Heroes Review

[Zager Krahl]

Half rank bonuses make PERFECT sense for scaling - at Tier II, rank 3, your total rank is 13 (10 Tier I + 3 Tier II = 13), so your half-rank bonus is 6. Same for Tier III (e.g. rank 7 gives total rank of 27, so bonus is 13).There is no "roller-coaster" effect as Plageman claims.

Also, having bonuses independent of rank means that someone taking the Discipline at rank 1 is JUST AS GOOD there-in 9 levels later when they reach rank 10 - which completely ignores any concept of "getting better with experience" and the like.

 

[Plageman]

Half rank bonuses make PERFECT sense for scaling - at Tier II, rank 3, your total rank is 13 (10 Tier I + 3 Tier II = 13), so your half-rank bonus is 6. Same for Tier III (e.g. rank 7 gives total rank of 27, so bonus is 13).There is no "roller-coaster" effect as Plageman claims.

Also, having bonuses independent of rank means that someone taking the Discipline at rank 1 is JUST AS GOOD there-in 9 levels later when they reach rank 10 - which completely ignores any concept of "getting better with experience" and the like.

Well I only assume that the folks at Mongoose are following the way the original gamebooks worked that is to say that at each Tier (Kai, Magnakai, Grandmaster) your Rank starts back to one. After all up until now almost all the rules found in the core MPG are copy paste of the ones found the original series.

As you note scaling only work if the Rank progression is uninterrupted as it is in other class-based rpg. However in that case they will have to release a new Difficulty Chart because if you have +13 Discipline Bonus the 1-10 scale is completely off.

Now about the static Discipline bonuses, the original system made these progress when you learned the superior Tier corresponding Discipline which is the mechanism we expect to see in later material. For example your Kai Lord may start with Weaponskill in Sword (+2 bonus) and will see it improve when he learns the Weaponmastery Discipline (+3 bonus) at Tier II and again when he learn Grand Weaponmastery (+5 bonus) at Tier III. Also starting at Tier II, each new Rank you get improve what you can do with the Disciplines you know.

In doubt check the books on Project Aon.

 

[Zager Krahl]

The crux of the argument is that we cannot fault their decision to use the half-rank system until we have seen how the game mechanics progress to Tier II and III. If the rank system is uninterrupted, then my explanation from my previous post will probably be the case - i.e. your Tier II rank will be 10+, and your Tier III rank will be 20+.

Also, I know about certain Disciplines giving a fixed bonus - like Weaponskill - but that goes back to my original point as to what type of skill/knowledge/experience the Discipline represents:
- fixed set of skills, regardless of experience: Discipline gives fixed bonus
- skills that can improve with experience: Discipline gives increasing bonus

Weaponskill would be an example of a fixed-skill Discipline, since there is only so much that a Kai Lord can learn at Tier I about a given weapon and its fighting style - and he needs to learn all of it before he can attain the Weaponskill Discipline.

Tracking would be an example of a variable-skill Discipline. A Kai Lord would learn the rudimentary skills of tracking to attain the Discipline - but as he progresses through the ranks, these skills would be augmented by real-life experience, and the increasing bonus would then be justifiable.

Ultimately though, I think it comes down to game-breaking, and preventing it - having a CS bonus that increases with rank can easily unbalance the class, and make certain Disciplines more appealing at the cost of other Disciplines never being chosen. Take the Dwarven Gunner, with skills that allow him to add his rank to CS and/or to damage dealt and/or to multiply the damage he deals - how likely is it that someone playing a Gunner will not take those Disciplines, hmm?

 

[Plageman]

The crux of the argument is that we cannot fault their decision to use the half-rank system until we have seen how the game mechanics progress to Tier II and III. If the rank system is uninterrupted, then my explanation from my previous post will probably be the case - i.e. your Tier II rank will be 10+, and your Tier III rank will be 20+.

As I said elsewhere official products do not follow this rule so I hardly see why it even exists. To me it seems as if they were unable to chose between keeping straight the original system and introducing some D20 concepts.

There is a lot of grey zone in the rules like Initiative or damage multiplying, all in all I feel that the what the game is seriously lacking is examples or at least a FAQ clarifying the mechanisms. All of these could be included in a later issue of S&P.

For example take the Gunner of Bor. He gets add his Rank to the "total damage" but when shooting with a Bor Musket he also get triple damage. So how is that calculated: (Damage + Rank) x 3 or (Damage X 3) + Rank ?

 

[Methos]

For example take the Gunner of Bor. He gets add his Rank to the "total damage" but when shooting with a Bor Musket he also get triple damage. So how is that calculated: (Damage + Rank) x 3 or (Damage X 3) + Rank ?

without having the book i would say (damage x3) + rank, cause i think for a starting character a 15 damage bonus is far to much

 

[Zager Krahl]

The little experience I have with RPG's would state that multipliers come before additions, for exactly the reason Methos stated - to prevent overwhelming stacking effects.

