Heroica: Glory Amongst The Stars RPG - Game Development

[samurai-turtle]

7 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

While I have no objection to the name 'Saturn Family' as a fun little reference I don't think we should just steal an existing list of creature types from another source. Especially since it seems unnecessarily large and creature types are redundant to the current system anyway.

Well the game is an "Indy game", probably just one person from Asia somewhere. And I do think some of those types are unnecessary but I figured if someone is going to put a scientific name to monsters something like this could help. Plus, if you ever do play "Summon Mate" the monsters pixels (and other things) have been taken from a public resource, where theses "pixels" have been used in other games. Not to mention some of the monsters are considered generic, I guess it will happen when their is a 160 different monsters. But you are probably right we should not just rip off an entire game even if it might be considered slightly generic. 

[Yzalirk]

11 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

While I have no objection to the name 'Saturn Family' as a fun little reference I don't think we should just steal an existing list of creature types from another source. Especially since it seems unnecessarily large and creature types are redundant to the current system anyway.

On another note; since the subject of demons has come up what ideas do you all have for their nature? Now that it's been brought up I'm feeling a mite curious.

I agree but I think we should still use creatures established from Heroica 1.0 and even Dungeons & Dragons.  I got a feeling that Mind Flayers could be something fun to play around with in Heroica 2.0.  I believe they were established in Heroica 1.0 but I do not think they were used very much.  I actually have an idea for a character that is a Mind Flayer.  If we can have a second character, I might use him as my alternate or I could think of some fun quests involving him. 

Demons could work similarly as they do in Dungeons & Dragons but I have been watching a lot of DOOM videos too so maybe some inspiration can be drawn from that source material too.

[KotZ]

If I think we should add more creatures, mainly that are more sci-fi/sci-fantasy type if they're not too similar to established H1 creatures. Even if they rarely show up, I think it helps flesh out the world we're building.

I would think demons could work in this setting, be they seen as full on spirits or another "form" of alien.

[Duvors]

4 hours ago, samurai-turtle said:

Well the game is an "Indy game", probably just one person from Asia somewhere. And I do think some of those types are unnecessary but I figured if someone is going to put a scientific name to monsters something like this could help. Plus, if you ever do play "Summon Mate" the monsters pixels (and other things) have been taken from a public resource, where theses "pixels" have been used in other games. Not to mention some of the monsters are considered generic, I guess it will happen when their is a 160 different monsters. But you are probably right we should not just rip off an entire game even if it might be considered slightly generic. 

 

1 hour ago, Goliath said:

I agree but I think we should still use creatures established from Heroica 1.0 and even Dungeons & Dragons.  I got a feeling that Mind Flayers could be something fun to play around with in Heroica 2.0.  I believe they were established in Heroica 1.0 but I do not think they were used very much.  I actually have an idea for a character that is a Mind Flayer.  If we can have a second character, I might use him as my alternate or I could think of some fun quests involving him. 

 

1 hour ago, KotZ said:

If I think we should add more creatures, mainly that are more sci-fi/sci-fantasy type if they're not too similar to established H1 creatures. Even if they rarely show up, I think it helps flesh out the world we're building.

I get you, but in a mechanical sense I don't think creature types really add anything to the system. Remember that in the original game creature types were important because they determined elemental vulnerabilities/invulnerabilities, something that this game's armor/weapon types already do. I don't really see any role for types here that doesn't just add unnecessary restrictions or complications to character or enemy building.

[Endgame]

I don't have any firm lore on demons at the moment, and I am  not convinced a type system is necessary. That being said, creature design in Heroica 1.0 was whacky (I remind you that the second to last boss in one of the most popular sages in the game's history was a set of floorboards... ), and I'm sure 2.0 will match.

Also, the dice completely and utterly betrayed you there. I'm sorry.

[Duvors]

55 minutes ago, Endgame said:

Also, the dice completely and utterly betrayed you there. I'm sorry.

Eh, I don't mind. 

Especially since it let me try the thing I actually wanted to do. 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Lord Duvors

[Endgame]

1 hour ago, Lord Duvors said:

Eh, I don't mind. 

Especially since it let me try the thing I actually wanted to do. 

I hope you know that I am going to roll this as if someone with two hands was trying to disguise themselves as a one-armed person, to not make four-armed people have an unfair advantage - so the DC will be relatively high.

I also hope you know I respect the hell out of it, and couldn't even remember Enson had 4 arms.

