HQ25 - The great TO-DO list

[Goblin-King]

Really? I would have thought Mohawk's rule was very clear.

All dwarfs who are touching another dwarf get +1D. That means both dwarf 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Daedalus' example.
It doesn't matter from where they are being attacked; frontal, diagonal or shot at... Teamwork bonus always applies.
If you need to explain it, just go for the old "the characters aren't actually standing still taking turns, but are actively running around fighting".

I don't really think it's necessary to flesh this rule more out - but IF I'm alone in thinking this I'd rather see it being explained better to avoid confusion than making it more complex.

[cynthialee]

I just can't see them being of any assistance if they can not also attack the hero. It just becomes cheese if a line of dwarves in a hallway could imbue on the front dude a grip of extra dice, they are no where near enough to the combat to be effective.

[Count Mohawk]

I see I have some new inputs to comment on! Let me see about them in turn order:

Swamp Summons: This spell conjures up a group of putrid undead to attack the caster's enemies. (Swamp Skeletons and Zombies have 1 extra Body Point. Place them adjacent to the caster.) Roll one red die:
Roll 1 or 2 = 3 Skeletons
Roll 3 or 4 = 2 Skeletons, 1 Zombie
Roll 5 or 6 = 3 Skeletons, 2 Zombies

I'm not sold on this one because it's too similar to "Summon Undead", and probably slightly more powerful at that (you get fewer minions, but they have more BP). I forget, are the Kobolds swamp-themed? If so, we could kill two stones with one bird by replacing this spell with "Summon Kobolds" instead. The other Swamp Spells are fine as edited.

As for the large-monster rule from the BQP, I'd include it to accomodate the stance of most any Minotaur figure out there--a single-square base won't cut it. Large Monster allows for diagonal attacks, something which had already been suggested for the Minotaur in this thread.

I hadn't considered that, but I agree that Minotaurs are the most likely to be Large out of the six new monsters we have here.

4.

Chaos Cultist
Mv 7 | At 1 | De 1 | Bo 1 | Mi 3

Chaos Cultist
M7 | A1 | D2 | BP1 | MP3

I'm for M7, as elite Sorcerers move 8. I like D2 as a Cultist should be tougher than a small Goblin.

I think there should probably be fewer Cultist models than Kobolds to highlight the Kobolds' strength. For that reason, I'd assign Cultists 2 Defend Dice. Also, Cultists with 2 Defend Dice won't encourage door-guarding because Heroes will want to kill them quickly before they can hit from afar with their special ability much.

I guess I can agree that random spells for Cultists isn't the way to go, though I don't mind Count Mohawk's suggestion of 3 specific Chaos spells. I now am of the opinion that spell casting should remain in the domain of Quest Notes with (Cultist) Sorcerers. I've worked up some seperate, alternate ability suggestions. One would suffice for the general Cultist:

• Doom- Instead of attacking, each turn a single Cultist may direct a wave of despair upon one Hero so that he defends with only one combat die. The effect can be broken at once or on a later turn by the Hero rolling one red die for each of his Mind Points. If a 6 is rolled, the effect is broken. (The tougher the Hero, the more effective the spell. This makes a Cultist's weak attack more effective at any Quest power level and makes monster team-ups scarier.)
• Mask of Chaos- Instead of attacking, each turn a single Cultist may focus untold horror upon one Hero. The victim must reroll any successfull Attack and Defend Dice on his next turn, accepting the second result.
• Corruption- Instead of attacking, each turn a single Cultist may channel profane power upon one Hero which inflicts 1 Body Point of damage for each Cultist in the room or corridor. The victim may resist by immediately rolling one red die for each of his Mind Points. For each 5 or 6 rolled, the damage is reduced by 1 point. (This is a mash-up of GK and CM's suggestions.)

I prefer the NA use of red dice to resist abilities and spells, as this reserves combat dice solely for defense in combat or avoiding trap damage. This insures a player won't roll a Hero's Defend Dice by mistake (as a matter of habit) to resist magic effects. Maybe this isn't an issue--I dunno. Anyway, I'm used to NA styling and prefer to see it used as a whole with the NA rules.

