Heroes Review

[Zager Krahl]

Well, for the Ice Barbarian, take the example of a Brotherhood Magician casting 'Net' on him.

- 'Net' counts as a ranged attack, and traps the target for 3 rounds of the mage deals more damage than the target
- if cast on the Ice Barbarian, the IB would get to add his rank to his CS for the purpose of determining the 'damage' of the net - and if the ranged attack then deals less damage to the IB than the caster, the 'Net' casting would fail.

At least, that is my interpretation of the discipline.

 

[Random Code]

Hey, sounds like a good idea, those discussion threads.

Yeah, after I've collected my thoughts I may get stuck into those.

 

[Random Code]

In the end I think I'll remove all variable bonuses Classes get from Rank as it's too much unbalanced.

Yeah, I'm certainly going that way as well.

...

Is it worth considering it for 'normal' skill as well, rather than just combat ones? So, where the current rule is half-rank added to dice roll it gets altered to a flat bonus. Although this directly impacts on higher rank characters being better at disciplines than lower ranked ones it removes the scaling issues that we've discussed at higher tiers as their flat bonus would just be larger.

 

[Random Code]

Well, for the Ice Barbarian, take the example of a Brotherhood Magician casting 'Net' on him.

- 'Net' counts as a ranged attack, and traps the target for 3 rounds of the mage deals more damage than the target
- if cast on the Ice Barbarian, the IB would get to add his rank to his CS for the purpose of determining the 'damage' of the net - and if the ranged attack then deals less damage to the IB than the caster, the 'Net' casting would fail.

At least, that is my interpretation of the discipline.

I think that's the way it'd work.

 

[Plageman]

In the end I think I'll remove all variable bonuses Classes get from Rank as it's too much unbalanced.

Yeah, I'm certainly going that way as well.

...

Is it worth considering it for 'normal' skill as well, rather than just combat ones? So, where the current rule is half-rank added to dice roll it gets altered to a flat bonus. Although this directly impacts on higher rank characters being better at disciplines than lower ranked ones it removes the scaling issues that we've discussed at higher tiers as their flat bonus would just be larger.

I think I'm gonna follow the way it was done in the original gamebook and assign the bonus between +1 and +3 depending on how well the Aspect/Discipline to the Test.

 

[Random Code]

I think I'm gonna follow the way it was done in the original gamebook and assign the bonus between +1 and +3 depending on how well the Aspect/Discipline to the Test.

... Which is what is used in the introductory scenario in the main rules as well.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Re: Dwarven Gunner

Firstly, whenever LW encounters a Bor Musket in the books, it usually kills him/someone else with one shot - so the (+Rank) CS and (+Rank) EN damage sound plausible.

Secondly - ranged attacks cannot be made at point blank range, so unless the Gunner has some mean close combat skills, he'll probably end up being swamped after killing the first target at range. For that matter, does the Gunner have any skills to help him in close combat?

 

[Random Code]

Re: Dwarven Gunner

Firstly, whenever LW encounters a Bor Musket in the books, it usually kills him/someone else with one shot - so the (+Rank) CS and (+Rank) EN damage sound plausible.

That's true the are lethal but the bonuses are extreme even for that and leave no room for progression.

Secondly - ranged attacks cannot be made at point blank range, so unless the Gunner has some mean close combat skills, he'll probably end up being swamped after killing the first target at range. For that matter, does the Gunner have any skills to help him in close combat?

Yep, but this is a group game. My experience is that such characters (rightly) get protected and so what you've described would not be the norm. Remember also that other PCs could engage all the opponents and then let the gunner pick them off one at a time. Even with the minuses of firing into mixed combat its still completely viable and successful.

The point is, the rules don't appear to have been playtested thoroughly. They promote a specific style of play which I think detriments the game.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Well, I don't have HoM yet so this might be a stupid question - musket ammo? How much, and how often can it be replenished?

 

[Plageman]

I think I'm gonna follow the way it was done in the original gamebook and assign the bonus between +1 and +3 depending on how well the Aspect/Discipline to the Test.