[Duvors]

1 hour ago, Endgame said:

I hope you know that I am going to roll this as if someone with two hands was trying to disguise themselves as a one-armed person, to not make four-armed people have an unfair advantage - so the DC will be relatively high.

I also hope you know I respect the hell out of it, and couldn't even remember Enson had 4 arms.

That's entirely fair. In fact I'd be perfectly willing to accept the DC being higher then I can hit, it is a rather difficult task after all.

And thanks, I'm glad to know you appreciate it. Though to be fair I never mentioned it until now so I didn't expect anyone to remember.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Lord Duvors
clarifying

[samurai-turtle]

6 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

I get you, but in a mechanical sense I don't think creature types really add anything to the system. Remember that in the original game creature types were important because they determined elemental vulnerabilities/invulnerabilities, something that this game's armor/weapon types already do. I don't really see any role for types here that doesn't just add unnecessary restrictions or complications to character or enemy building.

 

5 hours ago, Endgame said:

I don't have any firm lore on demons at the moment, and I am  not convinced a type system is necessary. That being said, creature design in Heroica 1.0 was whacky (I remind you that the second to last boss in one of the most popular sages in the game's history was a set of floorboards... ), and I'm sure 2.0 will match. 

I guess my mind was more in making a bio page for stuff. But your right the newer system doesn't need any type(s) stuff, just stats for battle(s). And wasn't most of enemies in the older game "human(s)", not even generic ones at that, everyone seem to have a full name. 

8 hours ago, Goliath said:

 Demons could work similarly as they do in Dungeons & Dragons but I have been watching a lot of DOOM videos too so maybe some inspiration can be drawn from that source material too.

 

7 hours ago, KotZ said:

I would think demons could work in this setting, be they seen as full on spirits or another "form" of alien.

As for Demons and Angels, I was thinking they are more transdimensional creatures living in between "worlds". But I might be getting into multi-verse territory. 

3 hours ago, Endgame said:

I also hope you know I respect the hell out of it, and couldn't even remember Enson had 4 arms.

 

2 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

And thanks, I'm glad to know you appreciate it. Though to be fair I never mentioned it until now so I didn't expect anyone to remember.

I know I sure didn't realize he had four arms. 

[Endgame]

A bit more complicated this time! I encourage everyone to pay attention to ranges, armor, and damage types for this one.

[Endgame]

Sorry for the missed update, guys, but now we're underway. This new battle system is pretty cool. Talk about a high drama round already.

[Classic_Spaceman]

6 hours ago, Endgame said:

MM Note: Full honesty, I forgot to roll the stun action. That being said, you have no weapons that specifically inflict the Stun effect, so the DC would've been too high - plus, I don't want to set a precedent of being able to take out enemies b posting a bunch of actions before the MM can get online to start the battle.

I assumed that Energy weapons would have a stun-setting, since nearly all do. Additionally, I was unaware that a battle was about to begin. Since Enson's Stealth check failed, my plan was to have Yelana stun Jek, thus allowing the party to enter the storeroom as Enson would have (had his check succeeded). 
BTW: Can attacks and movement occur diagonally? This is not quite clear from the rules (Which is why Yelana is attacking from C3, rather than D3, since D3 is three spaces diagonally from both droids). 
 

[Duvors]

18 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

I assumed that Energy weapons would have a stun-setting, since nearly all do.

In fiction? Because most energy weapons I know of from sci-fi actually don't do that, phasers from Star Trek and the Zat'nik'tel's from Stargate are the only ones I can think of of the top of my head. There are stun weapons in Star Wars but I think those are designed specifically for that purpose rather than having a setting for it.

[Classic_Spaceman]

18 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

In fiction? Because most energy weapons I know of from sci-fi actually don't do that, phasers from Star Trek and the Zat'nik'tel's from Stargate are the only ones I can think of of the top of my head. There are stun weapons in Star Wars but I think those are designed specifically for that purpose rather than having a setting for it.

Which ones are you thinking of that do not have a stun setting? 

A few with stun settings (aside from those previously mentioned), just off of the top of my head: 

Spoiler

Star Wars (The stun setting is standard on all blasters): 

 

Guardians of the Galaxy (At the end - Both Star-Lord and Rocket): 

Killjoys (Via dialogue, at the beginning): 

 

 

[samurai-turtle]

2 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

BTW: Can attacks and movement occur diagonally? This is not quite clear from the rules (Which is why Yelana is attacking from C3, rather than D3, since D3 is three spaces diagonally from both droids). 
 

The answer is yes. I had to ask like three times. 

