25430 replies to this topic

[Scorpiox]

Zepher, on 14 November 2012 - 10:18 PM, said:

I think quests where heroes can die would be AWESOME... the QM would probably have to warn of it in the sign-ups though.  And it would be a special breed of player who was willing to go.

I confess that I would never want to go on a quest like that. As exciting as it would be, I'd rather like a better death for Haldor than just being poisoned by a Big Rat, after all the work I've put into him.

Chromeknight, on 14 November 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Nerwen would shrug that off, she knows she's often one of the smartest people in the room, and that others sometimes react badly to that. Of course she's a smartarse, all of her is smart, including her behind..

I can tell you now that Haldor would NOT get on well with Nerwen, if that is her attitude. Being old and well-travelled doesn't immeadiately make her better and more wise than everyone else. I'm afraid that I'm backing Guts in this feud.

[Skyrimguy]

Scorpiox, on 14 November 2012 - 10:35 PM, said:

I can tell you now that Haldor would NOT get on well with Nerwen, if that is her attitude. Being old and well-travelled doesn't immeadiately make her better and more wise than everyone else. I'm afraid that I'm backing Guts in this feud.

Neither would Sarge! Talking of well traveled, Sarge has been in every army in every country. But he cannot read.. He is violent, unpredictable, impulsive, alcoholic and on drugs. Sarge is still better!

[TheBoyWonder]

Lycan would also side with Guts on principle, but if  Nerwen became a druid Lycan would side with them.

[Brickdoctor]

Scorpiox, on 14 November 2012 - 10:35 PM, said:

As exciting as it would be, I'd rather like a better death for Haldor than just being poisoned by a Big Rat, after all the work I've put into him.

Now wouldn't that be a hilarious death for Atramor, Badly Poisoned by a Rat?

[Endgame]

That'd probably be his preferred death, actually.

[Waterbrick Down]

Zepher, on 14 November 2012 - 10:18 PM, said:

I think quests where heroes can die would be AWESOME... the QM would probably have to warn of it in the sign-ups though.  And it would be a special breed of player who was willing to go.

I agree, you can count me in. It's about time consumables and clerics were given the credit they deserve.

Scorpiox, on 14 November 2012 - 10:35 PM, said:

I can tell you now that Haldor would NOT get on well with Nerwen, if that is her attitude. Being old and well-travelled doesn't immeadiately make her better and more wise than everyone else. I'm afraid that I'm backing Guts in this feud.

I'm backing Nerwen in this. Some people make decisions to play characters that have aspects about them that set them apart from others, this includes wisdom. Chromeknight is allowed to make a character that is wiser than most, just as you are allowed to make a healer that is more barbarian than most. Unless you want to start having wisdom, charisma, and knowledge stats I say we just let it be as it will take care of itself. Honestly when it comes to these statless qualities, I'm usually more willing to let players get away with it as long as it's within reason in game even when as a player out of game I don't want them to show up my character.

For instance if Nerwen discusses learned things with Skrall, even though he's had a bit more education than most Ogres, I'd conceed that she was smarter than him and play along accordingly. However there are other statless attributes that may also be taken into account for how he would react, for instance stubborness, conviction, or bias.

However if Skrall were to challenge Nerwen to an arm wrestling match (not assuming the Level or Power is equivalent to strength) I would hope assume Skrall's strength (a statless value) would win out. Again there are many other things to take into account. As an elf, Nerwen probably would have more stamina, and possibly more knowlege of mechanics, and leverage points of the body, whether this would be enough to sway victory to the other side is between us.

It's a give and take on both sides, I give your character credit in somethings and in return you give my character credit in others, all the time keeping the development of both our characters as the ultimate goal. The trick is creating checks and balances to make your character believable and someone others enjoy playing with (even if it means conceding to some statless attributes at times), for instance you can create a character that may be more beautiful than other players' characters, but that character may also suffer from deep seated vanity that dictates their buying habits and whether or not they'll use a physical attack during a battle. As an extreme, you could make your character all knowing without any negative attributes, but it'd be hard to pull off convincingly, and I can't see you having many friends in the long run, both as a player and a character.

Edited by Waterbrick Down, 14 November 2012 - 11:13 PM.

[Scubacarrot]

I kind of agree? Of course I'd let Skrall get away much easier with breaking down doors than for example Rufindel. Also, a character that knows everything is not fun. A character that THINKS it knows everything is incredibly fun. Just a tip.

[Scorpiox]

Waterbrick Down, on 14 November 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

-snip-

I would have to agree with all of that.

[Flipz]

Waterbrick Down, on 14 November 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

I'm backing Nerwen in this. Some people make decisions to play characters that have aspects about them that set them apart from others, this includes wisdom. Chromeknight is allowed to make a character that is wiser than most, just as you are allowed to make a healer that is more barbarian than most. Unless you want to start having wisdom, charisma, and knowledge stats I say we just let it be as it will take care of itself. Honestly when it comes to these statless qualities, I'm usually more willing to let players get away with it as long as it's within reason in game even when as a player out of game I don't want them to show up my character.

