Heroica: Glory Amongst The Stars RPG - Game Development

[Kintobor]

22 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

I like the orc mage and the last space rogue. The trick if finding the right balance between sci-fi armor/weapons but without making it too clean and too techy. A couple more figs:

Pretty much this. Even if I'm not overtly fond of all of them, KotZ, I think there's some good parts used in there, including the Ultron pieces, and that rogue in white looks superb.   I'll add, though, that I love that head/hair combo on the Space Gunner! I think it'd make for a good reoccurring port authority/customs character, someone who just really hates their long, tiring job. 

That Cleric of the Unending Sun is super cool, too, WBD. As someone who definitely has an interest in diving into a divine casting-class for Heroica 2.0, it's got my gears turning. 

When I get a chance I may try my hand at doing some different clerics up, actually. My sci-fi collection is somewhat limited, but I'll have a go at it. 

Edited December 5, 2018 by Kintobor

[KotZ]

10 minutes ago, Kintobor said:

Pretty much this. Even if I'm not overtly fond of all of them, KotZ, I think there's some good parts used in there, including the Ultron pieces, and that rogue in white looks superb.   I'll add, though, that I love that head/hair combo on the Space Gunner! I think it'd make for a good reoccurring port authority/customs character, someone who just really hates their long, tiring job. 

That Cleric of the Unending Sun is super cool, too, WBD. As someone who definitely has an interest in diving into a divine casting-class for Heroica 2.0, it's got my gears turning. 

When I get a chance I may try my hand at doing some different clerics up, actually. My sci-fi collection is somewhat limited, but I'll have a go at it. 

Thanks!... which ones are Ultron? I just got some new stuff froma FaceBook group on Sunday and I havent seen Age of Ultron so really all I know is Cap Amerc, Iron Man, Star Lord, and Scarlet Johansson, but I know I used a lot of those pieces. Regarding the Space Gunner, isn't that all of us, hating jobs?

And please do make some figs! I think we're (collectively) nailing down a feel from both figbarfing and text. I'm definitely going to lean more sci-fi than sci-fantasy, but I think we're close!

[CMP]

Since we seem to be getting into the gritty of things, what is everyone's opinion on weaponry? I notice none of WBD's figs have any sort of sci-fi weaponry (blasters and the like). I don't think we should just use Heroica's, personally. There was absolutely no differentiating between melee weapons other than "can use it" and "can't use it", and ranged weapons ended up just being...better.

I'm still in favor of using two or three 'rows' and weapons each having ranges they can fire from and to. But if we don't do that, I think the weapon classes of ranged and melee weapons should at least be equal. 

[KotZ]

34 minutes ago, CMP said:

Since we seem to be getting into the gritty of things, what is everyone's opinion on weaponry? I notice none of WBD's figs have any sort of sci-fi weaponry (blasters and the like). I don't think we should just use Heroica's, personally. There was absolutely no differentiating between melee weapons other than "can use it" and "can't use it", and ranged weapons ended up just being...better.

I'm still in favor of using two or three 'rows' and weapons each having ranges they can fire from and to. But if we don't do that, I think the weapon classes of ranged and melee weapons should at least be equal. 

For weaponry, I agree with you, that it needs more blasters, whichI've tried to include in the figs I've made. The dwarf crossbow/blaster works I say though.

For rows, I agree with this as well. I think different ranges need to be included otherwise everything is the same but characters just choose what they want to use.

[Endgame]

I feel like ranged weapons were better simply because the back row was straight up better. QMs would balance their levels/attacks around everyone chilling in the back row, so the front row became almost negated. The 50% damage reduction was simply too good.

Some random thoughts:

-Less of a damage reduction. This is kind of a nightmare, because anything other than 1/2 becomes a pain to calculate.

-Increase the chance of ranged weapons missing. This makes a little more sense in Heroica than in Space-Heroica, when lasers come out at the speed of light, but it would bring some balance.

I think the row system needs a major overhaul in general, because there is rarely penalty for battles taking a long time... but the penalty of getting hit in the front row was equal to death.

[Waterbrick Down]

12 hours ago, CMP said:

Since we seem to be getting into the gritty of things, what is everyone's opinion on weaponry? I notice none of WBD's figs have any sort of sci-fi weaponry (blasters and the like). I don't think we should just use Heroica's, personally. There was absolutely no differentiating between melee weapons other than "can use it" and "can't use it", and ranged weapons ended up just being...better.

I'm still in favor of using two or three 'rows' and weapons each having ranges they can fire from and to. But if we don't do that, I think the weapon classes of ranged and melee weapons should at least be equal. 

I've avoided blasters for the melee "knight" classes, but I'm open stylistically to them. I think the trick to balancing ranged and melee weapons comes down to damage type. We setup a weakness triangle:

Energy: Blasters, Beam Swords 
Kinetic: Bladed Weapons (swords, spears, knives), Crushing weapons (Maces, Staves, Hammers), Crossbow Bolts, Natural Weapons (Claws, Teeth, Talons)
Elemental: Flame Throwers, Ice Guns, Tesla Coils, Magic

Energy Armor: Weak to Kinetic Weapons
Kinetic Armor: Weak to Elemental Weapons
Elemental Armor: Weak to Energy Weapons

1 hour ago, Endgame said:

I feel like ranged weapons were better simply because the back row was straight up better. QMs would balance their levels/attacks around everyone chilling in the back row, so the front row became almost negated. The 50% damage reduction was simply too good.

Some random thoughts:

-Less of a damage reduction. This is kind of a nightmare, because anything other than 1/2 becomes a pain to calculate.

-Increase the chance of ranged weapons missing. This makes a little more sense in Heroica than in Space-Heroica, when lasers come out at the speed of light, but it would bring some balance.

I think the row system needs a major overhaul in general, because there is rarely penalty for battles taking a long time... but the penalty of getting hit in the front row was equal to death.

