GM vs Overpowered Heroes

[Patroclus]

The good about DMing in HQ is that everyone can do it, even if he is not good the players could have a lot of fun. And he can enjoy the combat as a common player while he is drinking beer… The only difference with the other players is that he knows the map, and even this it has fun to see the players trying to solve your dungeon. Of course a talented DM can push the experience to other levels…

In D&D the GM is a storyteller. I’ve played some short quests (6 hours each) and I’ve DM some in the long past... You need to find an interesting story with some drama and if you don’t put many NPC your job is easier. The key to have fun in D&D is to enjoy the narration and the scenes, if you put many encounters like in HQ your game will take weeks. Even with that in mind (short stories and few combat encounters), the role of DM is not for everyone. You have to handle everything on the fly, you have to put normal encounters to avoid having a wipe. But I am still saying that the fun in D&D is not in combat. For example, it’s very possible to enjoy a scene where you are trying to sleep for the night on a tree, than killing four orcs and a troll… simple as that.

[torilen]

While I agree with parts of knightcrawler's harsh and misguided tirade about DMing heroquest

I would like to put this one small comment out about that...
If a player adds even one small thing to the game...say, naming a monster that has not yet had a published name,
in my opinion, he has turned from a simple referee or a simple 5th player and has now become a DM. Realize that
world building, in any sense, in a duty of a good DM, and creating and adding a named character into the game is
therefore acting as a DM.

That said, I think most of us on here at the inn have little pieces of all three positions in the game...referee, 5th
player, and DM.

Personally, I think I would like to have a group nearby with which I could play the 5th player role - a 5th player whose
job is to win, and therefore must crush the heroes into dust as much as possible. I think it would be beneficial to let
them know that that is my job ahead of time, so if a hero does die, they don't feel too upset - they'll just be more
motivated to beat me next time.

[chaoticprime]

The problem is that common association with referees not being evil, despite that the most evil act in existence is to accuse misconduct upon upon the unwary.

[Big Bene]

By the way, I always want to puke when I read or hear people talk about dungeon mastering in HeroQuest. It happens a lot, especially among the Germans ('Spielleiter').
There is no dungeon master in HQ.

Well, I frequently use the term "Gamemaster" (GM) when referring to the player in question here in the forum or in the quests I write. I would call him Morcar were it not for the miserable fact that they renamed him in North America. For me, "GM" is just a simple way to avoid typing "Morcar/Zargon" all the time.

Havng said this, I think it's not too far-fetched to call him Dungeonmaster, implying a comparable role to the gamemaster of full-fetched RPGs like D&D. Heroquest was developed with the idea in mind to translate the basic concepts of fantasy roleplaying into a boardgame. This is a known "historical" fact, but even if it was not documented, you could easily tell it at first glance. The role of the player in question is that of the Dungeonmaster in RPGs, that's where it comes from, it's not derived from the boardgame aspect of Heroquest. In boardgames, there is rarely a single player with a special role opposed to all others. Of course, the player in question has a somewhat different approach than the DM in most RPGs, but then again, the role of the DM is also not defined entirely the same way in the different RPGs there are, either. In Heroquest, it is defined in a rather unusual way, to fit the mechanics of a boardgame, but it's still the basic function of the Dungeonmaster.
I think, the term "Dungeonmaster" (as opposed to "Gamemaster") is even more fitting to the player in question than to the Gamemaster of an RPG, as most RPGs have adventures in all sorts of locations, only somtimes in a dungeon, whereas HQ is a true "dungeon crawler", and the term "Dungeonmaster" also evokes the idea of the owner of the dungeon and master of it's monsters, which is more fitting to the "evil wizard" than to a "normal" RPG DM.
But you (Knightcrawler) are right in so far as teh differences there definitely are between the roles of the evil wizard and a "normal" DM should not be underestimated. The evil wizard surely has the right to play against the heroes and to try to win the game by killing them (this is, killing them in a fair way, leaving them an even chance to win if they play ably). If using the term "Dungeonmaster" leads to confusion in this point, it should be avoided, I just don't think it does.

For the original question, I'd say you should make the quests harder. This can be done by using more monsters of the "grey" variant, and by making some green or undead monsters champion characters with increased stats (plus using more traps and more monsters alltogether). No need to beef up all orcs or to leave orcs out entirely.