For instance if Nerwen discusses learned things with Skrall, even though he's had a bit more education than most Ogres, I'd conceed that she was smarter than him and play along accordingly. However there are other statless attributes that may also be taken into account for how he would react, for instance stubborness, conviction, or bias.

However if Skrall were to challenge Nerwen to an arm wrestling match (not assuming the Level or Power is equivalent to strength) I would hope assume Skrall's strength (a statless value) would win out. Again there are many other things to take into account. As an elf, Nerwen probably would have more stamina, and possibly more knowlege of mechanics, and leverage points of the body, whether this would be enough to sway victory to the other side is between us.

It's a give and take on both sides, I give your character credit in somethings and in return you give my character credit in others, all the time keeping the development of both our characters as the ultimate goal. The trick is creating checks and balances to make your character believable and someone others enjoy playing with (even if it means conceding to some statless attributes at times), for instance you can create a character that may be more beautiful than other players' characters, but that character may also suffer from deep seated vanity that dictates their buying habits and whether or not they'll use a physical attack during a battle. As an extreme, you could make your character all knowing without any negative attributes, but it'd be hard to pull off convincingly, and I can't see you having many friends in the long run, both as a player and a character.

If you keep giving out great advice like this, I may have to cede control of the Theatre to you.   I wholeheartedly agree.

[Waterbrick Down]

Scubacarrot, on 14 November 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:

I kind of agree? Of course I'd let Skrall get away much easier with breaking down doors than for example Rufindel. Also, a character that knows everything is not fun. A character that THINKS it knows everything is incredibly fun. Just a tip.

That's my point. Checks and balances. My point is that when it comes to wisdom, I think Nerwen is more wise than Guts, or many of the other characters for that matter. As a player I somewhat recoil at this, but as Skrall I would have to agree. Now this doesn't mean that Guts just hands the book over to Nerwen, because while she may be more wise (and I understand that it is a statless quality), Guts I believe holds more strongly to his beliefs due to some of his more tragic experiences and this allows his argument to be on par with hers and not seem like two players arguing whose is the better decision, but two characters arguing whose is the better decision.

Please do not take this as me trying to dictate what Guts should do, Scuba, you play him superbly and I wouldn't have anyone else doing it. You as a player do not allow any potential trust of Chromeknight or anyone, to influence Gut's trusting of Nerwen or anyone else, which I think is an excellent quality among many other things.

Edited by Waterbrick Down, 15 November 2012 - 02:06 AM.

[Palathadric]

I love it when old-timers return. Welcome back Aveal the black sheep. Hope you stick around at Heroica for a while.

[Chromeknight]

Waterbrick Down, on 14 November 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

I'm backing Nerwen in this. Some people make decisions to play characters that have aspects about them that set them apart from others, this includes wisdom. Chromeknight is allowed to make a character that is wiser than most, just as you are allowed to make a healer that is more barbarian than most. Unless you want to start having wisdom, charisma, and knowledge stats I say we just let it be as it will take care of itself. Honestly when it comes to these statless qualities, I'm usually more willing to let players get away with it as long as it's within reason in game even when as a player out of game I don't want them to show up my character.
It's a give and take on both sides, I give your character credit in somethings and in return you give my character credit in others, all the time keeping the development of both our characters as the ultimate goal. The trick is creating checks and balances to make your character believable and someone others enjoy playing with (even if it means conceding to some statless attributes at times), for instance you can create a character that may be more beautiful than other players' characters, but that character may also suffer from deep seated vanity that dictates their buying habits and whether or not they'll use a physical attack during a battle. As an extreme, you could make your character all knowing without any negative attributes, but it'd be hard to pull off convincingly, and I can't see you having many friends in the long run, both as a player and a character.

I play other games, so have in mind a framework for attributes, even if I do not attach specific numbers to them. It is difficult sometimes to portray weaker characteristics, because the character, knowing they are not strong in areas, does not put themselves forward in situations where those qualities are demanded. I have sought though, to show the negative aspects of Nerwen's strengths though. She is long lived, but that often leads to introspection as she dwells on past experiences. She is wise, but there are areas of self-doubt in there. She is honest, everything she says is (as far as she knows) true, but she is not above lying by omission or creating false impressions by connecting disconnected events.and, as spotted confidence easily slips into arrogance. Guts has rightly called her on some of those.

One difference to a forum RPG over a table group is that posting order matters. Scubacarrot posted first, so Guts has the book. If I had posted before him, Nerwen would have it and that would be a different role playing scenario. I am totally fine with players taking actions which close off options for other players. That leads to conflict (between characters, not players hopefully!). And conflict leads to character expression and growth.

[Brickdoctor]

Waterbrick Down, on 14 November 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

[sniiiip]

Stop posting quality roleplaying advice like this! Disputes should be settled with stats only! I want to see some good ol' PvP!