I agree, having something that can accelerate winning battles quickly would be very helpful. One of the RPG systems "13th Age" uses something called an "escalation die". Basically the first round the escalation die is 0, round 2 the die increases to 1 which means everything rolled increases by 1 (i.e. your to-hit values) which results in both the enemies and heroes landing hits more often which accelerates the end of the battle. The escalation die continues to increase to a maximum of 6.

I think by divorcing damage calculations from row and having row only be a determining factor for targeting would go a long way. 

 

[CMP]

5 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

I've avoided blasters for the melee "knight" classes, but I'm open stylistically to them. I think the trick to balancing ranged and melee weapons comes down to damage type. We setup a weakness triangle:

Energy: Blasters, Beam Swords 
Kinetic: Bladed Weapons (swords, spears, knives), Crushing weapons (Maces, Staves, Hammers), Crossbow Bolts, Natural Weapons (Claws, Teeth, Talons)
Elemental: Flame Throwers, Ice Guns, Tesla Coils, Magic

Energy Armor: Weak to Kinetic Weapons
Kinetic Armor: Weak to Elemental Weapons
Elemental Armor: Weak to Energy Weapons

That's close to what I've got, but I don't think damage type should be assigned to weapon types. Every class should have the same access to damage types. Like, a pike is a pike, but it could be some sort of plasma pike (energy), or an ice pike (elemental), etc. It shouldn't be able to be changed like enchanting/disenchanting elemental gems, an energy pike should always just be an energy pike, otherwise that defeats the purpose of different armors. 

My only issues with the armor is that I don't understand the logic behind it (mostly unimportant) but also that I don't know what elemental armor would entail.  I still think health/armor/shields is the way to go, personally.

17 hours ago, KotZ said:

For rows, I agree with this as well. I think different ranges need to be included otherwise everything is the same but characters just choose what they want to use.

7 hours ago, Endgame said:

I feel like ranged weapons were better simply because the back row was straight up better. QMs would balance their levels/attacks around everyone chilling in the back row, so the front row became almost negated. The 50% damage reduction was simply too good.

Some random thoughts:

-Less of a damage reduction. This is kind of a nightmare, because anything other than 1/2 becomes a pain to calculate.

-Increase the chance of ranged weapons missing. This makes a little more sense in Heroica than in Space-Heroica, when lasers come out at the speed of light, but it would bring some balance.

I think the row system needs a major overhaul in general, because there is rarely penalty for battles taking a long time... but the penalty of getting hit in the front row was equal to death.

5 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

I agree, having something that can accelerate winning battles quickly would be very helpful. One of the RPG systems "13th Age" uses something called an "escalation die". Basically the first round the escalation die is 0, round 2 the die increases to 1 which means everything rolled increases by 1 (i.e. your to-hit values) which results in both the enemies and heroes landing hits more often which accelerates the end of the battle. The escalation die continues to increase to a maximum of 6.

I think by divorcing damage calculations from row and having row only be a determining factor for targeting would go a long way. 
 

Row absolutely does need some sort of overhaul, but I personally still don't like the concept of ranged weapons being inherently different than melee weapons.

My line of thinking is to change front row and back row to close range, medium range, and long range. Both heroes and enemies follow these rules. Rather than affecting damage or accuracy, all range determines is who you can shoot at, and where from. We'd list how each weapon type works somewhere, like so:

Small melee weapons can be used from close range to target close or long range enemies. Small melee weapons are knives, shortswords, batons, gauntlets and other handheld weaponry.

Large melee weapons can be used from close range to target close or medium range enemies. Large melee weapons are full-size longswords, battleaxes, warhammers, and weapons designed for combat.

Reach weapons can be used from close range to target medium or long range enemies. Reach weapons are spears, pikes, whips, any long weapon for which reach is a factor.

Small arms can be used from medium range to target close or long range enemies. Small arms are pistols, phasers, revolvers, submachineguns, or any other handheld gun.

Spread weapons can be used from medium range to target close or medium range enemies. Spread weapons are shotguns, flamethrowers, anything that fires in a spread or cone.

Auto weapons can be used from medium range to target medium or long range enemies. Auto weapons are full-size blasters, assault rifles, and other two-handed weapons that fire automatically.

Bow weapons can be used from long range to target close or long range enemies. Bow weapons are longbows, crossbows, compound bows, and other stringed weapons.

Heavy weapons can be used from long range to target close or medium range enemies. Heavy weapons are machineguns, energy cannons, and other oversized weapons of destruction.

Sniper weapons can be used from long range to target medium or long range enemies. Sniper weapons are sniper rifles, slugthrowers, plasma beams, and other long distance precision weaponry.

So instead of defining 'how strong' or 'how accurately' a weapon shoots all people worry about is 'where' a weapon shoots. GMs wouldn't even have to worry about it any more.

Basic template for weapons would then be:

Plasma Longsword (WP: 3, energy damage, large melee weapon)

Cryo Beam (WP: 3, elemental damage, sniper weapon)

Old Revolver (WP: 3, kinetic damage, small arm)

 

Edited December 5, 2018 by CMP

[KotZ]

Made my thoughts in red.

On 12/5/2018 at 8:51 AM, Waterbrick Down said:

I've avoided blasters for the melee "knight" classes, but I'm open stylistically to them. I think the trick to balancing ranged and melee weapons comes down to damage type. We setup a weakness triangle:

Energy: Blasters, Beam Swords 
Kinetic: Bladed Weapons (swords, spears, knives), Crushing weapons (Maces, Staves, Hammers), Crossbow Bolts, Natural Weapons (Claws, Teeth, Talons)
Elemental: Flame Throwers, Ice Guns, Tesla Coils, Magic

As CMP says, why not have some weapons be elemental swords, kinetic guns, energy whatever, etc?

