EU vs. JP rule comparison

[Bob-Bob]

I'm guessing you read the rules, in which case you'd know there is no treasure searching in the first three quests. Right?

[Daedalus]

This gets even more bizzare from quest 4 onwards. The Heroes, as a group, now receive the Talisman of Lore. I have seen different translations of this card. In one it revives each hero once per quest. As this is already an ability the heroes posess in the first three quests, the Talisman would not imbue anything extra and there would therefore be no point in it's miracleous arrival. In another it revives the heroes numerous times. This seems ridiculous as the heroes can now never die, but is the one I believe to be true. In one translation there is some group revival which I don't really understand? If someone could give a definitive translation of this card it would be most welcome.

I'd assume Bob-Bob's version is the most accurate, as his friend who helped with the translating actually understands Japanese. Theirs is the translation everybody has been calling for since the Japanese edition surfaced. I hope Bob-Bob can get him to translate the game cards for the Inn, as well.

[Decipher]

Being a hardcore old school D&D player, the Quests "leveling up" idea is awesome. And the name Grimdead is so cool.

[Daedalus]

Grimdead sounds awkward to me. I know Chinese often prefers literal meaning in words: "Glasses" is an English example of this kind of word building, while "spectacles" differs a step. Whoever made the map wanted a Japanese literal-name translation rather than go with something that differed a bit, as with westernized names.

The name has also been translated as Glyn-ded by Google Translate and Glindeddo by majikayo in this post at Old Scratch.

The names for characters and locations are all written in katakana, so normally they would be the easiest part to translate. However, they’re also made-up fantasy-style names so the phonetic transliterations of them into English sound pretty bad. It might be worth reviewing those or just changing them if anyone decides to use this. I put some of those in italics to signify the clumsiness of translating them phonetically.

R's and L's are interchangeable. From that, I'd westernize the the name to an easier-to-say Grindeth (grinning skull + death.) My personal

[Bareheaded Warrior]

Late to this party, but some initial thoughts … more to follow, you will be pleased to hear!

Rule Structure

Whilst I like the idea of a simpler initial rule set to ease players into the game, which is implemented to a certain extent in The Trial anyway, I would prefer a basic ruleset with “Advanced Rules” that you can add in later when you are ready, I feel that the way in which the Japanese version has implemented this concept makes it more complex and means new players have to relearn / unlearn stuff (especially spell use) which is not great so I won’t be adopting this.

Treasure Chests

The handling of Treasure Chests is something that I have always felt needs to be looked at in the EU/US versions, in my rules we treat “looting” a chest as an action, and you need to be next to the chest to do so and no visible monsters. Good that the Japanese version recognised this issue, but the implementation means that you now have three mechanism at work, where two would suffice (and I like simple) i.e. you have proper actions like attacking, you have non-actions like opening doors/looking and now you have a third category of things that are not actions and are not non-action but are a third similar and yet different category – increasing complexity whilst not increasing the ’richness’ of the emergent gameplay.

Monsters' Body Points

Even when I preferred the EU rules to the US, I always preferred the US Monster Body points so unsurprisingly would go with that over the Japanese version. That said the idea of an ability that restores all lost BPs on the next Hero’s turn or better the next Zargon’s turn is interesting, not for Monsters from the standard deck, but one that I might use as a special ability for a Boss in future…

Gold Reward for Killing Monsters

Gold as experience points XP is a mechanism across all HQ versions, so tying it to killing Monsters does make logical sense, but I’m not a fan for a few reasons. More admin to keep recording this (boring), focuses reward/advancement on killing monsters rather than completing a Quest, more treasure for the Heroes means that they advance too quickly and plateau earlier (also an issue in EU/US but this added source of gold would just make it worse)

Traps

Jumping Pits – the jumping in a straight-line piece makes sense, but we already have ‘official’ quests with pits in corners of corridors, so that ship has sailed
Falling Rocks – mandatory move back to previous square, which saves some debate!

Buying Potions

Personally, not a fan of buying potions, it makes them less special, but obviously if a Quest Book says you can then you can. However, combining the revive rules with buying potions and various other aspects makes you wonder if it is actually possible for a Hero to die!

Projectile Obstacles

I shudder at the thought of talking about seeing and LOS in the context of HeroQuest again but monsters blocking and Heroes not seems both inconsistent and diminishes the gameplay, either they both block or neither block (in my rules magic doesn’t need LOS but in most cases you need to be able to see your target, but ranged/missile weapons need LOS which is blocked by figures irrespective of their friendly status - each to their own on this point but I think any useful interpretation needs to be consistent, and either improve gameplay or improve realism but this fails on all three)

Searching When Monsters are Present

Bearing in mind that you work towards the “expert chapter” and then at some point adopt the optional rules (I get that they are “optional”, but they are included for a reason) and so end up in the same place of no search/loot chest when monsters are present i.e. the EU and US rules then you might as well start there!

