My playgroup has too many fate points to consume.

[Dieterdg84]

I call it the "FP accumulation issue", and yes, it can potentially break the game. It's not commonly reported because most people don't stick around enough to reach that point. Only serious players get to come across it. You're really into the game, aren't you?

Quite a bit yes, how could you tell?

What matrices are you using? The issue could be a sign that the number and PV of the monsters you're picking are not a suitable match for the adventurers. You may need to start including stronger monsters along with spellcasters and specialists. Another quick fix is to increase the GM's chances of success so that a DC is used upon rolling equal to or lower than dungeon level (instead of a 1 for any DL). If you're playing multiplayer, then give the GM more DCs.

I primarily used the original tables most of the time. However, during their second campaign, I began implementing the classic rule for a DC on a roll of 1 or 12. I aim to develop a system for future GMs who are new to the game, allowing them to use the existing tables with some additional features. This approach would reduce the game's barrier for entry. For instance, the total fate points of the party could determine how many PVs they can add per table result, or introduce a higher risk of getting DCs. While creating new tables or adopting a new monster-generating system like Slev's is an option, I prefer to stick to the base game and incorporate a few tweaks to address these problems.

Limiting the use of FPs works as a quick fix, but then you'd have to limit the matrices and dungeons as well or the game would become unbearably difficult. You may probably want to increase the FP allotment as the adventurers become more experienced, though, or you'll be stuck with the same matrices and exploration tables. You'll have to find the point of balance that works best for you if you're going to keep using pre-made monster matrices. To me at least, sticking to monster matrices nowadays is like preferring graph paper to draw your dungeons by hand instead of taking pictures with your cellphone. Do yo still draw your dungeons by hand?

I've been thinking about a quick fix without having to change the matrices. The following tweak came to mind:
A hero is allowed to use as many fate points per exploration phase or combat phase, but after using one fate point during that phase, any subsequent fate points used will be lost permanently.

I haven't drawn any dungeons yet, but I've been quite busy creating new custom scenarios to serve as 'in-between adventures.' These scenarios replace some of the randomly generated upper floors, featuring stories that unfold on the way to the dungeon or within a town. https://drive.google.com/drive/u/1/fold ... CuTHeqD6Nz

I can't recommend Slev's system enough for generating monsters (the one that worked anyway). It scales itself to party strength taking training, spells, and experience (FPs) into consideration. You may find it in my bestiary.
Another part of my approach is that FPs may be used to acquire feats that spice up the encounters. Also, my adventurers start slightly lower stat wise than their AHQ counterparts but within the same spectrum, leaving more room for advancement. You can read about it in my redesign notes.

As you can see from the stuff I've made, I'm a fan of Enhanced AHQ, and been making loads of content for that specific version. But I know it's far from perfect. It tries to make the game less deadly for new heroes (new magic system, heroic abilities, new character creation with classes). But once those heroes have finished a few adventures, they become too overpowered very fast (which also was a thing with the base game in my opinion). So working out some house rules to fix that. Already using your Toughness softcap to address that issue. Fate points is the next gamebreaker that needs some work.

Nice setup, by the way. It looks fantastic!

Glad you like it! You can find all those tiles on my Google drive if interested.

[RECIVS]

I primarily used the original tables most of the time. However, during their second campaign, I began implementing the classic rule for a DC on a roll of 1 or 12. I aim to develop a system for future GMs who are new to the game, allowing them to use the existing tables with some additional features. This approach would reduce the game's barrier for entry. For instance, the total fate points of the party could determine how many PVs they can add per table result, or introduce a higher risk of getting DCs.

Sounds interesting, though I may be a little too attached to my revision of Slev's approach for its simplicity and variety of results. Your system would have to offer better self-scalability and more variety of results with even simpler mechanics (and a smaller footprint). I'd really like to see that.

By the way, Reforged also offers its own self-scalable system for allotting DCs. I recommend that one too.

While creating new tables or adopting a new monster-generating system like Slev's is an option, I prefer to stick to the base game and incorporate a few tweaks to address these problems.

I know. I had the exact same attitude when I started with AHQ eleven years ago. Give it some time. One day I realized that AHQ has much more potential as a sandbox than as an off-the-shelf game.

I've been thinking about a quick fix without having to change the matrices. The following tweak came to mind:
A hero is allowed to use as many fate points per exploration phase or combat phase, but after using one fate point during that phase, any subsequent fate points used will be lost permanently.

By the way, I forgot to mention that I use my doorway-exploit fix, which alleviates the issue considerably, and it also allows for more tactical variety at the same time (it's like killing two birds with one stone). Your Heroes are going to need every FP if they get surrounded by enough enemies since they wouldn't be able to heal or avoid damage through other means (that's real dread!). I don't know what monster-placing system you’re using, but maybe someone's been exploiting doorways a bit too much?

Let's keep in mind, however, that one of the main premises the original matrices seem to have been designed around is that some encounters need to be easier than others. As I said here, that’s what keeps AHQ playable, as it would be even more difficult and repetitive otherwise.

I'm not a fan of limiting FPs in AHQ, as I think it would limit other aspects of the game as well (such as matrices, exploration tables, and monster-placing options as I posted above). If you don’t want to deal with my approach, then the easiest fix is simply to limit the number of quests a Hero can take.

I haven't drawn any dungeons yet, but I've been quite busy creating new custom scenarios to serve as 'in-between adventures.'