Energy Armor: Weak to Kinetic Weapons
Kinetic Armor: Weak to Elemental Weapons
Elemental Armor: Weak to Energy Weapons

This totally makes sense to me, and I think it's very similar to how Mass Effect does it.

I agree, having something that can accelerate winning battles quickly would be very helpful. One of the RPG systems "13th Age" uses something called an "escalation die". Basically the first round the escalation die is 0, round 2 the die increases to 1 which means everything rolled increases by 1 (i.e. your to-hit values) which results in both the enemies and heroes landing hits more often which accelerates the end of the battle. The escalation die continues to increase to a maximum of 6.

This sounds great, especially for when players reach higher levels.

20 hours ago, CMP said:

That's close to what I've got, but I don't think damage type should be assigned to weapon types. Every class should have the same access to damage types. Like, a pike is a pike, but it could be some sort of plasma pike (energy), or an ice pike (elemental), etc. It shouldn't be able to be changed like enchanting/disenchanting elemental gems, an energy pike should always just be an energy pike, otherwise that defeats the purpose of different armors. 

Agree, class 1 can maybe only access weapon A, but they have access to whatever damage type.

My only issues with the armor is that I don't understand the logic behind it (mostly unimportant) but also that I don't know what elemental armor would entail.  I still think health/armor/shields is the way to go, personally.

Since this is more sci-fantasy, I'm understanding it as things like resistance to Fire/Burning, Ice/Freezing. I would imagine Light would fall under Energy, since physics and all.

Row absolutely does need some sort of overhaul, but I personally still don't like the concept of ranged weapons being inherently different than melee weapons.

My line of thinking is to change front row and back row to close range, medium range, and long range. Both heroes and enemies follow these rules. Rather than affecting damage or accuracy, all range determines is who you can shoot at, and where from. We'd list how each weapon type works somewhere, like so:

Small melee weapons can be used from close range to target close or long range enemies. Small melee weapons are knives, shortswords, batons, gauntlets and other handheld weaponry. How does small target long range? Throwing?

Large melee weapons can be used from close range to target close or medium range enemies. Large melee weapons are full-size longswords, battleaxes, warhammers, and weapons designed for combat.

Reach weapons can be used from close range to target medium or long range enemies. Reach weapons are spears, pikes, whips, any long weapon for which reach is a factor.

Small arms can be used from medium range to target close or long range enemies. Small arms are pistols, phasers, revolvers, submachineguns, or any other handheld gun. Why not medium? I understand balance but I'm not understanding the logic for this one.

Spread weapons can be used from medium range to target close or medium range enemies. Spread weapons are shotguns, flamethrowers, anything that fires in a spread or cone. AOE ones like Bombs work for this?

Auto weapons can be used from medium range to target medium or long range enemies. Auto weapons are full-size blasters, assault rifles, and other two-handed weapons that fire automatically.

Bow weapons can be used from long range to target close or long range enemies. Bow weapons are longbows, crossbows, compound bows, and other stringed weapons. No medium targets?

Heavy weapons can be used from long range to target close or medium range enemies. Heavy weapons are machineguns, energy cannons, and other oversized weapons of destruction.

Sniper weapons can be used from long range to target medium or long range enemies. Sniper weapons are sniper rifles, slugthrowers, plasma beams, and other long distance precision weaponry.

So instead of defining 'how strong' or 'how accurately' a weapon shoots all people worry about is 'where' a weapon shoots. GMs wouldn't even have to worry about it any more.

Basic template for weapons would then be: So much simpler than the previous system, much easier.

Plasma Longsword (WP: 3, energy damage, large melee weapon)

Cryo Beam (WP: 3, elemental damage, sniper weapon)

Old Revolver (WP: 3, kinetic damage, small arm)

 

[Zepher]

I like the idea of making the "types of weapons" work against different types of armor (energy, kinetic, elemental). That is easy. It creates three types of weapon classes, three types of armor classes. Done.

I'm much more opposed to CMP (sorry, we were so in line with what the classes should generally be doing!) reconfiguration of rows. It all feels so complicated. There are ALREADY lots of complicated RPG systems out there. The whole appeal of Heroica, at the beginning, was that it was incredibly simple. We want to keep that simplicity, and more importantly ensure that the simplicity survives to the higher levels.

My suggestion for ranged weapons is much simpler, and was something I thought was dumb when I started Heroica but think would work well now. Ranged weapons consume "bolts" (batteries, arrows, juul pods, whatever flavor text we want). When they're fired, they consume one "bolt". You can buy new bolts between quests. This is useful for three reasons:

1) It's incredibly simple.

2) It makes it so that people carefully consider using ranged weapons. Use a bolt in battle one, you might not have enough in battle three. CONSERVATION is GOOD. It again is my argument with shields. We don't need to make choices more COMPLEX, we need them to be straightforward with extremely obvious rewards but, more importantly, consequences. This means strategy will be easily grasped (which was a problem in later Heroica) but also means that it will still play a vital role.

3) It allows for some improvement, but not a lot. People with less money will be LESS likely to use bolts, that's true, so there will be less of a divide between melee and ranged fighters at the beginning of the game (ranged fighters will often choose to fight from the front row with a melee weapon to conserve ammo). Once there is more money in the game, ranged fighters will be more liberal with using bolts, but that will scale with them - if you use, let's say, 20 bolts per quest you can fight a lot from the back row, but your upkeep will go up as well.

Then we can keep a simple "front row/back row" dichotomy.

I haven't been as involved in this as I want to be, but I would like to be part of making Heroica 2.0. I can't ask you all the slow down, so I will try to contribute more.

My most important thoughts come on the side of classes. I'm largely in line with EXACTLY what CMP was saying. Let's use his guardian class as an example, because I think it's smart (though I will argue, maybe, on a slightly different combination of abilities).

