Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 52

Thread: You Need A Hero?

  1. #31
    Abecedarian Mage Trudd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bordeaux (France)
    Posts
    174
    I totally agree.
    For those who are not used to the D20 rules, telling them the hero is a ranger lvl1 is not saying anything.
    Sure, having access to the stat of the hero is necessary.
    And, yes, please don't let the hero just be a "Fighter" or a "cleric". Make them "knight", "duellist", "noble warrior", or "priest", "vicar", "nun" or whatever exotic class. Even if it is linked to a normal class.

  2. #32
    Mage’s Assistant Belgariad87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Trudd View Post
    I totally agree.
    For those who are not used to the D20 rules, telling them the hero is a ranger lvl1 is not saying anything.
    Sure, having access to the stat of the hero is necessary.
    And, yes, please don't let the hero just be a "Fighter" or a "cleric". Make them "knight", "duellist", "noble warrior", or "priest", "vicar", "nun" or whatever exotic class. Even if it is linked to a normal class.
    +1
    (even though i do know D20 rules)

  3. #33
    Moderator Asmodai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA (USA)
    Posts
    794
    I agree. As perhaps one of the most vocal D20 advocates in these forums even I don't want to see units called level 1 human warrior. I don't see where in this thread that was suggested though as I don't see any evidence of it happening. For example when you first make a High Men Spearman under the hood it may be a level 1 human warrior but the user doesn't need to know that. You MAY be able to dig through some screens to find that info if you are huge D20 fan but it shouldn't be the way the unit is described to Joe User. It may also be confusing because for example it's possible that a High Men Crossbowmen that you first make is under the hood a Level 5 Human Fighter in D20. But you just made that guy, how is he level 5?!? Since units advance maybe there is going to be a progression like green, regular, veteran, elite.
    So a just produced high men crossbowmen would be green. Under the hood he might be a D20 human fighter level 5.
    When he get promoted he'd be a regular high men crossbowmen which would equate to a level 6 human fighter in D20.
    Also some units don't have classes such as say the dragon turtle or wyvern. A wyvern still advances, you can see this in the D20 SRD there is a line in the stats called Advancement that tells you how they advance, many are by character class but not all. A wyvern starts at 7 Hit Dice and can advance all the way up to 21, when it goes from 10 to 11 it even increases in size from Huge to Gargantuan.

  4. #34
    I agree. As perhaps one of the most vocal D20 advocates in these forums even I don't want to see units called level 1 human warrior. I don't see where in this thread that was suggested though as I don't see any evidence of it happening. For example when you first make a High Men Spearman under the hood it may be a level 1 human warrior but the user doesn't need to know that.
    Agree 100%! And I like the idea of keeping oddball hero names like Mystic X "The Unknown" or The Golden One or whatever.

  5. #35
    Mage’s Assistant Belgariad87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy_Costisick View Post
    Agree 100%! And I like the idea of keeping oddball hero names like Mystic X "The Unknown" or The Golden One or whatever.
    yeah! hope aaron sees this...
    Malleus the Magician + Fang the Draconian = OP

  6. #36
    How about a game startup option of "No Champions"? Yes, it's heresy, but it would provide an interesting difference in gameplay.

    Another option. All armies must contain a hero (and if he gets killed, the stack suffers a terrible penalty until it gets a replacement).

  7. #37
    With regards to your first statement, the Heroes and Champions of this game serve as its catch-up mechanic. Every good strategy game has one. For instance, Risk has its mechanic where you turn in cards to get reinforcements. Magic: the Gathering has Wrath of God spells that destroy all creatures. There are many others. If a sorcerer gets way behind, he can still summon some strong heroes, outfit them with some magic items, and then terrorize nearby cities to give himself some breathing room in order to try to re-establish his footing. Not having heroes or champions would make it very hard for a player or an AI to come back once it was behind.

    As to your second statement, having that many heroes would devalue them IMHO. If every stack of units had to have one hero in their midst, you would have to have tons of heroes. That's too many to keep track of. They would lose a lot of their specialness. Personally, I'm hoping they cap us at 6-9 heroes/champions in WoM.

    Peace,

    -Troy

  8. #38
    Heroes aren't going to be labeled “Level 1 Fighter”... That's just goofy, lol. I mean, there are games where it works, but it wouldn't in WoM. It would be like going to a fancy french restaurant and asking for “snails”. Everyone knows you order escargot. What is escargot? Snails! But that's not the point. What's in a name? Flavor Shakespear! The answer is flavor! Why didn't you just call the play “Dude and Dudette”?!?!? Sorry... my mind seemed to wonder away there for a moment.... No Level 1 Fighter...

    We could add a switch to turn heroes and champions off, but it would really change the gameplay. I'm not saying that's bad, it would just be really different.

    If you want heroes leading the armies we could follow in the footsteps of Knights of Honor. You can only have so many heroes. You need heroes to lead armies. So, you can only have so many armies in the field. (City garrisons don't need a leader.) It would certainly be a game changing dynamic. If a lot of people liked the idea we might add it as an option. However, I don't know that it's going to get enough support to be worth the effort. Still, it's an interesting suggestion

  9. #39
    Mage of the Inner Tower War Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    62 Troll Drive, Troll Town, Plane of Myrror
    Posts
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    If you want heroes leading the armies we could follow in the footsteps of Knights of Honor. You can only have so many heroes. You need heroes to lead armies. So, you can only have so many armies in the field. (City garrisons don't need a leader.) It would certainly be a game changing dynamic. If a lot of people liked the idea we might add it as an option. However, I don't know that it's going to get enough support to be worth the effort. Still, it's an interesting suggestion
    On the one hand I like the idea of having stacks needing heroes as it will cut down on pointless Spam armies. However, on the other hand you'd need quite a lot of heroes for large Empires and they would lose their uniqueness, and then there's the possibility that killing heroes could become an exploit with certain magics/abilities, etc. I also quite like the idea that you start out with nothing but spearmen for exploration in the beginning, and that getting your first hero is a big 'woo-hoo' moment.

    I reckon heroes should be required to lead armies only if-

    -Morale is in the game and not having a hero reduces baseline morale.
    -Heroes can be 'wounded' instead of killed and have to recuperate for X amount of turns in the nearest City.
    -There are lots of them as they may have a quick turn-over!

    If it came to a vote I'd say no at this point, however.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    If you want heroes leading the armies we could follow in the footsteps of Knights of Honor. You can only have so many heroes. You need heroes to lead armies. So, you can only have so many armies in the field. (City garrisons don't need a leader.) It would certainly be a game changing dynamic. If a lot of people liked the idea we might add it as an option. However, I don't know that it's going to get enough support to be worth the effort. Still, it's an interesting suggestion
    I really don't like that idea, personally. You've stated that WoM has the capacity for HUGE maps. And we know there can be up to 7 planes. That's a lot of territory to control and conquer. If I gotta wait for enough heroes to do that, it'll take forever. I would rather heroes be more exceptional: the way they were in MoM. I'd want more than MoM gave us, of course. Maybe up to 9 or 10. But not one per stack. They lose their special-ness then and it cheapens the the importance of building the top unit for each race.
    Last edited by Troy_Costisick; 04-29-2013 at 02:41 PM.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
footer