heroes that heal undead to do damage getting DAMAGE or SPECIAL DAMAGE rolls? Or does Healing count as targetting an enemy?

[Zepher]

It's a risk free operation.

[Sandy]

In case I forget, was there any rule about heroes that heal undead to do damage getting DAMAGE or SPECIAL DAMAGE rolls? Or does Healing count as targetting an enemy?

Maybe it should be ruled that while the healer cannot get damaged when healing an undead, the healing does not negate the enemy's Free Hit. I know I've been going back and forth with this issue over the years, but would that sound fair to you guys?

[Zepher]

I was going to suggest a similar fix - it really is too risk free right now, and with a tonic or two and auto-rolling, a cleric could down quite a few undead.

[Endgame]

I've been pushing for that one sice 48.

In all seriousness, I would agree to that.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Endgame

[Waterbrick Down]

Maybe it should be ruled that while the healer cannot get damaged when healing an undead, the healing does not negate the enemy's Free Hit. I know I've been going back and forth with this issue over the years, but would that sound fair to you guys?

I'd agree with that, I only bring it up as I just realize that battles with nothing but undead can simply be auto-rolled once all the free-hits can be tanked and the clerics can sweep everything else up.

[Endgame]

While we're on it, one other thing I've been meaning to mention for a while now:

I propose Druids should only revive KOed allies with 1 HP during Roots of Life instead of the amount of HP the rest of the party is restored.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Endgame

[JimBee]

I would argue that it would make more sense just to include damage and special damage with healing rolls against enemies. The rule change proposed adds an exception to the targeting-negates-free hits rule. Healing is targeting, while using an item or scroll is not.

It's already confusing as is, no need to add another exception IMO.

[Waterbrick Down]

So even when healing an ally, heroes would be susceptible to Damage and Special Damage?

Edited July 28, 2014 by Waterbrick Down

[JimBee]

No, it would be "No Heal" as normal.

[Sandy]

I would argue that it would make more sense just to include damage and special damage with healing rolls against enemies. The rule change proposed adds an exception to the targeting-negates-free hits rule.

It would be an exception to standard rules either way.

We just have to finally decide in which way we should confuse people.

[Flipz]

Healing undead should carry the risk, but healing other enemies should not--consider the many situations in which the Heroes have needed to heal enemies to ensure they are knocked out instead of killed; healing in that way with a "benevolent" purpose should be risk-free, just like healing allies, while offensive healing should carry risk.

...

...Zepher, I blame you for making me talk like this.

[Zepher]

I'd say count it as targeting the enemy, and the damage and special damage are as a normal attack. That seems the easiest - even easier to remember than the current version.

And how'd I force you to talk anyway, Flipz.

[Flipz]

Thanks to you I keep speaking like a U'kin thanks to the speech pattern you created.

[Zepher]

The U'Kin speech pattern has endured. Who knew they'd end up so important. I think WBD was the first person to contact me and tell me he was using one, and that he wanted to get the speech pattern right, and I was like "oh god, they're sticking around".

[Brickdoctor]

The U'Kin speech pattern has endured. Who knew they'd end up so important. I think WBD was the first person to contact me and tell me he was using one, and that he wanted to get the speech pattern right, and I was like "oh god, they're sticking around".

Well, considering that the minifigs used are Gungans, I'd say the dialogue style you chose to use is a definite improvement.

[Cutcobra]

What happens if a mage class (or advanced mage class or necromancer) rolls a Shield without having any gems in their inventory?

[Sandy]

What happens if a mage class (or advanced mage class or necromancer) rolls a Shield without having any gems in their inventory?

The world explodes.

Nothing, of course. Isn't that kinda obvious? Necromancer's Shield-skill has nothing to do with gems, though.

[Palathadric]

I'll pull a Zakura:

Nerf rogues.

[Endgame]

I'll pull a Zakura:

Nerf rogues.

Why? Am I missing an occurance that has happened recently.

[Waterbrick Down]

I'll pull a Zakura:

Nerf rogues.

Sorry Pala, but for a quest that's centered around the undead, having a duel healing Paladin and cleric, makes things a little too easy. I'll run the round soon and continue as the rules-as-written are now, but I'm hoping we can get a change worked out.

[Palathadric]

I don't think my Dual Staff would Dual Heal.

No problem though. In one of the only quests where I used healing to attack undead, damage and special damage were rolled against me anyway.

Yes, I'm still looking at you, CJP!