HeroQuest Prime

[Teldurn]

Thief-Acrobat.

I wanted to stick to the single-word class names. But I can't think of anything better, either.

[Gold Bearer]

No barbarian?

I can see that a thief would take monster gold while others wouldn't but then why can't he just wait till they're dead? Doesn't really make sense. I'd drop the acrobat, give the thief that skill and add a barbarian with +3BP and -1MP.

If there are four hero players with one character each I can virtually guarantee that no one will choose a knight, but if there's two players with two characters each he'd be a good option to go with a magician.

Needs a few more race rules, like dwarves disarming traps and -movement and maybe +1BP and -1MP, elves +movement and maybe -1BP and +1MP.

Halberd's too expensive. 50gp more than a battle axe with one less attack die just reach a tiny bit of range.

Spear? May be thrown diagonally? Why not just attack? Two handed? 400gp? A spear would break much easier than an axe or hammer.

Crossbows run out of ammo but bows don't?

I understand not wanting to add having to keep track of ammo but I wouldn't like not having a clue how many shots I've got left when the hero obviously would. I think it's worth having to keep track.

Leather armour vs chainmail coif? And wtf is coif?

What I did with fimirs was add a fimir patriarch (by bluetacking a candle stick in his hand) that allows him all fimirs in the same room or corridor or in sight of him to share a spell pool while his in play.

Gelatinous cube? Sounds interesting.

Why loose the ogre lord? You can create different combinations with their arms or just stick a candle stick (wand) in his hand to show that he's a shaman.

I'd rename the necromancer summoner. There's already a necromancer in WoM that you may want to use.

[chaoticprime]

Thief-Acrobat.

I wanted to stick to the single-word class names. But I can't think of anything better, either.

Inflitrator, Doxer, Rake, Picaroon, Sneak, Spook, Smuggler, Tumbler, Saboteur, Ferret, Scout, Explorer, Speculator, Intelligencer, Exemplar, Expert, Preceptor, Ringer, Hustler, Kidd, Creep, Contortionist, Funambulist, Trouper, Escapologist, Stalker, Poacher, Jackknife, Stealer, Ribald, Knocker, Pickpocket, Subtractor, Artiste, Beguiler, Juggler, Hoaxer, Jongleur, Mountebank, Buffoon, Jester, Mischiever, Bravo, Vigilante, Bandit, Brigand, Gymnast, Athlete, Arsonist, Dancer, Tumbester, Balancer, Aerialist, Equilibrist, and I'm spent.

[Teldurn]

Until the PDF is released, nothing is set in stone and is likely to change. And maybe even after it's released, might be tweaked.

That said, you bring up some valid points. So let's go over some of them, shall we?

No barbarian?

I can see that a thief would take monster gold while others wouldn't but then why can't he just wait till they're dead? Doesn't really make sense. I'd drop the acrobat, give the thief that skill and add a barbarian with +3BP and -1MP.

Because no one else gets gold from monsters (see my previous post explanation about this). Doesn't matter who kills it, it won't drop loot (other than its weapon), but a thief can find some to steal. But still, having a barbarian could be interesting.

If there are four hero players with one character each I can virtually guarantee that no one will choose a knight, but if there's two players with two characters each he'd be a good option to go with a magician.

And that's perfectly fine. That's what having options is all about! ^_^

Needs a few more race rules, like dwarves disarming traps and -movement and maybe +1BP and -1MP, elves +movement and maybe -1BP and +1MP.

That's definitely something worth looking into more deeply. Thanks!

Halberd's too expensive. 50gp more than a battle axe with one less attack die just reach a tiny bit of range.

Attacking diagonally is worth it to pay 50gp more, in my humble opinion.

Spear? May be thrown diagonally? Why not just attack? Two handed? 400gp? A spear would break much easier than an axe or hammer.

Sarcasm: lolrealism /Sarcasm FYI, you can also attack in melee with a spear.

Crossbows run out of ammo but bows don't?

I understand not wanting to add having to keep track of ammo but I wouldn't like not having a clue how many shots I've got left when the hero obviously would. I think it's worth having to keep track.

The crossbow's versatility (of being able to shoot anywhere) needs to be mitigated somehow...

Leather armour vs chainmail coif? And wtf is coif?

Behold! A chain mail coif!

What I did with fimirs was add a fimir patriarch (by bluetacking a candle stick in his hand) that allows him all fimirs in the same room or corridor or in sight of him to share a spell pool while his in play.

Gelatinous cube? Sounds interesting.

