Heroica RPG Rules & FAQ

[Sandy]

  On 8/23/2015 at 10:30 PM, Goliath said:

Exactly why does Heroica have only two years left?

Nothing lasts forever. We've been playing this game for four years already, and that's a hell of a long time for a forum-based game. Eventually people are going to move on to other things, but I'm extremely glad it hasn't happened yet.

[StickFig]

  On 8/24/2015 at 4:29 AM, Sandy said:

Eventually people are going to move on to other things...

  On 8/24/2015 at 4:29 AM, Sandy said:

...but I'm extremely glad it hasn't happened yet.

[Yzalirk]

  On 8/24/2015 at 4:29 AM, Sandy said:

Nothing lasts forever. We've been playing this game for four years already, and that's a hell of a long time for a forum-based game. Eventually people are going to move on to other things, but I'm extremely glad it hasn't happened yet.

That is true but will there be a new story in this setting, or at least a similar setting? It sucks that I missed out on a lot of it and I wish I hadn't. Two years goes by fast, especially with quests that take months to complete. It'll be hard to move on when the time comes and I wish it could somehow continue.

[Sandy]

  On 8/25/2015 at 7:51 PM, Goliath said:

That is true but will there be a new story in this setting, or at least a similar setting?

For the last time, nobody knows. I am just making wild predictions here, since people are prodding me to.

[Lind Whisperer]

  On 8/25/2015 at 7:51 PM, Goliath said:

That is true but will there be a new story in this setting, or at least a similar setting? It sucks that I missed out on a lot of it and I wish I hadn't. Two years goes by fast, especially with quests that take months to complete. It'll be hard to move on when the time comes and I wish it could somehow continue.

  Reveal hidden contents

Again, there are some hypothesized plans to continue the story post-Sandy's, however progress on them is mostly paused until Sandy's is done because a., people can then focus on the current game, and b., we don't know how Sandy's story is going to end, planning a story with no idea of the world's state at the start runs into obvious issues with plotting.

  On 8/25/2015 at 8:03 PM, Sandy said:

For the last time, nobody knows. I am just making wild predictions here, since people are prodding me to.

I move we leave poor Sandy alone. He's already clarified what he knows several times, and repeating the question doesn't present a better answer.

If people want Heroica to last longer, they should do their part by writing and hosting/cohosting quests. That's the "secret solution" to keeping the game going. That's it. Complete, and unedited.

[Sandy]

  On 8/25/2015 at 8:44 PM, Lind Whisperer said:

If people want Heroica to last longer, they should do their part by writing and hosting/cohosting quests. That's the "secret solution" to keeping the game going. That's it. Complete, and unedited.

Quoted for truth.

[Pyrovisionary]

  On 8/25/2015 at 8:44 PM, Lind Whisperer said:

If people want Heroica to last longer, they should do their part by writing and hosting/cohosting quests. That's the "secret solution" to keeping the game going.

Too right.

I remember something being said a long time ago about the best way to put together a battle order . Healing classes first or whatnot. Anyway, am I right in saying that healing classes, and players that cause negative effects e.g Witches, Sorcerers, go first?

[swils]

Does anyone else feel a bit cheap using conditional actions to dance around various scenarios in battle? I mean, I fully recognize their value (and use them a lot myself), but I think it removes a lot of the tension/danger. For example, in #135, committing three of our party members to attacking Pretzel this round would be a lot more risky if we weren't tossing in the conditionals that allow us to essentially re-target midway through the round.

[Asphalt]

I would say they go last. You don't want an enemy put to sleep and then targeted.

Heavy armored goes first, conditional effects last.

[Flipz]

  On 8/25/2015 at 9:34 PM, swils said:

Does anyone else feel a bit cheap using conditional actions to dance around various scenarios in battle? I mean, I fully recognize their value (and use them a lot myself), but I think it removes a lot of the tension/danger. For example, in #135, committing three of our party members to attacking Pretzel this round would be a lot more risky if we weren't tossing in the conditionals that allow us to essentially re-target midway through the round.

The thing is, without them you get moments of idiocy like Clerics healing a party member after a Druid in the party rolled a SHIELD earlier that Round. People aren't usually THAT stupid, so it makes sense that they'd change their action based on the circumstances.