I think each class should have an attack option (that is obviously ATTACK, under CMP's model). Each class should then have an offensive battle modifier (Rally) and a defensive battle modifier (Protect). Again, I'm not married to that exact breakdown - I was actually imagining breaking things down into a simple three class system: Attack, Support, and Defense/Healer, but I can see why CMP's is good as well.

For leveling, I think people should be able to pick any TWO of those three when they start the game, depending on their first class. At level 10, they can gain access to whatever option for their class they didn't originally pick. At level 20, they should be able to open up 1 battle option from ANY OTHER CLASS. This will, I think, mitigate a little of what Flipz was worried about with being stuck with exclusively your original class, while still making you stick with your original choice.

Finally, and this is another sort of radical proposal, but I think players should have something called ACTION POINTS. Each action costs one action point. This would add another stat people could level up. Every character could choose to REST during battle, regaining a set number of action points (number of action points regained with each rest being another thing people could level). My reason for this is the same as all my other proposals - it will be an easy stat for people to learn and strategize around, but will still add another decision with consequences. That's going to be my manta. Simple decisions with clear consequences - easy to learn, allows for lots of strategy and punishment.

Finally, totally unrelated, I like the multiplier idea for round of combat, WBD (I keep almost calling you Skrall...)

[Zepher]

Here is a pitch for a class I considered. It's not quite as flashy as Guardian, and I'd be interested in sprucing it up a little... I have a few more ideas how to do that (maybe each class has 1 attack ability and then 3 "abilities" it can choose between, adding more as it goes along as I outlined above?) I referred to "Armor" as "Shields" throughout.

MECHANICS
Mechanics are masters of Shield Technology, allowing them to both cripple enemies and protect their allies from bodily harm. 

Health Points: 10/10
Armor Points: 10/10
Might: 1
Skill: 1
Initiative: +1
Equipment: Mechanics can wield… some weapons.
Class Traits: Diplomacy, Fortitude, Tactician
Combat Actions:

Mechanic Attack – The hero can attempt to hit an enemy with their weapon, dealing damage.
Dismantle Shields– The hero can attempt to protect an ally or themselves from damage they might take.
Repair Shield– The hero can attempt to rally an ally, improving their combat capabilities.

And that would be basically everything for each class. Somewhere else are class trait descriptions and combat actions such as the following:

ATTACK (Attack)
The hero attempts to hit an enemy with their weapon, dealing damage to the enemy. The success of the roll determines how much, if any, damage is dealt. Any hero may attempt the attack action.

CRITICAL HIT: The hero lands a decisive blow, attacking with strength equal to their weapon power added to twice their might stat. (e.g. WP 3 + might 1 x 2 = 5 damage)
HIT: The hero attacks with strength equal to their weapon power added to their might stat. (e.g. WP 3 + might 1 = 4 damage)
GRAZE: The hero only barely hit their target with strength equal to their weapon power only. (e.g. WP 3 = 3 damage)
MISS: The hero misses their target.
MISS:The hero misses their target
WEAPON FAILURE: The hero misses their target, and their weapon becomes inoperable for the next round.

 

TARGET SHIELDS (Offensive Ability)
The hero may attempt to dismantle enemies’ shields, allowing their allies to do more damage immediately.

SHORT CIRCUIT SHIELD: The hero totally dismantles the target’s shield, reducing it to 0.
FRIED CIRCUIT: The hero locates and destroys a vital circuit in the target’s shield, damaging it with a value equal to five times their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 x 5 = 5 damage to shields)
REND HOLE: The hero uses their special shield splicing tools and opens in the target’s shield, damaging it with a value equal to two times their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 x 2 = 2 damage to shields)
FALTERING TARGET SHILED: The hero deals damage to the target’s shield with a value equal to their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 = 1 Damage)
NO TARGET SHIELD: The hero fails to dismantle its enemies’ shield.
INTERFERENCE: In the chaos of combat the hero presses the wrong button, dealing damage to their own shield with a value of two times their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 x 2 = 2 damage to shields)

 

REPAIR SHIELDS (Defensive Ability)
The hero uses their special shield splicing kit to repair their allies’ shields.

MASTER SHIELD MASON: With a keen eye and swift hands, the Mechanic is able to repair all their allies shields, granting all allies repaired shields with a value equal to twice their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 x 2 = 2 shield points to each ally)
DEFT REPAIR: The hero makes quick work of their ally’s shield, repairing it with a value equal to twice their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 x 2 = 2 shield points to target)
REPAIR: The hero repairs the target’s shield, granting them repaired shields with a value equal to their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 = 1 shield point to target)
BLUNDERING REPAIR: The hero’s hands are shaking with panic, repairing their allies’ shield with a value equal to half their skill stat, rounded down, minimum 1. (e.g. Skill 1 / 2 = 1 shield point to target).
NO REPAIR: The hero fails to repair their ally’s shield.
CUT THE WRONG WIRE: The Mechanic is befuddled by the colors of their ally’s shield’s wires, and ends up cutting the wrong one, dealing damage to their ally’s shield with value equal to their skill stat. (e.g. Skill 1 = 1 shield point to target)

NOTES

Unlike CMP's Guardian, both the Mechanics' (or Shield Mason, as I might want to call them) abilities rely on it's Skill, whereas the Guardian uses both it's armor and it's skill. That's FINE, I think, and I'll point out why: the Guardian will want to buff it's armor, which it can use in combat and with an ability. Alternatively, the Mechanic is less likely to attack, so Armor is less likely to be necessary. The fact that it uses the "skill" modifier for both will give it a different flavor and build than the Guardian.

@CMP - interesting question regarding the Guardian. It's protect uses it's "AP". As it loses AP throughout the battle, does that ability get reflectively worse?