But ja, like Plageman said - an official word from Mongoose would be useful in this regard.

 

[Random Code]

Also, I know about certain Disciplines giving a fixed bonus - like Weaponskill - but that goes back to my original point as to what type of skill/knowledge/experience the Discipline represents:
- fixed set of skills, regardless of experience: Discipline gives fixed bonus
- skills that can improve with experience: Discipline gives increasing bonus

Capability with a weapon also increases with skill just like tracking (as an example).

Weaponskill would be an example of a fixed-skill Discipline, since there is only so much that a Kai Lord can learn at Tier I about a given weapon and its fighting style - and he needs to learn all of it before he can attain the Weaponskill Discipline.

That logic just as easily applies to other skills.

Tracking would be an example of a variable-skill Discipline. A Kai Lord would learn the rudimentary skills of tracking to attain the Discipline - but as he progresses through the ranks, these skills would be augmented by real-life experience, and the increasing bonus would then be justifiable.

Again, that can just as easily apply to Weaponskill. Depends on how you want to set up your standpoint.

Ultimately though, I think it comes down to game-breaking, and preventing it - having a CS bonus that increases with rank can easily unbalance the class, and make certain Disciplines more appealing at the cost of other Disciplines never being chosen. Take the Dwarven Gunner, with skills that allow him to add his rank to CS and/or to damage dealt and/or to multiply the damage he deals - how likely is it that someone playing a Gunner will not take those Disciplines, hmm?

... Only because other CS based skills don't increase at the same rate. If they did then the disciplines that have rank or half-rank progression would not be so broken. If they progressed at the same rate (ie, if there was consitency across all disciplines) then these wouldn't be as attractive, but then you'd have to pick them to maintain competitiveness. Which is the exact same problem for all disciplines - eg, PCs have to pick tracking if they want to still be relevant when tracking rolls are required. With a +1/+3 mechanic that still allows for PCs with no bonus to compete but when we get into the realms of greater half-rank bonuses that isn't the case.

The gamebooks got around the +1/+3 issue that you state earlier (ie, that it allows for no experience growth) by letting abilities grow with rank (ie, sixth sense interacted with the Sommerswerd more if you were a certain rank). Other options are available than just increasing bonuses to rolls. There is obviously a lot of preference involved in what you go with though.

However you look at it though, Mongoose have dropped the ball here. The rules say one thing, the scenarios say two different things. For such a simple rule system that's pretty crap and amateurish.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Ja, it depends on which side of the coin you are looking at I guess. Either way, I prefer the half-rank bonuses for no other reason than they are easy to keep track of - you do not need to constant check back to the Discipline text to see what the size of the bonus is. Also, the half-rank system makes a skill worth-while to pick - to take your example, if 'Tracking' only gave a +1 bonus regardless of rank, then a level 10 Kai Lord would be only 10% better (on a 10-point scale) at tracking than a level 1 character.

Regarding the scenarios giving different rules: sloppy in hindsight yes, but at the time there was only 1 character class available, and it could be that play-testing for HoM showed that the classes need bigger bonuses to differentiate them - and therefore the shift to half-rank bonuses.

 

[Random Code]

Ja, it depends on which side of the coin you are looking at I guess. Either way, I prefer the half-rank bonuses for no other reason than they are easy to keep track of - you do not need to constant check back to the Discipline text to see what the size of the bonus is. Also, the half-rank system makes a skill worth-while to pick - to take your example, if 'Tracking' only gave a +1 bonus regardless of rank, then a level 10 Kai Lord would be only 10% better (on a 10-point scale) at tracking than a level 1 character.

Yeah, the lack of experience growth in disciplines does grate with me in adopting some kind of fixed bonus option, but the half-rank option grates even more in other respects so I'm kind lumbered with the lesser of two evils there. Aaargh!

I may look at expanding out the discipline usage to be more effective in more areas as a PC grows in experience but that's a LOT of work so I'm pretty much discounting that as I type this!

So... I think, for me, a way to go would be to use Aspects and award those when a character increases in rank rather than front loading them all at the beginning of character generation, this should help in simulating some kind of experience growth. Then there's the increased number of disciplines that are actually known that support that too.

Regarding the scenarios giving different rules: sloppy in hindsight yes, but at the time there was only 1 character class available, and it could be that play-testing for HoM showed that the classes need bigger bonuses to differentiate them - and therefore the shift to half-rank bonuses.

Yeah, it'd be nice to hear from the developers in order to get some insights. Also, to see how the rules are going to work at higher tiers so that we understand where things are heading.

 

[The Wolf]

Heroes didn't exist when the MPGB scenarios were written, which were based on the system in the MPGB. Terror came after and was written by a different author.

The LWMPGB uses a system that's an iteration of the original gamebooks, not surprising really when you look at /who/ actually wrote the LWMPGB.