[swils]

In character I suppose that's true, but it just feels like we're supposed to submit our actions and if something like that happens, it happens. I think that's supposed to be part of the challenge, there. Otherwise we might as well get a battle update after each individual action is listed (Aside from the fact that this would be horribly inefficient & clunky, and I don't actually think that should be the case, heh)

[Yzalirk]

  On 8/25/2015 at 8:44 PM, Lind Whisperer said:

If people want Heroica to last longer, they should do their part by writing and hosting/cohosting quests. That's the "secret solution" to keeping the game going. That's it. Complete, and unedited.

Consider me invested then. I want to help keep Heroica lasting.

I still have a quest planned, like I've mentioned a while ago, along with ideas for a 5-part quest suited around a "Tribal" theme. It's still in the works though.

[Palathadric]

I organize all my battle orders on a case-by-case basis. I don't assume that armoured people will go first unless a heavy hitting enemy is first on the list and will get a free hit. The boss also isn't always at the top of the list and therefore hitting the first hero. :shrug:

[Palathadric]

  On 8/25/2015 at 9:57 PM, Flipz said:

The thing is, without them you get moments of idiocy like Clerics healing a party member after a Druid in the party rolled a SHIELD earlier that Round. People aren't usually THAT stupid, so it makes sense that they'd change their action based on the circumstances.

Well, if you're all acting in a round, in my opinion it's more like everyone's acting at once, in which case it would make sense for both to heal the same target, because they didn't know the other one would do it.

[Asphalt]

yeah, armored first assuming there will be free hits.

[Scubacarrot]

I agree with swils on the conditional actions. In character it is perhaps not the best, but removing them would simplify battles a bit and also save having actions that are three sentences long. Conditional actions feel kind of cheap sometimes, and it's a bit of a pain for the QM, I feel like.

[Lind Whisperer]

  On 8/25/2015 at 10:49 PM, Scubacarrot said:

...and it's a bit of a pain for the QM, I feel like.

I thought it was actually an aid to the QM. If the enemy you're targeting is already dead, they don't have to guess as to who the player would want to target next.

[swils]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:05 PM, Lind Whisperer said:

they don't have to guess as to who the player would want to target next.

Next in the order, iirc.

[Endgame]

Next in order that wouldn't one shot them, for me.

[Flipz]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:05 PM, Lind Whisperer said:

I thought it was actually an aid to the QM. If the enemy you're targeting is already dead, they don't have to guess as to who the player would want to target next.

It is. As a QM, it feels super cheap when a character is KO'd or nearly KO'd (or just rolls a catastrophic Special Damage) because someone else's kill redirected them to an enemy they otherwise wouldn't have attacked.

[Lind Whisperer]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:09 PM, swils said:

Next in the order, iirc.

Except that some players can survive certain specials, and others can't.

[Flipz]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:10 PM, Endgame said:

Next in order that wouldn't one shot them, for me.

See, that's not how it's traditionally run, though. Traditionally, if they didn't give a conditional target, it moved to the next in line...even if it'd kill them.

It's Artificial Stupidity, and it's not necessary. It actually reduces martial Heroes' strategy options significantly if conditionals are removed.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Flipz

[swils]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:11 PM, Lind Whisperer said:

Except that some players can survive certain specials, and others can't.

And that, I believe, is just part of the strategy/risk/whatever you want to call it. That's just my opinion, of course.

[Flipz]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:28 PM, swils said:

And that, I believe, is just part of the strategy/risk/whatever you want to call it. That's just my opinion, of course.

The thing is, it reduces strategy. All of a sudden, you're not thinking ahead, you're just pointing your character at a target and then waiting to see if they die and/or get the party killed. That makes the "mindless repeat" 'strategy' even more likely than it already is.

Like I said, our Heroes are not idiots. If they can respond to the events of battle quickly enough to pick a new target when their old one is down, they can plan ahead which one they'd want to swap to.

[Lind Whisperer]

  On 8/25/2015 at 11:46 PM, Flipz said:

Like I said, our Heroes are not idiots. If they can respond to the events of battle quickly enough to pick a new target when their old one is down, they can plan ahead which one they'd want to swap to.