[Duvors]

7 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Which ones are you thinking of that do not have a stun setting? 

Goa'uld staff weapons (Stargate), PPG's (Babylon 5), Klingon Disruptors (Star Trek), and nearly every example from Doctor Who. There are probably more but I'm not familiar enough with the necessary source material to name them. The point is that different IP's function under different rules and even within a single franchise it can vary from example to example.

[Endgame]

10 hours ago, samurai-turtle said:

The answer is yes. I had to ask like three times. 

In my defense, it was in a spoiler tag. In all seriousness, although I don't mind you guys using it for OoC interaction between each other, it is REALLY easy for me to miss stuff in spoiler tags, ESPECIALLY because I can't do Ctrl + F to find it on the page. I think I missed a stat upgrade because of it at the start of the battle, although that has been rectified... Bottom line is, if there is something you really want me to see, tag me here or put it in a not-spoiler tag. Both are pretty surefire ways to make sure I don't accidentally miss it.

But, yes. Moving and targetting on diagonals is perfectly fine. I apologize again for missing the question so many damn times... your MM is a person too, I'm not perfect.

13 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

I assumed that Energy weapons would have a stun-setting, since nearly all do. Additionally, I was unaware that a battle was about to begin. Since Enson's Stealth check failed, my plan was to have Yelana stun Jek, thus allowing the party to enter the storeroom as Enson would have (had his check succeeded). 
BTW: Can attacks and movement occur diagonally? This is not quite clear from the rules (Which is why Yelana is attacking from C3, rather than D3, since D3 is three spaces diagonally from both droids). 
 

This is another case of the fact that the stat sheet governs the game, and not necessarily the setting. You can't assume your weapons have certain properties or abilities if they are not explicitly there. Yes, other sci-fi settings have weapons that can be dialed to stun, but Heroica 2.0 isn't other sci-fi settings. (In fact, because this whole mission might be non-canon at the end of the day, one could argue it doesn't even have a setting yet. )

I totally accept the fact that I goofed because I missed the action - I was making the battle post in something of a rush, because I only had a 90 minute span to update that day, and I wanted to get the battle out. But in the future, that specific property of energy weapons is not implied.

I know there have been some clerical hiccups, but I hope everyone is still having a good time.

Edited February 9, 2020 by Endgame

[Yzalirk]

1 hour ago, Endgame said:

In my defense, it was in a spoiler tag. In all seriousness, although I don't mind you guys using it for OoC interaction between each other, it is REALLY easy for me to miss stuff in spoiler tags, ESPECIALLY because I can't do Ctrl + F to find it on the page. I think I missed a stat upgrade because of it at the start of the battle, although that has been rectified... Bottom line is, if there is something you really want me to see, tag me here or put it in a not-spoiler tag. Both are pretty surefire ways to make sure I don't accidentally miss it.

I posted a spoiler just before I read this!

Just in case you are not able to see it, I basically said that I would attack Trips if moving does not count as a single action.  I forgot if moving counts as an action or not but my assumption is that it is.

[samurai-turtle]

1 hour ago, Endgame said:

In my defense, it was in a spoiler tag. In all seriousness, although I don't mind you guys using it for OoC interaction between each other, it is REALLY easy for me to miss stuff in spoiler tags, ESPECIALLY because I can't do Ctrl + F to find it on the page. I think I missed a stat upgrade because of it at the start of the battle, although that has been rectified... Bottom line is, if there is something you really want me to see, tag me here or put it in a not-spoiler tag. Both are pretty surefire ways to make sure I don't accidentally miss it.

But, yes. Moving and targetting on diagonals is perfectly fine. I apologize again for missing the question so many damn times... your MM is a person too, I'm not perfect.

I know there have been some clerical hiccups, but I hope everyone is still having a good time.

Well in my defense, I am use to putting OoC in spoiler tags. I guess it keeps the story thread looking cleaner.  But if you want to be "at-ed" I will try to remember to do that. Also I figured if you get quoted the noticed pops up on your device. 

I will admit I put the question in two or three different threads. Witch might not of helped... 

What you are not a god?   It is good you have a lot of things to keep track of. 

I was thinking about the rule pages maybe two things need to added / updated; first one the diagonal movement / targeting it might needed to actually stated somewhere - the second item about the point usage, I know it is stated on the rule page but maybe it needed to be separated or highlighted better i.e. the states updated you only need two experience points upgrade a states, but the proficiency(s) need the experience points to scale up. 

