Waterbrick Down

Heroica: Glory Amongst The Stars RPG - Game Development

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

@Lord Duvors 

Questions and Suggestions, by Planet: 

Recivec: 

1.) How are we pronouncing this - with hard or soft 'c' sounds (I am currently pronouncing it with emphasis on the first syllable, soft 'c's, and the last 'c' with more of a 'ch' sound). 

2.) The adjectival form of "Recivec" is "Recivec" (no change). 

Akharif: 

1.) The adjectival form of "Akharif" is "Akharifi". 

2.) The silicon must flow! 

Pixiu: 

1.) How are we pronouncing this - with 'xi' as a soft 'sh' sound, or a hard sound and a play on the word "pixie"? 

2.) How long ago were the Chimerans created, and when were they granted official Sapient status? 

3.) "Chimeran" is the blanket term for all of these newly-recognised species, but each subspecies has chosen a name for themselves (for the purposes of group-identity and agency over their own existences) - The feline subspecies call themselves "Xenyr" ("zen-EAR"). 

Tehanui: 

1.) Navigating the system would be difficult due to its gravitational conditions, with the only ways of entering the system close to Tehanui being either via Æthergate or sublight propulsion from the outer solar system (a ship that enters near Tehanui at FTL would run the risk of hitting a gravimetric distortion and being destroyed). 

2.) The adjectival form of "Tehanui" is "Tehanu". 

3.) Bionicle pieces/symbols can be used for detailing (in monasteries and other places of worship, for instance, wherein masks could be used as representations of deities/"saints"/whatever figures are venerated in Tehanu culture). 

Ocquim: 

1.) The adjectival form of "Ocquim" is "Ocquos" ("Ocquos Mining" is as realistic a name as "American Airlines"). 

Cosmopol: 

1.) I get the play on the word "cosmopolitan", but is just a bit on-the-nose. I would suggest another one-letter change to "Cosmopoli" (pronounced like "Thermopylae", with the emphasis on the middle syllable) - The reference is still there, but it sounds more like a "real" name. 

2.) Could Cosmopoli be an artificial planet that was created by the Gatebuilders? 

3.) "Cosmopoli" has no adjectival form. 

Ebria Station: 
Would the structure of the station be a cobbled-together compilation of various cultures' designs? I feel like it would have developed organically, over the course of centuries, so it would not have any single cohesive design-language. 

 

New Addition: 

Novarii Sector: 
A vast, starless, and unreachable region of space, located far outside the Euripides Arm. Documentation of the Sector's existence dates back to the Krassar, but it has never actually been explored, both due to its distance from the Arm and to the lack of any Æthergates that lead there. 
 

Edited by Classic_Spaceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Recivec: 

1.) How are we pronouncing this - with hard or soft 'c' sounds (I am currently pronouncing it with emphasis on the first syllable, soft 'c's, and the last 'c' with more of a 'ch' sound). 

First soft, second hard. Reversed for 'Cricet'.

12 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Pixiu: 

1.) How are we pronouncing this - with 'xi' as a soft 'sh' sound, or a hard sound and a play on the word "pixie"? 

2.) How long ago were the Chimerans created, and when were they granted official Sapient status? 

Pixiu is actually a real word, so I presume it would be pronounced the same way here.

No idea, I'd say pretty recently though, as the Gaian Project should be a newish development.

12 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Tehanui: 

1.) Navigating the system would be difficult due to its gravitational conditions, with the only ways of entering the system close to Tehanui being either via Æthergate or sublight propulsion from the outer solar system (a ship that enters near Tehanui at FTL would run the risk of hitting a gravimetric distortion and being destroyed). 

3.) Bionicle pieces/symbols can be used for detailing (in monasteries and other places of worship, for instance, wherein masks could be used as representations of deities/"saints"/whatever figures are venerated in Tehanu culture). 

Maybe, it's cool, but the system's already pretty unique and it seems a tad excessive to add another unusual element.

I don't think we really need to overtly dictate aesthetics, but I like the idea.

12 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Cosmopol: 

1.) I get the play on the word "cosmopolitan", but is just a bit on-the-nose. I would suggest another one-letter change to "Cosmopoli" (pronounced like "Thermopylae", with the emphasis on the middle syllable) - The reference is still there, but it sounds more like a "real" name. 

2.) Could Cosmopoli be an artificial planet that was created by the Gatebuilders? 

That's fine.

I'd rather leave that a mystery for now.