Why loose the ogre lord? You can create different combinations with their arms or just stick a candle stick (wand) in his hand to show that he's a shaman.

I'd rename the necromancer summoner. There's already a necromancer in WoM that you may want to use.

Interesting ideas. For the ogre lord suggestion, keep in mind that I am basically building this from the mindset of playing online (Roll20), not necessarily on the tabletop...but I'd still like to keep it playable in meatspace, for sure. As for the necromancer renaming, "summoner" gives me a completely different mental image than "necromancer", and the latter is what the concept is about.

Thief-Acrobat.

I wanted to stick to the single-word class names. But I can't think of anything better, either.

Inflitrator, Doxer, Rake, Picaroon, Sneak, Spook, Smuggler, Tumbler, Saboteur, Ferret, Scout, Explorer, Speculator, Intelligencer, Exemplar, Expert, Preceptor, Ringer, Hustler, Kidd, Creep, Contortionist, Funambulist, Trouper, Escapologist, Stalker, Poacher, Jackknife, Stealer, Ribald, Knocker, Pickpocket, Subtractor, Artiste, Beguiler, Juggler, Hoaxer, Jongleur, Mountebank, Buffoon, Jester, Mischiever, Bravo, Vigilante, Bandit, Brigand, Gymnast, Athlete, Arsonist, Dancer, Tumbester, Balancer, Aerialist, Equilibrist, and I'm spent.

Holy Thesaurus, Batman!

[Gold Bearer]

Because no one else gets gold from monsters (see my previous post explanation about this). Doesn't matter who kills it, it won't drop loot (other than its weapon), but a thief can find some to steal.

Yea but I mean he could do that when the monster's dead. Why waist an attack?

And that's perfectly fine. That's what having options is all about! ^_^

I'm coming off as a prick aren't I. It wasn't meant as a criticism. Just thought I'd tell you what I'd pick and point out that the knight is a lot more appealing when playing more than one hero, in case you hadn't thought of it and thought it was a problem. I've got characters like that as well (paladin especially).

Attacking diagonally is worth it to pay 50gp more, in my humble opinion.

Seriously? But it attacks with one less!

FYI, you can also attack in melee with a spear.

400gp is a total rip off!!! Compare it to your axe/hammer. I could make one myself!

The crossbow's versatility (of being able to shoot anywhere) needs to be mitigated somehow...

Maybe make quarrels more expensive than arrows?

Behold! A chain mail coif!

Oh I see. It can be worn as well as armour. Gotcha.

As for the necromancer renaming, "summoner" gives me a completely different mental image than "necromancer", and the latter is what the concept is about.

Reanimater?

Holy Thesaurus, Batman!

I vote bravo.

My

[Teldurn]

Because no one else gets gold from monsters (see my previous post explanation about this). Doesn't matter who kills it, it won't drop loot (other than its weapon), but a thief can find some to steal.

Yea but I mean he could do that when the monster's dead. Why waist an attack?

Perhaps I'm not explaining it properly. If the monster dies, even the thief won't be able to get gold. That's why you waste an attack.

And that's perfectly fine. That's what having options is all about! ^_^

I'm coming off as a prick aren't I. It wasn't meant as a criticism. Just thought I'd tell you what I'd pick and point out that the knight is a lot more appealing when playing more than one hero, in case you hadn't thought of it and thought it was a problem. I've got characters like that as well (paladin especially).

No, not really. I understand not everyone is going to love every aspect of the races/classes. Having said that, however, I also want to stay away from obvious power combinations. If I added classes, like your suggested barbarian with the HP bonus, then no one would ever pick a race other than Human to put that wandering +1 into BP. Similarly, I don't want to give the Dwarf race the ability to do traps, because that devalues the toolkit items.

Attacking diagonally is worth it to pay 50gp more, in my humble opinion.

Seriously? But it attacks with one less!

FYI, you can also attack in melee with a spear.

400gp is a total rip off!!! Compare it to your axe/hammer. I could make one myself!

How would you suggest fixing this, then?

The crossbow's versatility (of being able to shoot anywhere) needs to be mitigated somehow...

Maybe make quarrels more expensive than arrows?

That's a good idea.

Behold! A chain mail coif!

Oh I see. It can be worn as well as armour. Gotcha.

Yep! And, while I know "coif" is a weird sounding word, be glad I didn't break it down further, i.e., pauldrons, greaves, sabatons, etc.

As for the necromancer renaming, "summoner" gives me a completely different mental image than "necromancer", and the latter is what the concept is about.