That leads me to another point. What is the difference between Armor/Shields, and health. One potential thing we've suggested is that it armor can be easily regained, but health cannot. That doesn't seem big enough to me, though. Has anyone played Banner Saga? There, Health contributes to attack, so as you grow weaker your attacks do less damage. That might be an interesting addition (on some scale). Otherwise, I don't see much of a point of differentiating them, though I still strongly suggest we do.

[Zepher]

Alright, one final idea for how classes might work in this game.

We put together a series of "dice roll packs". For this example (based on what we have) you'd have the dice roll packs: Protect, Rally, Attack (Guardian Variety), Attack (Mechanic Variety), Target Shields, Repair Shields. We could come up with maybe... let's say 9 more to begin with. Each class would be able to access five total, but you would only start with two and then be able to unlock more as you level up (access to 3 at level 10, 4 at level 20, etc.) This would give classes a lot of variety and customizability, as different combos of roll packs would favor different builds (for example, a level 10 with Rally, Target Shields, and Repair shields would look very different from a level 10 with Protect, Attack, Target Shields). It would still let you have an idea of what you're starting with, but would also let you to grow into your character.

I also have a lot idea for roll dice combos without a particular class to tie it to.

[samurai-turtle]

Part of me not sure what is going on right now with this game. But some ideas I got from other games... 

If any you played Fate: the Traitor Soul (I heard it is similar to Diablo) it has a simple skill tree. So if you want to be better with a hammer, you train for that skill and you would get a +1. And if you want more plus numbers you would train to get that +1 to a +2 hammer. I am assuming all weapons start with a +0. 

As for ranges, Wizardry V (it was on the SNES) had a short, medium and long range weapons. So what I was thinking the closer you are to an enemy the more damage you do. So long range gets a +0. Medium range gets a +1 (I was thinking Spears and Halberds go here). For close range gets a +2. Plus, their would be no defense bonus for being in the long range. 

[CMP]

6 hours ago, Zepher said:

I like the idea of making the "types of weapons" work against different types of armor (energy, kinetic, elemental). That is easy. It creates three types of weapon classes, three types of armor classes. Done.

I'm much more opposed to CMP (sorry, we were so in line with what the classes should generally be doing!) reconfiguration of rows. It all feels so complicated. There are ALREADY lots of complicated RPG systems out there. The whole appeal of Heroica, at the beginning, was that it was incredibly simple. We want to keep that simplicity, and more importantly ensure that the simplicity survives to the higher levels.

My suggestion for ranged weapons is much simpler, and was something I thought was dumb when I started Heroica but think would work well now. Ranged weapons consume "bolts" (batteries, arrows, juul pods, whatever flavor text we want). When they're fired, they consume one "bolt". You can buy new bolts between quests. This is useful for three reasons:

1) It's incredibly simple.

2) It makes it so that people carefully consider using ranged weapons. Use a bolt in battle one, you might not have enough in battle three. CONSERVATION is GOOD. It again is my argument with shields. We don't need to make choices more COMPLEX, we need them to be straightforward with extremely obvious rewards but, more importantly, consequences. This means strategy will be easily grasped (which was a problem in later Heroica) but also means that it will still play a vital role.

3) It allows for some improvement, but not a lot. People with less money will be LESS likely to use bolts, that's true, so there will be less of a divide between melee and ranged fighters at the beginning of the game (ranged fighters will often choose to fight from the front row with a melee weapon to conserve ammo). Once there is more money in the game, ranged fighters will be more liberal with using bolts, but that will scale with them - if you use, let's say, 20 bolts per quest you can fight a lot from the back row, but your upkeep will go up as well.

Then we can keep a simple "front row/back row" dichotomy.

I thought we were trying to fix the ether problem, not replace it with ammo. 

I really am concerned about tying economy so tightly into battle effectiveness...again. I don't really understand what you're going for here. The front row/back row thing was simple...at first. Then it started getting ridiculous. Enemies fighting at range interacting with heroes fighting at range, some enemies ignoring range altogether...it was just one more thing to calculate into damage.

Your idea keeps ranged weapons better than melee, something I REALLY want to avoid, it's one more thing for GMs to keep track of, and, well, I don't think it'll play out like you're thinking. This was the entire concept behind spellcasting, remember? Limited resource for better attacks? And I can't think of a single instance where lack of ether was ever a concern for anybody but minstrels. 

I don't see what is so complicated about the range concept. Row no longer impacts damage, so ranged weapons aren't inherently better, and all range determines is who you can shoot at. There's nothing mechanical about it. Nobody has better damage or takes less damage, there's no ammo to keep track of, and it's not attached to how much money someone does/doesn't have.

From like a really broad standpoint what I am trying to accomplish is that I want weapons to work the SAME as eachother, so that everyone can just use whatever weapons they want and we can give classes weapons that are appropriate, not ones that are best/better.

6 hours ago, Zepher said:

My most important thoughts come on the side of classes. I'm largely in line with EXACTLY what CMP was saying. Let's use his guardian class as an example, because I think it's smart (though I will argue, maybe, on a slightly different combination of abilities).

I think each class should have an attack option (that is obviously ATTACK, under CMP's model). Each class should then have an offensive battle modifier (Rally) and a defensive battle modifier (Protect). Again, I'm not married to that exact breakdown - I was actually imagining breaking things down into a simple three class system: Attack, Support, and Defense/Healer, but I can see why CMP's is good as well.

For leveling, I think people should be able to pick any TWO of those three when they start the game, depending on their first class. At level 10, they can gain access to whatever option for their class they didn't originally pick. At level 20, they should be able to open up 1 battle option from ANY OTHER CLASS. This will, I think, mitigate a little of what Flipz was worried about with being stuck with exclusively your original class, while still making you stick with your original choice.