I would probably reword some of those spell-like abilities above, but I like the concepts offered. That said, only Corruption fits the flavor requirement of "Cultists work together to cast their ritual", and it's pretty much outright stronger than their current ability of Dark Bolt (about twice as strong, actually, since each Cultist contributes 1 BP of damage instead of E( ) = 0.5 BP of damage).

5.

Kobold (Reptilian?)
Mv 9 | At 1 | De 2 | Bo 1 | Mi 1
A Kobold rolls one extra Combat Die when attacking a Hero for each other Kobold adjacent to that Hero.
I bumped the Kobolds up to 9 move as a minor aesthetic thing. 8 Move (or 1 Defense if you go that route) is perfectly acceptable. I suggest that only one of the Kobolds and the Cultists should have 2 Defense, though. As for the ability, note that four Kobolds moving to surround a Hero will attack with 1, 2, 3 and then 4 dice, which on average is less damaging than 4 Orcs. If the 4 Kobolds start adjacent to the same Hero, that's a different story - but that also requires either horrible attack roll luck or abject Hero stupidity.

I like the Kobold as the smaller pushover with 1 Defend Die--I expect there will sometimes be a lot of them, and they will need to be cleared quickly for good game flow and more stable combat results. Also, I think 1 Defend Die works better to invite a quick-kill strategy over a boring door-guard.

The EU rules state, "He [the evil wizard player] moves each monster in turn," which insures each monster moves and attacks seperately. Unfortunately, the NA rules lack such specificity. With the NA rules, it is possible that when Zargon "moves every monster on the gameboard" 4 Kobolds in a room could first surround a Hero. Then, "...each monster may...attack," all with 4 Attack Dice in the same initial turn. Some rewording of the abilily is in order to guarantee the EU-guided intent within both rulesets. My new Kobold:

Kobold

Mv:8 At:1 De:1 BP:1 MP:1, Moving in turn, each Kobold attacking a Hero rolls one extra combat die for every other Kobold adjacent to that Hero.

I think this ability works great, but am a bit disappointed that it would over-power Summon Kobolds, a spell I'd like to have seen added to the Swamp or Chaos spell groups. Still, a better ability should trump a spell.

The problem with the wording of the Kobold ability is that the wording of the main rule set could be taken to imply that the Evil Wizard player can move all his figures and then attack with them after setting them up, which means that there's not actually a problem with the wording of the Kobold ability! (Although replacing "each" with "every" is fine.)


The Basilisk: Of the three options you mention, I like the middle one the most, with a minor rewording to make it use fewer words. (This is probably because it's just my version, edited to actually deal damage in addition to stunning.)

A Basilisk may attack with its petrifying gaze, rolling 3 combat dice against any one Hero it can "see." The Hero defends with Combat Dice equal to his Mind Points. If the victim loses any Body Points this way, he loses his next turn. A Hero and his equipment are turned to stone if the Hero's Body Points are reduced to zero this way. Does not affect artifacts.

And finally, the Chaos Dwarf. We can change their MP back to 2 as per Daedalus' suggestion about the symmetry with the Elven monsters. I worded their ability the way I did for simplicity's sake, although you're quite right that in a more realistic setting, a Dwarf standing behind his fellow while the Heroes attack from the front are not nearly as able to jump in and help defend.

I just can't see them being of any assistance if they can not also attack the hero. It just becomes cheese if a line of dwarves in a hallway could imbue on the front dude a grip of extra dice, they are no where near enough to the combat to be effective.

That would be funny for the first couple of turns, though. Fortunately, the ability can only grant one extra Defend Die total, which caps a Chaos Dwarf's defense power at 5.

Can I just express my gratitude for keeping this thing going daedalus? I've slacked off SO badly... Occupied by so many things lately.
Still want to do those graanskin quests. Keep it up!!!

Yeah, you do that. For the record, I'm still planning to submit one or two Quests for the final arc (Quests 19-25); I'm just waiting on a few more Quests getting posted first. Thankfully, I have a large project of my own to occupy my time in the meantime.