13 hours ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Ebria Station: 
Would the structure of the station be a cobbled-together compilation of various cultures' designs? I feel like it would have developed organically, over the course of centuries, so it would not have any single cohesive design-language. 

Certainly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this may be a kind of wild idea, and feel free to shoot it down, but has there been any talk about setting up a Discord for the planning 2.0? It just seems to me that part of the difficulty in planning in a format like this is that ideas can easily get lost in waves of conversation or behind pages and pages of other ideas. Not to mention there might be people who are interested in hashing out lore and others who are more interested in discussing mechanics. Having a Discord with different channels and the ability to pin core idea or give solidified concepts their own feed, not to mention arguably better search functionality, might streamline the process here a little bit. It would also make back-and-forth discussion a lot easier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, The Legonater said:

So this may be a kind of wild idea, and feel free to shoot it down, but has there been any talk about setting up a Discord for the planning 2.0? It just seems to me that part of the difficulty in planning in a format like this is that ideas can easily get lost in waves of conversation or behind pages and pages of other ideas. Not to mention there might be people who are interested in hashing out lore and others who are more interested in discussing mechanics. Having a Discord with different channels and the ability to pin core idea or give solidified concepts their own feed, not to mention arguably better search functionality, might streamline the process here a little bit. It would also make back-and-forth discussion a lot easier. 

Would you mind explaining Discord to me? I'm completely unfamiliar with the platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2021 at 1:23 PM, Lord Duvors said:

Maybe, it's cool, but the system's already pretty unique and it seems a tad excessive to add another unusual element.

This is directly related to the system's established characteristics, though. If the planets are passing each other close enough to literally connect, the gravitational conditions nearby would naturally be extremely difficult to navigate (and landing near the waterspout itself would be virtually impossible). 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

This is directly related to the system's established characteristics, though. If the planets are passing each other close enough to literally connect, the gravitational conditions nearby would naturally be extremely difficult to navigate (and landing near the waterspout itself would be virtually impossible). 
 

That only happens twice a year though. The rest of the time they're a more normal distance  from each other. And besides, if we were being realistic then the two planets would've crashed into each other long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

That only happens twice a year though. The rest of the time they're a more normal distance  from each other. And besides, if we were being realistic then the two planets would've crashed into each other long ago.

I meant "realistic" from an in-universe perspective ("Consistent" may be a better word here) - Both planets have gravitational fields that can pull water from each other to form a bridge of sorts, so any ships nearby would also be affected similarly. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Classic_Spaceman said:

I meant "realistic" from an in-universe perspective ("Consistent" may be a better word here) - Both planets have gravitational fields that can pull water from each other to form a bridge of sorts, so any ships nearby would also be affected similarly. 

Well I had thought that they were just very close, but I guess you could say they have unusual gravity fields. Ultimately I'd like to have @Waterbrick Down's opinion on this. I hate to fall back on him so often but I feel the need for a third perspective and this is based on his idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

Well I had thought that they were just very close, but I guess you could say they have unusual gravity fields. 

I did not mean that their gravitational fields were unusual - I was simply pointing out that both planets have gravitational fields, and that gravity affects everything, not just a single column of water. 


Basically this: 
88efac495c41b775b04677748e9f27ca.gif
 

Edited by Classic_Spaceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

I did not mean that their gravitational fields were unusual - I was simply pointing out that both planets have gravitational fields, and that gravity affects everything, not just a single column of water. 

Okay. But what the hell is happening in that gif?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

Okay. But what the hell is happening in that gif?

It is from this scene in The Last Jedi. I was illustrating that if two equal forces pull an object in opposite directions, the object in-question will be torn apart - In the case of Tehanui, the object in-question would be any ship that flies between the two planets. 

Edited by Classic_Spaceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

It is from this scene in The Last Jedi. I was illustrating that if two equal forces pull an object in opposite directions, the object in-question will be torn apart - In the case of Tehanui, the object in-question would be any ship that flies between the two planets. 

Ah. That didn't look like what was happening to me. But yes, I see your point. Though in this case I don't think that would be an issue unless the two planets were near confluence, the rest of the time they'd be far enough apart that that the effect wouldn't be that extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Duvors said:

Ah. That didn't look like what was happening to me. 

I assumed that you had watched the movie (or, at least, that particular scene), so I was posting a gif as more of a reminder. 