Becoming a Champion & Levelling Up

As mentioned before “advancement through gold as XP spent on equipment that boost your stats” works for me and is essential HeroQuest (by which I mean one of those core elements, like the Combat Dice that you can’t really remove and still call the game HeroQuest – side note – that would make for an interesting thread in its own right – mental note taken!) but it still leaves two areas not covered.

1. Champion status - in the first edition, if a hero completes three quests, they reach the title of “Champion” with a reward of 500 gold. In the second edition, same but no reward, in the US edition, the status comes at the end of the first Quest book with no reward (I will check if this statement is correct, too many versions for my brain!)

2. “Advancement Beyond Equipment” – once you have maxed out on equipment, excess gold can be used for potions and suchlike but the “advancement through gold as XP spent on equipment that boost your stats” path has ended, feels like something could be needed to follow

I’m wondering whether these two problems could have a single solution, especially as max equipment starts to appear on the horizon around the time that you complete the first Quest book, particularly if you have avoided too many individual deaths, equipment loss or a TPK

What about something like (and you could wrap this in a ‘visit to a Temple’ theme)

If your Hero successfully completes all the quests in the first Quest Book (without dying) he becomes a Champion and gets a reward in the form of a free “Advancement”.

Any Hero may pay 500gc for an “Advancement” at the end of the first quest book or at any point beyond as part of the “Between Quests”.

Advancements are as follows; first one is +1 Max/Starting BP/MP (your choice), second one is the other BP/MP that you didn’t take the first time, third and subsequent are Fate Points. A Fate Points can be used once, and only once, to either allow you a complete dice reroll, you can reroll all of your dice used for an action once or to force your opponent to do the same

Wand of Recall

Very OP – scrap!

Revive & Talisman of Lore

The revive rules seem odd, although that may be at least in part due to inherent translation problems. You lose all your belongings, presumably including gold, then you can revive yourself at that moment, but only once ever, by losing all the gold that you already lost when you died, and you get your belonging that you lost back but then you have to donate all your gold to the temple between quests, so you do lose it now but not until later (and are you so filled with deep grateful appreciation for your life being spared that you donate all your gold to the temple but still sneakily pocket any additional gold that you found post-revival?)

It gets worse with Talisman of Lore (and you are guaranteed that someone will get it at the proper time) then death just becomes a loss of gold, not even that if you haven’t found any yet, feels very computer-game-like, I will be keeping with the EU/US proper death!

[Bareheaded Warrior]

And part 2

Equipment differences

Differences can be summarised into three categories

More weapons and armour restrictions, I am opposed to railroading specific Hero types by limiting their equipment choices any more than is necessary, so I will not be adopting this.

Costs have been altered, generally increased, I’m not opposed to this in principle but apart from some minor changes, some of which correspond to US version anyway this seems to be mostly tied to the increased attack dice

Increased attack dice, seems an odd step to remove the Battle Axe with 4 attack dice then increase some of the other to compensate, as mentioned before Gold/XP being used to buy equipment is the HQ advancement process, I would perhaps criticise the EU and US versions for needing more equipment particularly weapon variant to allow more advancement but the Japanese version seems to be going the opposite and wrong way in my opinion

However, I do agree that there is some room to tweak the prices in the EU/US version, the Helmet for example has the same benefits of the Shield but none of the disadvantages related to single/double handed weapons so that should really be more expensive maybe 200gc

Removing the Plate Armour movement restriction is something that we have all debated to death on the forum, but I was tempted before, and this may tempt me again

This has also reminded me of one of the many thoughts that I had around “advancement through equipment” in relation to the starting weapon of the Barbarian. I have long been uncomfortable with the Barbarian starting with a Broadsword and thus taking away a significant step on his advancement journey (in EU version it meant that he started with only one additional attack step-up to the Battle Axe). I like “advancement through equipment” in HQ but a combat-based Hero starting only one step from maxing out his attack struck me as poor.

US version brings in a longsword, a step in the right direction, which whilst better is not good enough for me. I have been considering reducing the Barbarian’s starting equipment to a shortsword but giving him a ‘natural’ attack boost, something to reflect his massive physique and aggressive fighting nature. I toyed with the idea of either allowing him to reroll any attack dice once per attack, but that brings in the reroll mechanism that does exist in HQ (although see Fate Points above, but even so you don’t want too many rerolls in play) or for a black shield rolled on an attack roll to count as a skull but again new mechanism, so I think I will just opt for him to get a simple bonus combat die when attacking across the board, but that makes him a "better" Hero than the Dwarf so some form of balance is needed - any ideas on this would be welcomed.