[knightkrawler]

For the original question, I'd say you should make the quests harder. This can be done by using more monsters of the "grey" variant, and by making some green or undead monsters champion characters with increased stats (plus using more traps and more monsters alltogether). No need to beef up all orcs or to leave orcs out entirely.

Agreed. To add to that, two quest in Wizards of Morcar are precedence cases for that. Therein Skeletons and Orcs respectively are in general beefed up. They are personal guards for Grawshak and Fanrax. These are just the two quests that spring to mind immediately, and there are many more.
Then there's the option to give monsters crossbows, to let them defend with white shields, or to let them move/attack/move. That last piece alone has been quite some fun when I playtested it. All kinds of basic skills weighing tactical play towards monsters while remaining simple.
Or this: When a goblin is activated in a room, it may immediately alarm the next room, which is also activated. These kinds of things.
The simplest solution to Heroes hacking through a room before monsters can even react: at least five monsters with at least 2 BP each. At least one will be able to counterattack.

The stats and rules are written in a way that they are very easily modified to great effects. That's why this forum is in existence.

[tasoe]

I always try to be three things when Morcaring:

- The referee: the legislative (I'm wrote the rules), the executive (I play thereafter and stick to them) & the judicative (I interpret if something comes up and have the only voice therein)
- The fifth player: I have the right to as much fun as the heroes do; I know my part and I use my strenghts, trying to explore the players' weaknesseseseses
- The enemy: I am evil, the players are good, I'm khaos, the players imperial, I am legion, the players are four, I am alone, the players cooperate

These three roles I play give me right and yet also the duty to play fair, but as evil as I can, exploring the 'may's' and 'cannots' of the game.

I mostly do the first thing in my quests. I only have fun if the heroes have fun. A good quest is one designed so that the heroes can almost make it (maybe one of them dies). If you kill a hero in your first 2 rooms then your quest is hard and the heroes don't have fun. And they don't come back next time.
I don't always go all out to kill the wizard because it get ridiculous when he stands always covered in the back, I'd like to see him get some action. But if he gets reckless I'll send two chaos guerreros to hit him and he'll go down.

I don't prefer it when Morcar is the fifth player. He shouldn't be active and have decision making other than what heroes to attack each turn. You can be creative by designing cool rooms and triggered events but then play them out normally so that the heroes don't feel cheated as if you put that there to kill a bunch of them.

As far as Patroclus' question is concerned, when heroes advance, the quests become harder. As simple as that.
A chaos warrior here and there accompanied by a couple of fimirs is a tough match for any group of heroes.
Also adding new monsters is nice, mostly 2-3 body monsters 'cause the 1 bodied ones are lame.

Finally, as a way to toughen several monsters or bosses, I give them re-roll instead of adding crazy body points or dice.
Chaos warriors who re-roll their failed defence dice live longer so they deal more damage.
The same way that a boss 6A/6D/6B is not as good as all 5s but re-rollable attacks and defenses.
The problem is that a monster with 6 attack can get a lucky shot in and one-hit-kill an unlucky hero. I don't want that to happen so 4 attacks with re-roll will do at the most 4 body points of damage, while the average result is the same, 3 skulls in both cases. More efficiency and less unexpected lucky/unlucky dice rolls that can destroy a nice afternoon set up for a couple of quests when a hero dies at the beginning of the quest.

[Goblin-King]

Assuming the damage has been done and you've already let the heroes grow too strong...
Another possibility is to just send hordes of monsters against them.
Sure they may not be particularly afraid of orcs, but throw enough at them and the will slowly be whittled down...

It's also always fun to separate the heroes.
After the second hero has passed this tile a the roof collapses...
Then simply have two routes through the entire dungeon, and make them meet up near the end.
There's safety in numbers. This way you take that away from them.

[Daedalus]

Well, I frequently use the term "Gamemaster" (GM) when referring to the player in question here in the forum or in the quests I write. I would call him Morcar were it not for the miserable fact that they renamed him in North America. For me, "GM" is just a simple way to avoid typing "Morcar/Zargon" all the time.

So true. I feel the renaming was an unfortunate effect of the licensing agreement of Games Workshop IP. Why else would Hasbro opt for a lesser name? Then again, they may have felt that Morcar wasn't as approachable to US kids. How about ZM?