[Daedalus]

I'm not sold on this one because it's too similar to "Summon Undead", and probably slightly more powerful at that (you get fewer minions, but they have more BP). I forget, are the Kobolds swamp-themed? If so, we could kill two stones with one bird by replacing this spell with "Summon Kobolds" instead. The other Swamp Spells are fine as edited.

Indeed Swamp Summons is Summon Undead tweaked to fit the Swamp Zombie/Marsh Skeleton idea. The main difference is the aforementioned Body Points and lack of Mummies for theme. I agree Summon Kobolds would work well for the ambush/closing horde in the swamp idea. Summoning Swamp Zombies/Marsh Skeletons can be included with Summon Undead as a Quest Note instead if they are desired.

...

• Corruption- Instead of attacking, each turn a single Cultist may channel profane power upon one Hero he can "see" [edit] which inflicts 1 Body Point of damage for every each other [edit] Cultist in the room or corridor. The victim may resist by immediately rolling one red die for each of his Mind Points. For each 5 or 6 rolled, the damage is reduced by 1 point. (This is a modified mash-up of GK and CM's suggestions.)...

I would probably reword some of those spell-like abilities above, but I like the concepts offered. That said, only Corruption fits the flavor requirement of "Cultists work together to cast their ritual", and it's pretty much outright stronger than their current ability of Dark Bolt (about twice as strong, actually, since each Cultist contributes 1 BP of damage instead of E( ) = 0.5 BP of damage).

Their strength is an issue, so I figure we should limit their number to 3 or 4 (gray?) figures in the expansion (expansions generally include just a few of each new monster.) Their weak combat attacks are easily avoided, so I'd like to see them compensated with an ability that put them on par with a like number of Orcs over a combat. Would this be too much, considering how difficult it will be to avoid their ranged attack? Maybe you could compare the numbers to find an appropriate figure limit. A bit of toning down seemed wise upon later consideration, so I edited in "every each other" to reduce the damage by 1 [edit].

Other monsters like Skeletons or Zombies can be used as a screen if they aren't meant to drop too quickly, but this would make them more dangerous than Orcs and must be done judiciously. Pairing with Chaos Warriors would make them very dangerous indeed, which I feel would be appropriate for a final room where a Hero death would mean less game time lost for a player. Daggers should provide a good counter, however.

A Kobold rolls one extra Combat Die when attacking a Hero for each other Kobold adjacent to that Hero....As for the ability, note that four Kobolds moving to surround a Hero will attack with 1, 2, 3 and then 4 dice, which on average is less damaging than 4 Orcs. If the 4 Kobolds start adjacent to the same Hero, that's a different story - but that also requires either horrible attack roll luck or abject Hero stupidity.[/color]

...The EU rules state, "He [the evil wizard player] moves each monster in turn," which insures each monster moves and attacks seperately. Unfortunately, the NA rules lack such specificity. With the NA rules, it is possible that when Zargon "moves every monster on the gameboard" 4 Kobolds in a room could first surround a Hero. Then, "...each monster may...attack," all with 4 Attack Dice in the same initial turn. Some rewording of the abilily is in order to guarantee the EU-guided intent within both rulesets. My new Kobold:

Kobold

Mv:8 At:1 De:1 BP:1 MP:1, Moving in turn, each Kobold attacking a Hero rolls one extra combat die for every other Kobold adjacent to that Hero....

The problem with the wording of the Kobold ability is that the wording of the main rule set could be taken to imply that the Evil Wizard player can move all his figures and then attack with them after setting them up, which means that there's not actually a problem with the wording of the Kobold ability! (Although replacing "each" with "every" is fine.)

I think I either haven't stated the issue clearly or I don't understand what you prefer. When using, "A Kobold rolls one extra Combat Die when attacking a Hero for each other Kobold adjacent to that Hero" and 4 Kobolds close on and surround a Hero, the NA rules allow for 4x4 AD right off the bat. This is the same as starting adjacent- 4x4 AD. The EU rules would have the same closing and surrounding Kobolds use 1, 2, 3, and 4 AD in the first turn. I added, "Moving in turn, each Kobold attacking a Hero..." to keep the ability less damaging than 4 Orcs on their initial attack when using the NA rules, just as with the EU rules. I don't think the ability should play differently from one ruleset to the other.

