Make a small donation to Ye Olde Inn!
Every cent received goes toward Ye Olde Inn's maintenance and allows us to continue providing the best resources for HeroQuest and Fantasy Gaming fans.
Make a small donation to Ye Olde Inn!
Every cent received goes toward Ye Olde Inn's maintenance and allows us to continue providing the best resources for HeroQuest and Fantasy Gaming fans.
Teldurn wrote:Goblin-King wrote:Is it possible to rewrite the spell card without referencing the trap?
If we decide to go with my suggestion of a separate Special Rules page, it won't be necessary to rewrite it.
Gold Bearer wrote:Yes.Goblin-King wrote:Is it possible to rewrite the spell card without referencing the trap?
I think we should use all of them and use these to expand the deck. That's kind of what was suggested from the beginning. I also think we should keep the fimir art, it looks really good. We just need to rename it. That's eighteen spells, and possibly more to come.Teldurn wrote:I also really like the Acid Rain card from Sjeng's existing Fimir deck.
It's not my spell.Goblin-King wrote:Gold Bearer wrote:Yes.Goblin-King wrote:Is it possible to rewrite the spell card without referencing the trap?
Then do it smart ass!
Gold Bearer wrote:I also think we should keep the fimir art, it looks really good.
Goblin-King wrote:Teldurn wrote:Goblin-King wrote:Is it possible to rewrite the spell card without referencing the trap?
If we decide to go with my suggestion of a separate Special Rules page, it won't be necessary to rewrite it.
While showering IS the best way to think, I don't quite see why you would want to move a special rule for a single quest to the beginning of the book.
I mean... if you are running out of space you are probably putting in too many quest notes anyways
Stuff in the beginning of the book should only be for things that are general throughout the entire book.
Like if(/when ) we put in KK's new slough trap, that trap will be a part of the pack through all the quests. You'll meet that trap again and again.
But if all goblins defend by rolling white shields (or what ever) in a single quest, it doesn't make sense to put in a line saying you have to look up the rules for this quest on another page.
The rule should just be on the same page for easy referencing.Gold Bearer wrote:Yes.Goblin-King wrote:Is it possible to rewrite the spell card without referencing the trap?
Then do it smart ass!
Goblin-King wrote:Gold Bearer wrote:I also think we should keep the fimir art, it looks really good.
It's not really a matter of what looks good but rather a matter of using artists' works without permission.
Hero Quest is an unsupported, dead game which is why I can accept that we recycle components from it. Logos, layouts, etc...
But using current, active artists' works is a whole other deal. Stealing art is not okay, even if it's non-profit.
Goblin-King wrote:If you want to designate random spells in your quests feel free to do so. I don't think there is a need to make new rules for this.
That's the beauty of HeroQuest, with very few components and quest-notes you can make a myriad of different quests with very different flavors.
Not sure about the amount of cards in the deck... 18+ sounds like a LOT for a single deck.
I'd prefer fewer but more distinct spells.
Of course. I thought it was done by someone on the site and we could use it with permission. I never suggested we steal anyones work so don't make a presumption before you make an accusation, and I certainly don't need you to tell me what is or isn't okay. I'm not sure what your problem is and I've tried to be patient with you but you're really start to push it now.Goblin-King wrote:It's not really a matter of what looks good but rather a matter of using artists' works without permission.Gold Bearer wrote:I also think we should keep the fimir art, it looks really good.
Hero Quest is an unsupported, dead game which is why I can accept that we recycle components from it. Logos, layouts, etc...
But using current, active artists' works is a whole other deal. Stealing art is not okay, even if it's non-profit.
I wasn't really suggesting it as a rule. I thought I was quite clear that it's at the digression of the quest designer. I just thought that if one generally had determined spells and the other type generally had random ones (and there's no reason why one or more couldn't have both) then it would a bit more distinction to two new types of magicians that are sharing spell.Goblin-King wrote:If you want to designate random spells in your quests feel free to do so. I don't think there is a need to make new rules for this.
That's the beauty of HeroQuest, with very few components and quest-notes you can make a myriad of different quests with very different flavors.