Finally, and this is another sort of radical proposal, but I think players should have something called ACTION POINTS. Each action costs one action point. This would add another stat people could level up. Every character could choose to REST during battle, regaining a set number of action points (number of action points regained with each rest being another thing people could level). My reason for this is the same as all my other proposals - it will be an easy stat for people to learn and strategize around, but will still add another decision with consequences. That's going to be my manta. Simple decisions with clear consequences - easy to learn, allows for lots of strategy and punishment.

That's basically the levelling process I had in mind, but with only two trees at the start. I personally think attack needs to just be a baseline thing that everyone can do, but I'm not opposed to having new players select one of these trees at start instead of getting both non-attack ones.

Action points is not a good idea. With the way hero turns and enemies turns are now different there IS no punishment for having multiple turns. Multiple actions is just too powerful to be tied into a stat, in my mind. 

5 hours ago, Zepher said:

Here is a pitch for a class I considered. It's not quite as flashy as Guardian, and I'd be interested in sprucing it up a little... I have a few more ideas how to do that (maybe each class has 1 attack ability and then 3 "abilities" it can choose between, adding more as it goes along as I outlined above?) I referred to "Armor" as "Shields" throughout.

Unlike CMP's Guardian, both the Mechanics' (or Shield Mason, as I might want to call them) abilities rely on it's Skill, whereas the Guardian uses both it's armor and it's skill. That's FINE, I think, and I'll point out why: the Guardian will want to buff it's armor, which it can use in combat and with an ability. Alternatively, the Mechanic is less likely to attack, so Armor is less likely to be necessary. The fact that it uses the "skill" modifier for both will give it a different flavor and build than the Guardian.

@CMP - interesting question regarding the Guardian. It's protect uses it's "AP". As it loses AP throughout the battle, does that ability get reflectively worse?

That leads me to another point. What is the difference between Armor/Shields, and health. One potential thing we've suggested is that it armor can be easily regained, but health cannot. That doesn't seem big enough to me, though. Has anyone played Banner Saga? There, Health contributes to attack, so as you grow weaker your attacks do less damage. That might be an interesting addition (on some scale). Otherwise, I don't see much of a point of differentiating them, though I still strongly suggest we do.

I like the concept of granting shields but destroying them is kind of pointless for an action. That's what weapons for, isn't it?  I don't think attack trees should be different at all, that's just going to get terrible to keep track of for GMs. 

Yeah I'm totally on board with classes relying on different stats. It only makes sense.

As I mentioned earlier, the armor/shields/health was my idea to replace the elemental system. I was thinking that each class either uses armor points or shield points, same thing for the most part save for what it's vulnerable to/resistant against.

Kinetic damage is as ancient as the oldest races, but it sure is still effective. Everything from bullets to explosive shrapnel to sticks and rocks and the claws of hostile wildlife is kinetic. Kinetic damage deals 50% more damage to vulnerable health bars, but only deal half as much damage to heavy armor bars. 
Elemental damage is unorthodox, but it’s more than earned its place on the battlefield. Ice such as from cryo weapons, incendiary fire damage, and crippling acid and toxins are all elemental. Elemental damage deals 50% more damage when melting through armor bars, but deals only half damage against shield bars.
Energy damage is the most cutting-edge tech one can efficiently dish out. High-end plasma weaponry, electromagnetic ion weaponry, even antiquated laser ‘beam’ weapons – all of it boils down to energy. Energy damage deals 50% more damage to shield bars, but only half damage against health bars.

WBD's was this:

Energy Armor: Weak to Kinetic Weapons
Kinetic Armor: Weak to Elemental Weapons
Elemental Armor: Weak to Energy Weapons

Which is slightly simpler but doesn't have the, I guess logic behind it? (I get it for balancing reasons but I don't know why energy deals more damage to elemental armor) And I still don't think elemental armor is...a thing? Like I don't really understand conceptually what it would look like. Fire armor?

I can't really quote your post KOTZ, so I'll just throw this in here. I honestly couldn't think of a particularly good reason for how any weapon can only damage close or long range, but like you said, it is for the purpose of balance. I did think about having certain weapons letting you fight from different rows, it's just a matter of making sure everything is balanced. If you've got a suggestion for it I'm all ears, because I'm not totally satisfied with it as it stands either.

[KotZ]

48 minutes ago, CMP said:

I can't really quote your post KOTZ, so I'll just throw this in here. I honestly couldn't think of a particularly good reason for how any weapon can only damage close or long range, but like you said, it is for the purpose of balance. I did think about having certain weapons letting you fight from different rows, it's just a matter of making sure everything is balanced. If you've got a suggestion for it I'm all ears, because I'm not totally satisfied with it as it stands either.

No worries on not quoting. My main issue with is it say you're using a gun/blaster or whatever, why can't you target someone oin the front row/close range, and vice versa, etc. And honestly right now I don't have a suggestion/solution and I'm sorry for that. An idea I have is what's the chance of a physical weapon (sword, knife, polearm, etc) blocking a bullet/plasma bolt like Star Wars? But then that becomes too much for the QM to calculate.

I do love the bullet idea, as I think it would force players when  hey start off to choose how they want to play, and the economy has an effect with buying stuff, etc. Of course enemies can drop rounds or whatever mid quest/after battles, so players can continue their playstyle but not feel forced into playing something they aren't speced to. My first idea is for "guns/blasters/whatever" weapons to have a percentage, as well as swords, etc. The system below is just what I made up right now, probably has no balance and makes no sense, but trying to figure this out.

Close Range, Medium Range, Long range weapons of melee and guns/blasters. Very rudimentary, and I know it's atrocious. I'm saying, what is the point of contact that does damage for melee, and what is the best "quick draw accuracy" for range. I've kinda used your classes for them. They could be combined depeneding on weapon or something. I know none of the following really make sense, and they probably get worse as they go on with my adjustments, and QMs would hate it. Just trying to get an idea.