[Flipz]

Chromeknight, on 15 November 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

One difference to a forum RPG over a table group is that posting order matters. Scubacarrot posted first, so Guts has the book. If I had posted before him, Nerwen would have it and that would be a different role playing scenario. I am totally fine with players taking actions which close off options for other players. That leads to conflict (between characters, not players hopefully!). And conflict leads to character expression and growth.

While I understand this perspective, I disagree in principle; I feel that deliberately closing off others' options is inconsiderate to them.  If it's in-character, fair enough, but if it's just to "gain moar power", then...   (Not picking on anyone in particular, it's just an attitude that I'm seeing arise that I feel should be nipped in the bud.)


Incidentally, this leads to the ultimate reason that Arthur wouldn't be able to stand Guts; Arthur is a strong, almost divine proponent of free will (it's a huge part of the philosophy of Chaos, after all).  Guts took away Nerwen's choice to her own fate, which Arthur absolutely opposes.  Arthur believes that everyone has the right to make their own choices, even if the choices are wrong or are choices that Arthur himself disagrees with.  To him, the only action that's universally wrong is to interfere with someone else's path.  Guts, on the other hand, thinks he knows best about pretty much everything, and he'd likely try to boss Arthur around.  This would not end well.

Edited by Flipz, 15 November 2012 - 01:12 AM.

[Rumble Strike]

I do like the idea of hidden stats.  I think a lot of people use those.  Tarn's naive rating is very high! Also I would definitely go on a Quest where heroes could die in battle. The ultimate stakes.

[Waterbrick Down]

Flipz, on 15 November 2012 - 01:11 AM, said:

While I understand this perspective, I disagree in principle; I feel that deliberately closing off others' options is inconsiderate to them.  If it's in-character, fair enough, but if it's just to "gain moar power", then...   (Not picking on anyone in particular, it's just an attitude that I'm seeing arise that I feel should be nipped in the bud.)

That is because you play this game with more of a story emphasis, however we do not all play Heroica RPG in this manner and I believe that some of the richness of this game is derived from its vast spectrum of players. If everyone is playing to "gain moar power" then it would not be inconsiderate, but expected. I put my stake in the free market style of the game. If you don't like someone's play style then it is your free choice to not interact with their character or sign up for/select players for a certain quest for which they are partaking in. If enough people don't like a certain play style then it will eventually go into decline and vice versa. In the meantime we strive for some compromise between stat and story players in order to continue an enjoyable gaming experience for both.

Edited by Waterbrick Down, 15 November 2012 - 02:05 AM.

[Endgame]

I'm really sorry that the battle with Rhodus is taking so long. Because of his whole illusion gag, I can't autoroll. Don't worry, you are nearing the trump card, and it should all speed up after that.

[CallMePie]

Endgame, on 15 November 2012 - 02:08 AM, said:

Don't worry, you are nearing the trump card, and it should all speed up after that.

That's reassuring...

[Endgame]

It is, actually!

Reassuring that I won't have to run any color-coded battle orders for a little bit, that is.

[Flipz]

You know, the gem puzzle in Quest 49 really reminds me of this (Q49ers, don't look unless Etzel says it's OK!):
http://www.youtube.c...wPIYu424#t=395s

I'd really like to see Quests that operate like the games in the King's Quest series, those were always a LOT of fun.

[Tamamono]

Might start participating again (or at least posting in the Hall) if I ever get off my lazy megablocks and write something else for Tomas.

And no, this is not just for palathadric. Lol.

[Dannylonglegs]

Endgame, on 15 November 2012 - 02:25 AM, said:

It is, actually!

Reassuring that I won't have to run any color-coded battle orders for a little bit, that is.

Hahaha! but don't kid yourself. Just because Rhodus is gone, doesn't mean Sylph is...

On a side-note, would you check over the stats to make sure there's a clue for us to figure-out which Rhodus is right? I've honestly searched for an hour.

~Insectoid Aristocrat

Edited by Dannylonglegs, 15 November 2012 - 04:23 AM.

[Brickdoctor]

Tamamono, on 15 November 2012 - 04:12 AM, said:

Might start participating again (or at least posting in the Hall) if I ever get off my lazy megablocks and write something else for Tomas.

And no, this is not just for palathadric. Lol.

Hurray! The chances of getting the Quest 1 team together for a run at the Fields just went up.

[Flipz]

Tamamono, on 15 November 2012 - 04:12 AM, said:

Might start participating again (or at least posting in the Hall) if I ever get off my lazy megablocks and write something else for Tomas.

And no, this is not just for palathadric. Lol.

Hooray!  Tomas is back!  

[Palathadric]

Tamamono, on 15 November 2012 - 04:12 AM, said:

Might start participating again (or at least posting in the Hall) if I ever get off my lazy megablocks and write something else for Tomas.

And no, this is not just for palathadric. Lol.