[Duvors]

2 hours ago, Endgame said:

In my defense, it was in a spoiler tag. In all seriousness, although I don't mind you guys using it for OoC interaction between each other, it is REALLY easy for me to miss stuff in spoiler tags, ESPECIALLY because I can't do Ctrl + F to find it on the page. I think I missed a stat upgrade because of it at the start of the battle, although that has been rectified... Bottom line is, if there is something you really want me to see, tag me here or put it in a not-spoiler tag. Both are pretty surefire ways to make sure I don't accidentally miss it.

Well in that case I have to remind you that Enson is in the wrong place. I placed him at B4, but on the grid he's at B3.

 

3 hours ago, Endgame said:

This is another case of the fact that the stat sheet governs the game, and not necessarily the setting.

I'm sorry, but what does this mean?

[Classic_Spaceman]

4 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

I'm sorry, but what does this mean?

I assume that it means that game-mechanics supersede genre conventions/tropes. 
That said, as the game is still in development, we can decide to include weapons with stun-capabilities, if we so choose. 

[Endgame]

46 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

I assume that it means that game-mechanics supersede genre conventions/tropes. 
That said, as the game is still in development, we can decide to include weapons with stun-capabilities, if we so choose. 

Of course! Weapons that sun, burn, lacerate, poison, blind, defenestrate, those will all eventually exist in the game. But you gotta fight battles and clear missions and get your hands on one first.

Let's talk about attacking diagonally, actually, because I think there are two different possible interpretations. In the following graphics, blue is the max range of melee, green is the max range of short range, and red is the max range of long range. White is a space you can't hit.

The two possible interpretations are 45 degree angles only:

And any diagonal works:

I've personally been using the latter interpretation - does anyone have any sort of opinion on this? I will have to sit down and consider the pros and cons of both...

[Duvors]

54 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

I assume that it means that game-mechanics supersede genre conventions/tropes. 

That's what I was thinking, but the wording was so odd I had to ask.

@Endgame

I prefer the latter because it makes more sense in regards to internal logic, but the former allows for the ability to avoid attacks via positioning.

Of corse in either case the internal logic is still a bit odd as in both cases weapons seem to have ranges that are square rather than circular.

[Classic_Spaceman]

47 minutes ago, Endgame said:

Of course! Weapons that sun, burn, lacerate, poison, blind, defenestrate, those will all eventually exist in the game. But you gotta fight battles and clear missions and get your hands on one first.

What about incorporating these effects into Elemental weapons, so that they do more than just inflict "Elemental Damage"? 
For example: Electrical weapons deal a stun effect, Sonic weapons knock enemies backwards, etc. 
 

52 minutes ago, Endgame said:

Let's talk about attacking diagonally, actually, because I think there are two different possible interpretations. In the following graphics, blue is the max range of melee, green is the max range of short range, and red is the max range of long range. White is a space you can't hit.

The two possible interpretations are 45 degree angles only:

I think that this is what we should use. It makes the most intuitive sense, as attacks would only be along a direct line-of-sight, and it allows players to move in order to avoid attacks. 
 

[Yzalirk]

I agree that the latter example should be what we use otherwise combat will just become incredibly tedious and more complicated.  Not to mention that not every battle grid is going to be the same.  What fun is it if the players cannot attack and have to continuously move?

1 hour ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

What about incorporating these effects into Elemental weapons, so that they do more than just inflict "Elemental Damage"? 
For example: Electrical weapons deal a stun effect, Sonic weapons knock enemies backwards, etc. 
 

I think that this is what we should use. It makes the most intuitive sense, as attacks would only be along a direct line-of-sight, and it allows players to move in order to avoid attacks. 
 

I think that is a good idea and something @Endgame has put thought into. 

One of the key talking points was to have multiple bits of gear rather than relying on the same.  So, what if the certain weapon categories can have certain effects?  For example, Kinetic weapons can Lacerate / cause Bleeding and Poison whereas Elemental weapons can Incinerate, Shock, and Freeze enemies?  Just a thought but I have no idea how to work in Energy Weapons because arguably they could do the same thing.  Suppose you have a Energy Weapon that shoots extremely hot plasma, you would think that would Incinerate the target, yes?

Also I disagree with your point on the battle grid.  You would still be able to hit a target for any of the positions.  In reality you would just have to adjust where you are facing.  Would you not do that?  There are no obstacles obscuring your line of sight.  I would find it absurd to only be able to attack from two different angles with ranged weapons.  It just makes no sense to me.