Reanimater?

I like it!

Holy Thesaurus, Batman!

I vote bravo.

Interestingly, out of the whole list, I also liked Bravo the best. It made me think of Game of Thrones. In particular, the Braavosi Bravos' Water Dancing. "What do we say to death? Not today!"

[Gold Bearer]

No I knew what you meant, but why wouldn't he be able to get the gold after the monster's dead? It would be a lot easier, and safer and there's no reason he wouldn't be able to do that.

Elves and dwarves could be made more attractive. A toolkit can be used to improve a standard ability. Would you really want an elf barbarian anyway? It's handy that human is the best for that class. You could limit a barbarians ability to wear armour and give dwarves a +BP to make them an option as well.

It's difficult without changing the others because you've got a flail and broardsword at the same price. Without changing the others it would have to be 275gp and one handed. Shortswords can attack with two in melee so it can just attack diagonally and be thrown. The halberd 425gp.

You might like this rule. I was thinking of using it but I'm not even going to bother with ranges, maybe with throwing weapons. Instead of attacking with pull power on one square and not even being able to reach the next square along you could give ranged weapons a penalty of -1 skull for every square (or two or three) past their range.

[Teldurn]

No I knew what you meant, but why wouldn't he be able to get the gold after the monster's dead? It would be a lot easier, and safer and there's no reason he wouldn't be able to do that.

Elves and dwarves could be made more attractive. A toolkit can be used to improve a standard ability. Would you really want an elf barbarian anyway? It's handy that human is the best for that class. You could limit a barbarians ability to wear armour and give dwarves a +BP to make them an option as well.

It's difficult without changing the others because you've got a flail and broardsword at the same price. Without changing the others it would have to be 275gp and one handed. Shortswords can attack with two in melee so it can just attack diagonally and be thrown. The halberd 425gp.

You might like this rule. I was thinking of using it but I'm not even going to bother with ranges, maybe with throwing weapons. Instead of attacking with pull power on one square and not even being able to reach the next square along you could give ranged weapons a penalty of -1 skull for every square (or two or three) past their range.

Call it magic or whatever else you like, but when a monster is still alive, the thief can find gold to steal. Once it dies, the thief or anyone else can't get anything from it aside from what weapon it was carrying. If this were a true and full-fledged RPG, that gold wouldn't magically disappear when the mob dies. However, in trying to keep things simple - as is the HQ way - in this particular instance, having a fun gameplay mechanic trumps realism. Otherwise, the thief would be a useless class. That's why the thief wastes an attack to get gold, that's why no one else can do it, and that's how the economy isn't flooded.

I can see where you're coming from with the toolkit ability for dwarves. But I really want to stay away from that. I don't want one class or race to be able to do something that everyone else has to spend money on to be able to do. And...I've played an Elf Barbarian before...so yeah. I would want to be one.

Talking about the items like this makes me think it's worth it to take another look at that one chart I saw floating around here some time ago, where it broke down weapons into keywords and each keyword was given a gold value. So you can have weapon x cost Y gold coins, but if you also want to attack diagonally, then add z gold more....or something like that. I don't really remember the details too well.

Hmm, nah. While adding a little bit of granularity to the rules makes for variety and fun gameplay, I'd really like to keep it simple rather than complex. I feel that ranged suggestion is taking it a bit too far.

[Gold Bearer]

Arh! But it doesn't make sense. How about letting him try to steal from people between quests then?

You've played an Elf barbarian? Next you'll be telling me you've played a dwarf wardancer?

Yea I'm not being nasty but those values are kind of broken.

I thought so, although I should of said dice instead of skulls, like short range and long (maybe over half) range. Just in case anyone else is thinking of doing it.

[Teldurn]

Arh! But it doesn't make sense. How about letting him try to steal from people between quests then?

All this back and forth about the thief is making me realize that the ability isn't strong enough to stand on its own and the class will probably need to be cut. Oh well.

You've played an Elf barbarian? Next you'll be telling me you've played a dwarf wardancer?

I can't say I've ever even seen wardancer as a class option. Which splatbook is that from?

Yea I'm not being nasty but those values are kind of broken.

Which ones are broken?

I thought so, although I should of said dice instead of skulls, like short range and long (maybe over half) range. Just in case anyone else is thinking of doing it.

Even in D&D 3.5e, I always felt that short/long/extra long range rules were too, umm, I guess simulationist? It felt needlessly complicated. Like having a complex rule for the sake of being complex. All my groups never played with them.