The Basilisk: Of the three options you mention, I like the middle one the most, with a minor rewording to make it use fewer words. (This is probably because it's just my version, edited to actually deal damage in addition to stunning.)

A Basilisk may attack with its petrifying gaze, rolling 3 combat dice against any one Hero it can "see." The Hero defends with Combat Dice equal to his Mind Points. If the victim loses any Body Points this way, he loses his next turn. A Hero and his equipment are turned to stone if the Hero's Body Points are reduced to zero this way. Does not affect artifacts.

Using Defend Dice works fine for this ability, as they can usually be thrown in one go and as you say, less words are needed. Like.

[Daedalus]

Really? I would have thought Mohawk's rule was very clear.

All dwarfs who are touching another dwarf get +1D. That means both dwarf 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Daedalus' example.
It doesn't matter from where they are being attacked; frontal, diagonal or shot at... Teamwork bonus always applies.
If you need to explain it, just go for the old "the characters aren't actually standing still taking turns, but are actively running around fighting".

I don't really think it's necessary to flesh this rule more out - but IF I'm alone in thinking this I'd rather see it being explained better to avoid confusion than making it more complex.

Yeah, the simpler rule will probably suffice for most of us. Cyntialee's hallway example is compelling but rare enough to excuse, in my opinion. Those wishing more tactical definition and realism can always houserule the ability as has been done before when abstract mechanics and roleplay detail clash.

I have two variations with changes in italics that hopefully work out simpler (and better) for the added exception:

Two adjacent Chaos Dwarves alongside a Hero each roll one extra Combat Die in defense against that Hero's attack.

or

Two adjacent Chaos Dwarves in a Hero's surrounding squares each roll one extra Combat Die in defense against that Hero's attack.

Neither of these similar descriptions allow the Chaos Dwarves' ability against missile fire (as well as rear support.) Rather, the focus of the ability is up close and personal.

@ Count Mowhawk-
I edited the Corruption ability in the previous post to tone it down.

[Count Mohawk]

I have two variations with changes in italics that hopefully work out simpler (and better) for the added exception:

Two adjacent Chaos Dwarves alongside a Hero each roll one extra Combat Die in defense against that Hero's attack.

or

Two adjacent Chaos Dwarves in a Hero's surrounding squares each roll one extra Combat Die in defense against that Hero's attack.

Neither of these similar descriptions allow the Chaos Dwarves' ability against missile fire (as well as rear support.) Rather, the focus of the ability is up close and personal.

Unless you include diagonally adjacent under the flag of "adjacent", two Chaos Dwarves cannot be adjacent to both a Hero and each other. You can fix this by changing your second suggestion to say "...in a Hero's eight surrounding squares...". This tweak does mean that Chaos Dwarves can't get the bonus in the narrow hallways, since they will be forced to walk single file, but that was the case you were guarding against anyway.

@ Count Mohawk-
I edited the Corruption ability in the previous post to tone it down.

I read that edit and I like it. Funny how much difference 1 BP makes, huh?

I think I either haven't stated the issue clearly or I don't understand what you prefer. When using, "A Kobold rolls one extra Combat Die when attacking a Hero for each other Kobold adjacent to that Hero" and 4 Kobolds close on and surround a Hero, the NA rules allow for 4x4 AD right off the bat. This is the same as starting adjacent- 4x4 AD. The EU rules would have the same closing and surrounding Kobolds use 1, 2, 3, and 4 AD in the first turn. I added, "Moving in turn, each Kobold attacking a Hero..." to keep the ability less damaging than 4 Orcs on their initial attack when using the NA rules, just as with the EU rules. I don't think the ability should play differently from one ruleset to the other.