2 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

Though in this case I don't think that would be an issue unless the two planets were near confluence, the rest of the time they'd be far enough apart that that the effect wouldn't be that extreme.

Not that extreme, but I still think that there would be some gravitational distortions/"turbulence" in the system, no matter the season. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

I assumed that you had watched the movie (or, at least, that particular scene), so I was posting a gif as more of a reminder. 

I've only seen the original trilogy and The Force Awakens. I'm not that much of a Star Wars fan.

4 minutes ago, Classic_Spaceman said:

Not that extreme, but I still think that there would be some gravitational distortions/"turbulence" in the system, no matter the season. 

You're right, I'll go add something to the doc now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Waterbrick Down @Kintobor @samurai-turtle @Goliath @Classic_Spaceman

I have made the following addition to the list of actions available in combat:

On 9/20/2020 at 12:06 AM, Lord Duvors said:


-Try Something: Make a Proficiency or Attribute Check against DC chosen by MM.

This is to cover instances where a player wishes to try something in combat that isn't covered by another action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Waterbrick Down @Kintobor @Goliath @Classic_Spaceman @samurai-turtle

I have made the following changes to the 'Defeat' section of the rules:

On 9/20/2020 at 12:06 AM, Lord Duvors said:

Defeat
If a hero's health is reduced to zero during a battle, they are unable to participate in it. On a downed hero's turn they roll a 
Strength, Skill, Smarts, or Spirit Attribute Check against a DC 3. If successful, the hero is stabilized and can be revived with a healing consumable item or spell. If a hero is unstable at the end of combat the hero dies and can no longer participate in the mission. If all heroes die upon a mission it is considered a failure. If a hero dies, the player retains all Character Points gained during the hero's career but loses all their equipment. The player may then choose to have their character survive and start again with one of the Starting Gear choices, or create a new character with their accumulated points.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Duvors @Waterbrick Down

Quote

If a hero dies, the player retains all Character Points gained during the hero's career but loses all their equipment. The player may then choose to have their character survive and start again with one of the Starting Gear choices, or create a new character with their accumulated points.

I need a bit of clarification on this - Does it mean that a player can choose between either losing their Character Points and retaining their character, or losing their character and retaining their points? It may be just how I am reading it, but this seems odd. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. It means the player can choose between keeping their current character or making a new one. They keep all their points either way.

@Classic_Spaceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Duvors said:

No. It means the player can choose between keeping their current character or making a new one. They keep all their points either way.

@Classic_Spaceman

Ah, OK - That makes more sense. 👍
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preferably they'd create a new character, but retain the level up points they've gotten with the old character. That way it introduces some finality and closure (no more immortal heroes), without having players feel like they've wasted a ton of time (progress is carried over to new character).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I second what WBD said, but I decided to explicitly spell out that someone could choose to simply make the same character again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.  I like that players can choose to keep their old character rather than making a completely new character if they so choose.  I take it players can have only one active character at and not two?

When you die and lose all your gear, does that extend to currency and “unique gear” if that happens to be in the game?  Things that are not tradeable and unique to only you the player?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that currency counts as equipment. I don't know about unique items, as this game doesn't use the 'suitable for' format to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Goliath said:

Interesting.  I like that players can choose to keep their old character rather than making a completely new character if they so choose.  I take it players can have only one active character at and not two?

When you die and lose all your gear, does that extend to currency and “unique gear” if that happens to be in the game?  Things that are not tradeable and unique to only you the player?

Correct, one active character. It'd be preferable for canonical purposes if players didn't flip back and forth between characters. There will be a respec system that you can reallot level up points to try a different style with your character, but the idea is that death will have some consequence. Again the plan is to not wealth/items be as big of a deal in Heroica 2.0 so that losing things isn't as debilitating as it would be in Heroica 1.0.

Also if any other folks want to contribute to the working doc, send me a PM. We've got most of the critical species/planets roughed out, but there's still more to do on locations/technology/factions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I was wondering if an ruling has been made about vehicles type of like "tanks" and "airplanes". For example I was thinking the main vehicle (a tank) would get it's stats, then a driver would get it's stats and a gunner would get it's stats. But if the driver or gunner gets "killed" by an allies then a enemy on foot could take over said position. Plus, I was wondering about robotic vehicles and would just get their single stats or would they need some thing else? 

I guess the other main thing is how one would make a battle map/grid? I am thinking some one might have to make some sort of tutorial on how to make one. Because at this time I am sort of drawing a blank and I figured it might help other people out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.