I think you know what I meant.

As you can see from the stuff I've made, I'm a fan of Enhanced AHQ, and been making loads of content for that specific version. But I know it's far from perfect. It tries to make the game less deadly for new heroes (new magic system, heroic abilities, new character creation with classes). But once those heroes have finished a few adventures, they become too overpowered very fast (which also was a thing with the base game in my opinion). So working out some house rules to fix that.

May I ask what do you mean by "overpowered" exactly?

Already using your Toughness softcap to address that issue.

Nice! Have you had any problem with it so far? Did it fix the issue for you?

Fate points is the next gamebreaker that needs some work.

This one in particular may require a little more than a few tweaks I’m afraid.

[RECIVS]

I'd like to know more about the system you mention but don't know where to find it or your bestiary.

Is Slev's original version available somewhere, I'd like to see what that looks like.

Here's a comparison of Slev's 2020 version vs the current one (2023)

I also made this comparison of the results of the monster matrices in those two versions of Reforged vs the original ones and the one in my variant to see the differences between them (don't miss page 2). We may notice how the results of the current version of Reforged are way off to the point of being unusable. It's quite clear then that Party Experience shouldn't be multiplied by any factor greater than 1. That's why I prefer the 2020 version, and I still don't see why it had to change.

I have the following issues with the said 2020 version of Reforged anyway:

*Slev's Number of Enemies Table may produce repetitive and predictable results. Mine allows for more variety and unpredictability with less entries.

*His Random Factor for determining Value of Enemies may become irrelevant as the adventurers gain experience. The one I use is much simpler and more consistent throughout.

*My version may self-scale more smoothly than Slev's, as only fractions equal to or greater than .5 are rounded up in mine (all fractions are rounded up in Reforged). One may notice that the Value of Enemies in my variant has to start slightly lower than in AHQ to compensate for the effect of my doorway-exploit fix.

Other than that, it's the same system.

[Dieterdg84]

Do yo still draw your dungeons by hand?

I'm afraid I misunderstood your question somehow the last time. Sorry for that (not a native speaker). Yes we still draw the dungeons, so they can add notes etc. I think it adds alot of flavour to the game
Using a new made little booklet per campaign for this: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/1/fold ... XkVzczf6vj

May I ask what do you mean by "overpowered" exactly?

Once the Heroes completed several expeditions, they start to gain quite alot of fate points very fast. Especially with the pre-written campaigns, that also reward them some very unique weapons/armour.
Over time spell components no longer feel expensive either, so the Wizard can go nuts, etc..

Nice! Have you had any problem with it so far? Did it fix the issue for you?

It feels like a solid fix for me. Really works well with the previous games I had so far. My playgroup was a bit confused at first, but eventually made peace with the softcap

[RECIVS]

Do yo still draw your dungeons by hand?

I'm afraid I misunderstood your question somehow the last time. Sorry for that (not a native speaker). Yes we still draw the dungeons, so they can add notes etc. I think it adds alot of flavour to the game
Using a new made little booklet per campaign for this: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/1/fold ... XkVzczf6vj

No worries. What I meant to say is that, as much as one prefer drawing dungeons by hand, taking pictures with a cellphone gives much better (and faster) results with far less complications. That's been my point all along, and the same principle may apply to other mechanics in the game.

May I ask what do you mean by "overpowered" exactly?

Once the Heroes completed several expeditions, they start to gain quite alot of fate points very fast. Especially with the pre-written campaigns, that also reward them some very unique weapons/armour.
Over time spell components no longer feel expensive either, so the Wizard can go nuts, etc..

It seems that the game-breaking (and fun-killing) effects of the vanilla monster-placing rules are becoming evident to you. That's why I say in my comparison of the AHQ variants that EAHQ doesn't entirely fix the major flaws in the game.

I think it's not so much that AHQ Heroes become overpowered, but rather that the monster matrices and enemy-placing rules become inadequate. You can try my doorway-exploit fix along with my monster matrices for a few encounters and see if the Heroes still feel overpowered to you.

I forgot to mention that I use my doorway-exploit fix, which alleviates the issue considerably, and it also allows for more tactical variety at the same time (it's like killing two birds with one stone). Your Heroes are going to need every FP if they get surrounded by enough enemies since they wouldn't be able to heal or avoid damage through other means (that's real dread!). I don't know what monster-placing system you’re using, but maybe someone's been exploiting doorways a bit too much?

By the way, I didn't invent the concept of surprise ambushes in the game. Please take a look at the images on pages 24 and 53 of the AHQ rulebook (and also the image on page 36 of TitD). That's what ambushes should look like (pretty much like in WHQ), and it's the model I think we should follow. It certainly allows for more tactical variety (and it may fix other issues such as the one that concerns us in this thread), but it's incompatible with the original design of the game, unfortunately. We could fairly say that my whole approach revolves around making such a model playable in the least "invasive" way and preserving the essence and feel of AHQ as much as possible.

Nice! Have you had any problem with it so far? Did it fix the issue for you?

It feels like a solid fix for me. Really works well with the previous games I had so far. My playgroup was a bit confused at first, but eventually made peace with the softcap

I'm glad it can be of some use. Yes, it may work as a softcap that also enables the use of the full spectrum of Toughness without breaking the game.

You can simply score the wound on a roll of 10+, which will pretty much solve the issue since models with unmodified TH12 and/or modified TH14+ are very rare to come by. I did that for years with very good results.