 

[Random Code]

Heroes didn't exist when the MPGB scenarios were written, which were based on the system in the MPGB. Terror came after and was written by a different author.

The LWMPGB uses a system that's an iteration of the original gamebooks, not surprising really when you look at /who/ actually wrote the LWMPGB.

Cheers Wolf.

Can you comment at all on the seemingly contradictory rules regarding bonuses to actions from disciplines.

1) We have half-rank, full rank, or +2 in many of the discuipline descriptions. Then in those rules we have a general half-rank application.

But...

2) In the intro scenario we have a +1 (for slightly applicable disciplines), +3 (for applicable disciplines) and/or no bonus to tests involving certain disciplines (eg, Animal Kinship).

Then...

3) In Terror of the Darklords this moves to a flat +2 bonus.

 

[Zager Krahl]

You have two options, essentially:

1) For scenario X, use the rules as written for scenario X ("When in Rome, do as the Romans")

2) Consider the rules from the latest release as canon, i.e. superseding all before it. In that case, HoM becomes the Bible until the next release shows up.

 

[Random Code]

You have two options, essentially:

1) For scenario X, use the rules as written for scenario X ("When in Rome, do as the Romans")

2) Consider the rules from the latest release as canon, i.e. superseding all before it. In that case, HoM becomes the Bible until the next release shows up.

Yeah, I was more trying to find out the reasoning, etc... You know, being nosey!

 

[The Wolf]

The first time I saw TotD was when I met the author in person at a convention, we got to chatting and so on, but I didn't get a chance to read through it until later on.

This was after the Intro scenarios had been written and published, and in the case of those, they were designed/pitched and written for new players and GM's. That was the brief basically, make it as simple as possible for new gamers to get into the game.

I didn't have to go epic (that's TotD domain) or create anything that was long term. Though the author of TotD (Pete Nash) did a great job running with Master Stormsong and incorporating him into the scenario, something I didn't expect at all.

I did kind of expect, upon hearing about Heroes that they might do something else with the system that contradicts what had been written previously, the only thing you can do is as Zager suggests and that's use the latest book as the new rules bible.

I don't think (unless they've been added by Joe) there's any new rules in Sommerlund for you to worry about, that's pure source material and detail for the Kingdom of Sommerlund itself and the people therein.

I can't truly comment on any of the new books that may be coming, save that I've stuck as closely as I can to the gamebooks and iterated where possible in regards to the Bestiary.

I think everyone involved with the Lone Wolf RPG in the new iteration is basically taking steps, small ones at that, to try and produce a faithful representation to the gamebooks and Joe's world as possible.

Not an easy task with rules lite, it never is.

 

[The Wolf]

For example take the Gunner of Bor. He gets add his Rank to the "total damage" but when shooting with a Bor Musket he also get triple damage. So how is that calculated: (Damage + Rank) x 3 or (Damage X 3) + Rank ?

without having the book i would say (damage x3) + rank, cause i think for a starting character a 15 damage bonus is far to much

I've always done similar. I don't have the book either, but that's how I would do it. (Damage x3) + Rank.

 

[Random Code]

Thanks Wolf, that response is really appreciated.

I think I'll be ignoring a lot of the 'bible' - never been much for religion! :wink: Seriously though, its nice to know how the contradictions came about and it is good to see the differences as it allows us all to pick ones we like, the beauty being that with a rule lite system the impact of system changes can easily be seen.

Interesting little tidbits about Sommerlund and the Bestiary as well. Thanks.

 

[The Wolf]

I've also always looked at rules system (any of them, even D&D 4E) as tools, pick and choose what you want, what works and if it doesn't, well as long as you have a handle on the system, iterate to your hearts content.

You're more than welcome.

I'm a fan of simple mainly, +1 - +3 and so on, compared to other ideas that might slow play down, or put off a new player. So that's how I've always done things.

It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but if it works for the majority of people - that's me happy.

 

[Plageman]

One of the main reason we cannot agree on what to do, is that we only have the first Tier of the system. Unless we get more informations about the MagnaKai Tier and the change the folks at Mongoose will introduce with it, all the bets are off.

 

[Xex]

I use the 'add half your Kai's rank to the Test' rule myself. Its also what I used in the S&P adventure 'Murder at the Tourney'

 

[The Wolf]

One of the main reason we cannot agree on what to do, is that we only have the first Tier of the system. Unless we get more informations about the MagnaKai Tier and the change the folks at Mongoose will introduce with it, all the bets are off.

You know in the old days, the Red Box D&D set only supported levels 1 - 3 and we had to wait quite a while for the intermediate and master books. I doubt you'll hear anything yet about the MagnaKai Tier yet if those rules are in playtesting. No doubt they're under NDA.

Me I'm just happy there's a new Lone Wolf RPG and people are supporting it with materials.