Close melee weapons: knives, batons, short swords, fists, etc 100% hit first row, 50% hit second, 25% third

Large melee weapons:  long swords, maces, flails, similar, 25% hit first row; 75% hit second, 100% third

Reach weapons: Polearms, whips, similar; 10% first; 60% second row; 100% third

Small arms: Revolvers/pistols, mini-crossbow, wands; 100% close; 50% hit second; 25% third

Spread/Shotgun: 10% First row; 70% medium; 20% long range

Auto weapons/Rifles/Blasters: 5% close; 80% medium; 15% long range

Bow weapons, could honestly go into auto

Heavy weapons: 0% close; 50% medium; 50% long

Sniper weapons; 0% close, 20% medium, 80% long

[Kintobor]

On December 4, 2018 at 10:50 PM, KotZ said:

And please do make some figs! I think we're (collectively) nailing down a feel from both figbarfing and text. I'm definitely going to lean more sci-fi than sci-fantasy, but I think we're close!

You've waited 5000 years, but finally, I present some figbarfs! Behold, two new groups, the Priests of Lorgoloth, and the South Star Mining Corporation!

Priests of Lorgothol, worshippers of the god of disease, pestilence, happiness, friendship, and charity! I definitely went with a Nurgle inspired look, for those who are familiar with Warhammer. I imagine these guys to be all for the spread of disease and illness, but they're also charitable folk who enjoy donating their time and effort to help the poor. After all, Lorgothol is all about spreading those germs, and what better way than contact with others! I'm debating how likely these guys would be available to player characters, as I suppose it depends on how far you want to spread the spreading of illness angle. Needless to say, I wanted to use some of the heads that are a bit harder to use, and I came up with these guys. 

South Star Mining Corporation. Frontiersmen and women who strike out into the airless vacuum of space looking for their fortune on a mining colony. I should've probably made a few dwarves to go with them, but I image these guys to speak with a southern drawl and twang. Most of them grew up poor, and the prospect of making one's fortune on a mining colony drives them to the tough labour and the promise of fortune in mining mithril, adamantine, and other precious metals needed to create space ships. Their higher ups are dwarf nobles whose expertise and tradition in mining has carried over into massive operations. South Star is one of those companies. I imagine whatever organization is going to be our Heroica stand-in will occasionally get call ins from South Star and other mining corporations to perform odd jobs for them. That and I wanted a faction that was easy to build figures for: I think most of us have Power Miners somewhere in our collections, so they're an easy factions to create figures for.

[KotZ]

I like them, especially the background on the Priests. The mining companies would definitely be easy to include in the lore that a lot of people could do... now quick question, are Rock Raiders a rival organization?

[Asphalt]

I think that all of us giving ideas is great, but the only way it is going to get off the ground is if One or a small group of very connected individuals sit down and right it up.  If we try to work as a large group on this it will never happen.  The wide world of us can work on lore and background stories, but the core rules needs to be done by a small group or single individual so that a play testable version can get put together. 

That said, I have started typing up a race for consideration.  Just waiting on a Bricklink order so I can make mock ups.

 

[Waterbrick Down]

So I've been thinking about different systems, what are folks thoughts on a dice pool system? You'd roll a number of d6's, 1-3 is failure, 4-6 success. Then it would be # of success vs difficulty level or an opposed roll against an opponent.

Stats:
HP
Strength (also gives bonus to HP)
Skill (also functions as Initiative)
Smart (also gives bonus to # of proficiencies)

Actions:
Attack: 3 dice+ Strength/Skill/Smart Dice + Proficiency Dice + Weapon Rating vs. 3 dice + Skill Dice + Armor Rating = # of successes = Damage
Defend: Add Skill Attribute Dice to player’s next Defense pool
Rally: Add Smart Attribute Dice to Player’s Attack pool
Magic: 3 dice + Arcana/Nature/Religion Proficiency Dice vs. Spell Difficulty Level
Any other action: 3 dice + Attribute Dice + Proficiency Dice vs Difficulty Level

Difficulty Level
Simple: 1 Successes
Skilled: 3 Successes
Difficult: 5 Successes
Impossible: 7 Successes

Max Dice Pool = 10

Character Creation

Starting Points: 10 points, 2 Proficiencies, 5 HP
Proficiencies cost: 1 point
Attributes cost: 2 point
HP cost: 1 point

Level ups would give points to spend.

Example Proficiencies:
Short Range Weapons
Long Range Weapons
Artillery
Blade Weapons
Blunt Weapons
Athletics
Acrobatics
Sleight of Hand
Stealth
Arcana
History
Investigation
Nature
Religion
Piloting
Insight
Medicine
Perception
Survival
Deception
Intimidation
Performance
Persuasion

[KotZ]

I like the idea of a pice pool, but the xplanations are a little confusing to me (thought that might be because I learn by doing), so I'd love to see an example battle to get a grasp on it. Then would the only stats be HP, Strength, Skill, and Smart? I do also suggest for a proficiency Engineering.

[Waterbrick Down]

1 hour ago, KotZ said:

I like the idea of a pice pool, but the xplanations are a little confusing to me (thought that might be because I learn by doing), so I'd love to see an example battle to get a grasp on it. Then would the only stats be HP, Strength, Skill, and Smart? I do also suggest for a proficiency Engineering.

So Example stats:

Hero A
HP: 11 HP
Strength: 1
Skill: 1
Smarts: 0
Proficiency: Bladed Weapons (1)
Equipped: Beam Sword (2), Impulse Shield (2)

Enemy A
HP: 7
Strength: 2
Skill: 0
Smarts: 0
Proficiency: Bladed Weapons (1)
Equipped: Energy Axe (3), Ion Plating (1)

Round 1
Hero A attacks Enemy A: Hero A's Dice Pool (3 [starting] + 1 [Skill or Strength] + 1 [Bladed Weapons]) vs. Enemy A's Dice Pool (3 [starting] + 0 [Skill]) = Hero A rolls 2 success + 2 Successes (Beam Sword) = 4 vs. Enemy A rolls 1 success + 1 (Ion Plating) = 2 Total Damage = 2 to Enemy A

Enemy A attacks Hero A...