... Which is what is used in the introductory scenario in the main rules as well.

exactly

 

[Random Code]

... Which is what is used in the introductory scenario in the main rules as well.

exactly

Heh, heh.

I wonder why they altered the rules to go with the half-rank bonus rather than stick with the +1 or +3 that can still be found in the scenario... Hmmm.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Half-rank makes more sense to me, as it represents someone at rank 10 begin better at a certain discipline than someone at rank 1. Fixing the bonus makes more sense for a discipline that represents a fixed body of skills (like +2CS on Kai 'Weaponskill) than for something where the discipline represents an improvement in technique/experience with ranks (like Kai 'Tracking').

 

[phantomdoodler]

Just got my copy of heroes and having thumbed through each class, so these are my first impressions:

Kloon Sage - great to see a new race to play. They are described as green skinned (and crimson eyed) in the Kingdoms of Terror, but actually i prefer them in this guise, more dwarfish (or possibly gnomish).

Ice Barbarian - again, good to see another race. Would have been nice to see a shamanic variant, but nice class.

Brother of the Crystal Star - I like the flexible use of magic with this class. I would have included a Crystal Star Pendant with the starting equipment though (one reroll per adventure)

Herbwarden - Think they got this right, but would have liked them to be able to produce non-healing potions, such as sleeptooth brew etc

Dwarven Gunner of Bor - Good class, although essentially the same as the d20 version. I think they should have offered more than 10 disciplines, using the other d20 abilities, such as Shatter Shot , Smoke Shot, Roar of command and Expert Smithing.

Knight of the White Mountain - Good to see this class - I think they should have offered additional disciplines linked with the three types, so ranger abilities for Skies etc

Vakaros Warrior-Mage - by far my least favourite class - this is similar to the d20 version, which I didnt like either. I wish they had included the Old kingdom battle magics, depicted in Jungle of Horrors, and the grandmaster books : Invisible Fist, Penetrate, Halt Missile, etc. At least the name is right this time round.

Magician Of Dessi - I guess i have to accept the fact they once again ripped off grey star, but the abilities are too good for one npc, so I understand why. What happenend to Evocation though? Seems to have become Sorcery (which has become a healing ability), rather than the power to commune with the dead. And I think the Alchemy Discipline should do a lot more than make Endurance or Willpower potions - more like the grey star use, creating potions from herbs etc.

Telchoi Warrior - similiar to the d20 version, but still pretty good. Wish they were called Telcharim Warrior though.

Buccaneer of Shadaki - I like this class, and can be used for other pirates, such as Buccaneer of Lakuri etc.

Border Ranger - Good to finally see a ranger type (other than Kai). Now if we could have a rogue and a priest, all areas would be covered...

Knight of the Realm - I am not a huge fan of this class, but if you want a chivalric knight, you cant go too far wrong.

Overall, I think where possible, for greater customization, each class should provide 15 or more Disciplines so you dont have to choose the same ones as other characters of that class.

Character sheets - atrocious!

Equipment - I was a little disappointed with the new equipment charts - not for scope though. The range is impressive I admit. No, my main gripe is inconsistency between this and the other 2 books. For example the humble arrow , which depending what book you use, either costs 1 GC each, 1 GC for 6, or 1 GC for 12. A chain mail vest costs 45, 50 or 80 Gcs, a Shortsword costs 7 or 25 Gcs etc. That to me is a little annoying.


I think this is a mixed bag for me, but overall, I think its pretty good -there are some things i am keen on, others I am not. Definitely of use, in terms of invaluable background on the new classes though, so I think its worth purchasing, and it offers a good range of characters to choose from, which is really important.

 

[Random Code]

Half-rank makes more sense to me, as it represents someone at rank 10 begin better at a certain discipline than someone at rank 1. Fixing the bonus makes more sense for a discipline that represents a fixed body of skills (like +2CS on Kai 'Weaponskill) than for something where the discipline represents an improvement in technique/experience with ranks (like Kai 'Tracking').

That could just as easily be prescribed to Weaponskill though? Why is Weaponskill a flat +2 and Tracking half rank? I don't see the logic.