For the original question, I'd say you should make the quests harder. This can be done by using more monsters of the "grey" variant, and by making some green or undead monsters champion characters with increased stats (plus using more traps and more monsters alltogether). No need to beef up all orcs or to leave orcs out entirely.

Agreed. To add to that, two quest in Wizards of Morcar are precedence cases for that. Therein Skeletons and Orcs respectively are in general beefed up. They are personal guards for Grawshak and Fanrax. These are just the two quests that spring to mind immediately, and there are many more.
Then there's the option to give monsters crossbows, to let them defend with white shields, or to let them move/attack/move....

Second Bene's and KK's elite groups, especially as KK points out published expansions have done just that. I've also given options as abililies to all of the group monsters of the Main Game System and expansions. I have set a mechanic that occasionally activates a monster's ability during the game. This frequency can be increased to up a Quest's challenge.

Assuming the damage has been done and you've already let the heroes grow too strong...
Another possibility is to just send hordes of monsters against them.
Sure they may not be particularly afraid of orcs, but throw enough at them and the will slowly be whittled down...

Second this. Even if the Orcs or Goblins go down quickly, the reinforcements will still get in attacks. Place enough in a room with good positioning and you can encircle the Heroes, forcing them to roll multiple defenses. They will eventually fail some of those rolls. Against Heroes with missile capability, it would probably be necessary to arm some monsters with crossbows or provide access to the Heroes' rear rank during a door-guard action.

Goblin Games: Just thought of an upgrade based on ZM play and Hero reaction. Using the maximum six Goblins from the Main Game System (Kelar's Keep Goblins need only count toward the maximum of that expansion, particularly before it is played), place them all in a room--you can always add an Orc or two. What, you don't have enough as some Goblins are already on the board, having cleverly run out of range? Then you'll just have to follow the rules and substitute other green monsters, namely Orcs or Fimir, to get their numbers back to six. Then run the Goblins back in on the Heroe's rear rank. Too bad the Heroes ignored the little sneaky little buggers. Next time they pursue to prevent a repeat, be sure the Goblins lead them merrily through a gauntlet of traps. Don't abandon the fun of Goblins just because the Heroes can pulverize them.

Finally, as a way to toughen several monsters or bosses, I give them re-roll instead of adding crazy body points or dice.
Chaos warriors who re-roll their failed defence dice live longer so they deal more damage.
The same way that a boss 6A/6D/6B is not as good as all 5s but re-rollable attacks and defenses.
The problem is that a monster with 6 attack can get a lucky shot in and one-hit-kill an unlucky hero. I don't want that to happen so 4 attacks with re-roll will do at the most 4 body points of damage, while the average result is the same, 3 skulls in both cases. More efficiency and less unexpected lucky/unlucky dice rolls that can destroy a nice afternoon set up for a couple of quests when a hero dies at the beginning of the quest.

This makes sense for the grunts. I think a Polar Warbear that may roll 8 AD against a Hero's single defense too much. I still prefer to allow a boss 5 or 6 AD to heighten the tension of the climax. If a Hero must die, the end is the best place. The player only misses a small portion of the Quest that way.

[Gold Bearer]

1BP, 2BP, 3BP, 1BP, 2BP, 3BP, 4BP, 5BP.

Orcs and goblins have a variety of weapons which lets you mess around. Letting some attack diagonally should work well. Orcs with flails are bosses and defend with three and can attack diagonally, the orc with the bigger sword is a savage orc, orcs with a shield stuck to them are black orcs, goblins with axes are night goblins, goblins with shields are forest goblins, goblins with axes and shields are goblin bosses, fimirs with shields are bosses, chaos warriors with shields are chaos champions, skeletons with shields are wights, etc. You can also use the candle sticks as staffs or swords and the gargoyle wings to make reapers.

One idea I've got for my house rules is to let all monsters that don't have 0MP open doors and as soon as one monster in a room is in sight all the monsters in the room are activated on the next EW player turn but I've never playtested it and it might make it too hard for the heroes.

[mako-heart]

I have used the rule that the monsters defend on white shields before that worked well. Men-at-arms are fun to bust out against heros too!