I'm not the biggest fan of the weapon armor interaction, but I'm not sure how to incorporate them yet. The idea is that any player can use their highest stat to attack, but only Skill helps with defense rolls. Strength gives a bonus to HP and Smarts allows for more proficiencies. So characters can invest in Strength and they'll have lots of HP and do well with attacks, but sacrifice going lower in the battle order and not having a lot of proficiencies. Characters that invest in Skill can be good at combat and don't take a lot of damage, but when they do get hit they don't have a lot of extra HP to soak up the damage they also don't have a lot of proficiencies. Characters that invest in Smarts can do well attacking, but don't have a lot of defenses or HP, but are great skill monkies and usually have access to magic.

[Yzalirk]

Hello everyone.

I know I have not posted here in a long time but I checked this section the other day and this thread caught my attention and I just wanted to share a few thoughts.

First, I think it is a very interesting idea to go with a Science-Fantasy theme.  It is very unique.  I think the idea of Dwarves and Orcs in space is brilliant.  I just have a few concerns.  Assuming it is a type of sequel, how will it fit into existing lore?  How will weapons be balanced if there are energy-based weapons and physical-based weapons?  Is there an estimated time for Heroica 2.0 to come into fruition?

Anyways, I am interested to see what you guys come up with.  

[KotZ]

18 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

So Example stats:

Hero A
HP: 11 HP
Strength: 1
Skill: 1
Smarts: 0
Proficiency: Bladed Weapons (1)
Equipped: Beam Sword (2), Impulse Shield (2)

Enemy A
HP: 7
Strength: 2
Skill: 0
Smarts: 0
Proficiency: Bladed Weapons (1)
Equipped: Energy Axe (3), Ion Plating (1)

Round 1
Hero A attacks Enemy A: Hero A's Dice Pool (3 [starting] + 1 [Skill or Strength] + 1 [Bladed Weapons]) vs. Enemy A's Dice Pool (3 [starting] + 0 [Skill]) = Hero A rolls 2 success + 2 Successes (Beam Sword) = 4 vs. Enemy A rolls 1 success + 1 (Ion Plating) = 2 Total Damage = 2 to Enemy A

Enemy A attacks Hero A...

I'm not the biggest fan of the weapon armor interaction, but I'm not sure how to incorporate them yet. The idea is that any player can use their highest stat to attack, but only Skill helps with defense rolls. Strength gives a bonus to HP and Smarts allows for more proficiencies. So characters can invest in Strength and they'll have lots of HP and do well with attacks, but sacrifice going lower in the battle order and not having a lot of proficiencies. Characters that invest in Skill can be good at combat and don't take a lot of damage, but when they do get hit they don't have a lot of extra HP to soak up the damage they also don't have a lot of proficiencies. Characters that invest in Smarts can do well attacking, but don't have a lot of defenses or HP, but are great skill monkies and usually have access to magic.

Ok, I think I'm following.

3 hours ago, Goliath said:

Hello everyone.

I know I have not posted here in a long time but I checked this section the other day and this thread caught my attention and I just wanted to share a few thoughts.

First, I think it is a very interesting idea to go with a Science-Fantasy theme.  It is very unique.  I think the idea of Dwarves and Orcs in space is brilliant.  I just have a few concerns.  Assuming it is a type of sequel, how will it fit into existing lore?  How will weapons be balanced if there are energy-based weapons and physical-based weapons?  Is there an estimated time for Heroica 2.0 to come into fruition?

Anyways, I am interested to see what you guys come up with.  

All I think we've really figured out is sci-fantasy. There's an earlier post about everyone traveling through a portal or similar to fit the existing lore. Everything before that "time" could be filled in at a later date from my understanding. Balancing still ongoing. I don't know if anyone else has an idea of when H2.0 would happen. Personally I would love sooner rather than later, but there's major kinks that need to be worked out. I'm sure WBD has a better idea on that.

[Kintobor]

1 hour ago, KotZ said:

All I think we've really figured out is sci-fantasy. There's an earlier post about everyone traveling through a portal or similar to fit the existing lore. Everything before that "time" could be filled in at a later date from my understanding. Balancing still ongoing. I don't know if anyone else has an idea of when H2.0 would happen. Personally I would love sooner rather than later, but there's major kinks that need to be worked out. I'm sure WBD has a better idea on that.

I don't believe the portal was fundamentally agreed upon, either. 

I can't see it happening until lat 2019, but I'd be more than willing to help hammer some things out, even play-test if need be. I'm going to go over some of the mechanical stuff when I have a chance to.

[samurai-turtle]

I guess this is for @Waterbrick Down didn't you say (a month ago) you would have a first draft of the rules. Because at this time I am a little confused, well about everything (a little bit). 

[Waterbrick Down]

2 hours ago, samurai-turtle said:

I guess this is for @Waterbrick Down didn't you say (a month ago) you would have a first draft of the rules. Because at this time I am a little confused, well about everything (a little bit). 

If I did that was in error. I should be clear, while I'm glad to put forth suggestions and comment on balance for new mechanics of a future game, I will not have the time to lead a Heroica 2.0. Finishing up Heroica 1.0 was taxing enough and with another kid on the way in a few more months, I simply can't commit to even playing much less running right now. Honestly, the break from the daily Heroica post has been very refreshing and while I absolutely love the community we created here, the break has been good. I don't believe the community needs a replacement right away, I think in order to create something that attracts new players and QM's, there needs to be some space between the two games and time to develop a semi-polished rule-set and setting, and have committed people to getting the game off the ground.