This, combined with a starting weapon of a shortsword, keeps his starting attack dice to three, above the other Heroes so he has his thematic advantage, but with my US&EU weapons he can still step up from shortsword to spear to broadsword to longsword to battle axe (with a side visit to hand axe)

Wandering Monster

No! Monsters, wandering or otherwise, do not appear attack then disappear

Spell differences

Swift Wind as Gust – gust effects are interesting – will think more on this ... is this already partially covered by the Escape Ring? [EDIT: having done my research the Escape Ring is not an official item but homebrewed, and neither the Escape spell or the Ring of Return work exactly like this spell. As some people, like me, have ported EU stuff into US and vice versa, changing this Swift Wind spell to the Gust effects prevents any duplication between the original spell and the Potion of Speed so I will probably adopt this, but perhaps without the name change]

Pass Through Rock – “but they may only move to areas that have already been explored” – this I agree with (controversial) due to the lack of ways to simply and smoothly handle the “reveal” rules in the US/EU version – but this is debated at length elsewhere on this forum

Fire Attack Spells

I thought with the EU/US (and US Chaos spells) this is an area that needed a little rework anyway, not so much because the existing EUv1/v2/US spells are broken, just a little inconsistent / bumpy and this has just stirred the pot a little more.

I am not a fan of the ‘deals x BP’ condition, in general, and in spells in particular. You do not roll to see if a spell is cast or not, which is fine, but then if you don’t roll to determine damage, either attack or to defend then it becomes a “put spell card down remove monster” operation.

If a spell targets the mind of the victim then a mind defend roll to block or reduce damage is appropriate, but fire (and lightning) attack spells aren’t in that category, they are a physical attack, so either they should fit into the roll x combat dice to attack, roll your defend dice to defend as per normal combat OR they should just have a roll x combat dice to attack with no defend approach

The latter is my preference – thematically fire (and lightning) is a physical but energy rather than matter affect and I’m not convinced that normal armour/defence would be wholly effective (wearing a metal helmet when being zapped with electricity / ball of flame states that you point at the target and they burst into flames, not sure that a shield would help) but also in terms of game play it allows you to somewhat counter the increasing effects of armoured Heroes as the game advances, you might get used to smugly rolling a fistful of defend dice against monster attacks, but at least magic may give Zargon a twist, so…

Ball of Flame / Fireball - rolls three attack dice, no defend, target loses 1BP for each skull rolled

Fire of Wrath / Flame of Rage – the unrestricted “anywhere on the board” targeting so roll two attack dice, no defend, target loses 1BP for each skull rolled

I like “Holy Flame” with the undead twist, but I am not sure that it is workable, to use MP as a defence then it needs to be a spell that attacks your mind and therefore it wouldn’t work on undead as they don’t have one. Alternatively, you can consider that they are summoned and controlled by a caster (Necromancer or Lich for example) so perhaps a spell could be used to weaken/break that control, so a form of mind spell, banishing them automatically without a mind save as they have no mind, but then that is already covered in the game with the EU rules with Holy Water.

If you want to use Mind points more/at all, and I do, then take a look at my house rules in my signature and some posts elsewhere on the forum, where certain mind attack / control spells use mind as a defence and some attack spells such as “Fire of Wrath”- have effects that are tied to your mind value – number of attack dice is based on ½ your mind value (rolling up)

[Daedalus]

And part 2

Equipment differences

. . . Removing the Plate Armour movement restriction is something that we have all debated to death on the forum, but I was tempted before, and this may tempt me again

This has also reminded me of one of the many thoughts that I had around “advancement through equipment” in relation to the starting weapon of the Barbarian. I have long been uncomfortable with the Barbarian starting with a Broadsword and thus taking away a significant step on his advancement journey (in EU version it meant that he started with only one additional attack step-up to the Battle Axe). I like “advancement through equipment” in HQ but a combat-based Hero starting only one step from maxing out his attack struck me as poor.

US version brings in a longsword, a step in the right direction, which whilst better is not good enough for me. I have been considering reducing the Barbarian’s starting equipment to a shortsword but giving him a ‘natural’ attack boost, something to reflect his massive physique and aggressive fighting nature. I toyed with the idea of either allowing him to reroll any attack dice once per attack, but that brings in the reroll mechanism that does exist in HQ (although see Fate Points above, but even so you don’t want too many rerolls in play) or for a black shield rolled on an attack roll to count as a skull but again new mechanism, so I think I will just opt for him to get a simple bonus combat die when attacking across the board, but that makes him a "better" Hero than the Dwarf so some form of balance is needed - any ideas on this would be welcomed. . . .

Though either suggestion may have already occurred to you in some form, you could balance the Dwarf by:

• Up the Dwarf's starting defend score to 3 to match both the Barbarian’s higher starting and topped-out attack score.
• Allow just the Dwarf to ignore the movement penalty for plate armor automatically, as with his superior ability to disarm traps. Like a tool kit, other Heroes that want to bypass the restriction must purchase a more expensive version of plate armor, say field plate that wouldn't have as stiff a movement penalty. For instance, roll two red dice but discard one--or even no penalty.