I agree with Plageman on the +1 and +3 option. They use that in the introductory adventure as well but for some reason have changed it.

 

[phantomdoodler]

I agree with this level of bonus because by the time you get to Rank 10, you will pretty much achieve any roll you make, except for the toughest ones. If you then move into Magnakai disciplines, its not even worth rolling for.

You could even add 1/4 your Rank, rounding up. So 1-4 equals +1, 5 to 8 +2, 9-12 +3, 13-16 +4 and 17-20, +5

 

[Zager Krahl]

Well, every time you finish one Tier, the bonuses from that Tier could become fixed at a certain level, while bonuses for the current (new) Tier become variable.

For example:
- As a Kai Lord, 'Hunting' gives you a bonus to tests equal to [half Tier I rank]
- As a Magnakai Lord, 'Huntmastery' gives you a bonus to tests equal to [half Tier II rank] PLUS you get an additional +2 for having 'Hunting' (Tier I)
- As a Grand Master, 'Grand Huntmastery' gives you a bonus to tests equal to [half Tier III rank] PLUS you get an additional +2 for having 'Hunting' (Tier I) PLUS you get an additional +3 for having 'Huntmastery' (Tier II)

This might seem overwhelming when you look at the Tier III bonuses - [half rank] +5 - but at that point your Kai will be able to do things in his sleep that would have required massive effort at Tier I.

Alternatively, instead of a fixed +2 at Tier I and a +3 at Tier II, the [half rank] bonus could use your cumulative rank at that point - i.e. a Magnakai rank 7 would have a total rank of 17, so the bonus would be +8.

 

[Random Code]

They use that in the introductory adventure as well but for some reason have changed it.

I dislike quoting myself but in Terror of the Darklords, all the skill checks involving Kai disciplines are stated as +2 which could mean the half rank bonus but that's a large assumption to make (ie, that characters are still 5th rank) when you consider that the introductory adventure within the main rulebook would make them 6th rank and give them a +3 bonus to skill checks and which TotD logically follows on from. Also, when the +2 bonus is stated there doesn't appear to be any mention that this is based on that assumption so its unclear as to why its +2 and not stated as rank/2, or as +1 (for a slightly related skill) and +3 (for a strongly related skill).

I'm certainly going with Plageman on this and adopting the +1 and +3 rule and support what Phantom said earlier on this. Additionally, going this way, these bonuses could simply be increased for higher Tier characters (eg, Tier 1 characters to +2 and +4, Tier 3 character to +4 and +6 for instance) and their disciplines to allow for simulating their increase in power and capability, which seems far simpler than fixing the previous tier(s) bonus(es) and then adding half-rank for the current tier.

I'm really getting disappointed with these rules now. Not the nature of their simplicity but due to the fact that for such simple rules, they haven't been proofed (as the above half rank, or +1/+3 shows) or possibly even play tested to any degree.

 

[Zager Krahl]

I've found that using half rank, rounded down, works fine on most tests. It is when you start using pure rank (no dividing, no rounding) that some disciplines becoming overpowering...

 

[Plageman]

When you use 1/2 Rank (or Rank) it poses a problem because of the Difficulty scale as each point you add actually give you 10% more chance of success. Add to that the rollercoaster bonus: raise to +5 a Tier I, then drop to 0 until you get the corresponding Tier IIDiscipline then raise up to +5 again, etc.

If you add a flat bonus, you can make it stick until improved (like Weaponskill > Weaponmastery) or simply assign it on the spot (giving +1 to the Test if you have the Tier I Discipline rather than giving a +3 for having the required Tier II Discipline).

 

[Random Code]

Absolutely.

I really am curious as to why Mongoos altered the +1/+3 bonuse to a half rank one. I see no reason behind it. It actually makes scaling more difficult with Tier I, II, and III. With the +1/+3 bonus they can simply be increased for their more powerful Tier II and III equivalent disciplines and the increased bonus will slide probability of success along perfectly to demonstrate higher tier characters dealing with more difficult tasks and completing easier ones 'in their sleep'.