I am sorry; I see I got a little too flamboyant with my words in my previous post. The idea I was trying to convey was that because the NA rules are ambiguous about the order Morcar can choose to move and attack with all of his various pieces, the 'proper' fix is to correct these rules so they work appropriately (one monster moves then attacks, then another monster goes, and so on), rather than lean on the Kobolds' ability text for that. However, as a quick fix, your use of the phrase "Moving in turn,..." is, I believe, adequate to cover this scenario.

By the way, "Mohawk" is spelled with only one W. You had my moniker written down with two.

[Daedalus]

Two adjacent Chaos Dwarves alongside a Hero each roll one extra Combat Die in defense against that Hero's attack.

or

Two adjacent Chaos Dwarves in a Hero's surrounding squares each roll one extra Combat Die in defense against that Hero's attack.

Neither of these similar descriptions allow the Chaos Dwarves' ability against missile fire (as well as rear support.) Rather, the focus of the ability is up close and personal.

Unless you include diagonally adjacent under the flag of "adjacent", two Chaos Dwarves cannot be adjacent to both a Hero and each other. You can fix this by changing your second suggestion to say "...in a Hero's eight surrounding squares...". This tweak does mean that Chaos Dwarves can't get the bonus in the narrow hallways, since they will be forced to walk single file, but that was the case you were guarding against anyway.

Looks like I was being unclear by cutting down to too few words. I was considering the wording of the first option to be "Two Chaos Dwarves both adjacent to each other and alongside a Hero...." However, "...in a Hero's eight surrounding squares..." nicely clarifies the second option with fewer words.

...

• Corruption- Instead of attacking, each turn a single Cultist may channel profane power upon one Hero he can "see" [edit] which inflicts 1 Body Point of damage for every other [edit] Cultist in the room or corridor. The victim may resist by immediately rolling one red die for each of his Mind Points. For each 5 or 6 rolled, the damage is reduced by 1 point. (This is a modified mash-up of GK and CM's suggestions.)...

@ Count Mohawk-
I edited the Corruption ability in the previous post to tone it down.

I read that edit and I like it. Funny how much difference 1 BP makes, huh?

After a reread, I'm concerned "every other" could be taken to mean one of every two Cultists when I mean all Cultists but the Cultist using the ability instead of attacking. Perhaps "each other" is preferable. Otherwise someone might think a room with 4 Cultists causes just 2 Body Points of damage instead of the intended 3 Body Points.

Then again, it occurs to me we could keep "every other" to mean one of every two Cultists so that 6 Cultists could be their maximum number. Maybe this:

Corruption- Instead of attacking, each turn a single Cultist may channel profane power upon one Hero he can "see" which inflicts 1 Body Point of damage for every other Cultist in the room or corridor (half). The victim may resist by immediately rolling one red die for each of his Mind Points. For each 5 or 6 rolled, the damage is reduced by 1 point.

Optionally, instead word with "...which inflicts as many Body Points of damage as half the number of Cultists in the room or corridor, rounded down."

By the way, "Mohawk" is spelled with only one W. You had my moniker written down with two.

Oops. I should be mo careful.

[Count Mohawk]

Since we seem to be entering another cycle of interest in finishing HQ25, I'd like to share a thought with you all. (I share it in this particular thread so as not to derail the Kobold thread Daedalus started a couple days ago.)

During the brainstorming phase of our HQ25 last year, we had a lot of user input and were able to hammer out and narrow down a selection of quality ideas. However, when it came time to start finalizing concepts and actually write the Quests, the project lost steam. I believe that in order to be able to complete the project this time, we will need to be able to come to a reasonable compromise for each monster, spell, storyline, etc., and also be able to recognize when to put the pencil down and pass in our work, so to speak. There are a lot of concepts and mechanics that people generally agree on, which makes it easy to move on once the debate runs its course. But for others, where there are two or more opposing viewpoints that each make sense, collaboration is king. If that means we elect a project administrator, then we should abide by whatever decisions he finalizes for us. We all play this game by our own set of house rules anyway.

Anyway, I'm glad to see the project moving again; I intend to do what I can on my end, time and interest permitting.