For one thing I don't think a largish number of new spells is a problem, just the opposite if they're all decent spells, and secondly it was a list of possible spells and the eight from the fimir deck makes eighteen. I wasn't saying that we have eighteen confirmed spells, we're still just brainstorming. Must I clarify everything I say from now on in this much detail so you get it? It's tedious!Goblin-King wrote:Not sure about the amount of cards in the deck... 18+ sounds like a LOT for a single deck.
I'd prefer fewer but more distinct spells.
I agree. There's no reason to rewrite the rules for a trap that's going to be used in multiple quests on the spell card. But it is possible.knightkrawler wrote:And no, rewriting the Slough spell card without referencing the trap rule would result in a ridiculously small fonted wall of text. The EWP should be able to lay the trap rules out for the players who'll quickly learn.
We could also make a reference card analogous to the Magic Reference Card from Wizards of Morcar.
Those spells were split though, there were only three or six in each set. How many chaos spells are there in total (we can easily include a list of the newer ones for people who only have the base set, in fact we're going to have to relist all the chaos spells we're using anyway because they're only in the US version)? Maybe we should match that number. It would be tidy and give us the freedom to include the spell we want instead of being restricted to a small number.knightkrawler wrote:As for the number of cards:
The card deck in Wizards of Morcar had 64 cards! That's as much as the EU game system had.
Bow, Halberd, Great Sword, Great Axe and Bastard Sword is so much simpler. Your ones have special rules like weapon range and affect different monsters differently, that should just be for artefacts, not standard equipment.knightkrawler wrote:I have no problem with that amount, though I don't consider it necessary.
5 pieces of equipment (if we follow my suggestions - could be more, could be less), 4 artefacts, 6 Swamp spells... I don't think the number of cards is gonna be a problem as it stands now. That's not a threat in my opinion.
I see where you're coming from but I don't think it's necessary to restrict ourselves like that. Why should there be a certain number of each type? Why is the number of spells we have now in any way unmanageable? Why should we make a consciousness decision to limit ourselves for no reason? The most important thing is that the spells are interesting, the right flavour, that they work well and that they're distinct from each other.Teldurn wrote:IINM, the base Game System has 12 Chaos spells in the deck, and it didn't use all of them in the whole quest book. But since almost all of the spells we just came up with in the last two days are equally fantastic, I propose a simple way to streamline the bloat of having too many Swamp Spells. Categorize the spells we come up with plus the Fimir deck already available into one of three categories: Direct Attack, Debuff, or Support.
Direct Attack - pretty clear. If the spell directly does damage, it goes here.
Debuff - things like immobilizing, reducing attack or defense dice, or anything else that hampers a Hero, goes here.
Support - spells that either summon new monsters or buff up monsters goes here.
Once we have categorized spells, we can see which one has too many and reduce from there. Maybe aim to have 3 in each category. Voila, streamlined and reduced the deck to a manageable number!
EDIT: Or change it up to be 2 Direct attack and 4 debuff, to give more of a swampy flavor.
It's in case the reflection spell goes in, sir.Goblin-King wrote:Cloud Of Flies - The "swamp based" characters distinction is a little weak. Card should mention specific monsters or just affect all heroes. Or anything BUT the caster. Remove this distinction from all cards.
I suggest in addition to changing your attitude you change your fever spell as it overlaps with the previously proposed cloud of flies spell.Goblin-King wrote:There's some overlap with the the Fever spell. I suggest making it just affect attack.
Or we could have a swamp beast. It fits with the theme and it would be nice to have an original(ish) monster.Goblin-King wrote:Swamp Beast - As we don't have a swamp beast I suggest using something we DO have. Summon basilisk instead. Fits pretty good. Or perhaps go for "drowned corpses and summon some zombies!
I agree, it should be defendable.Goblin-King wrote:Rot/Putrifaction - No defense?!?! Seems OP
Depends on what happens with the reduced equipment at the start idea. It's also good to make it clear why the target rolls two (if that's what we decide is standard for all the heroes) defence dice.Goblin-King wrote:Insect Swarm - Isn't basic defense always 2 dice? Just write that the target may roll 2 dice in defense.
Goblin-King wrote:Disease No objections
Goblin-King wrote:It's not really a matter of what looks good but rather a matter of using artists' works without permission.
Hero Quest is an unsupported, dead game which is why I can accept that we recycle components from it. Logos, layouts, etc...
But using current, active artists' works is a whole other deal. Stealing art is not okay, even if it's non-profit.
Gold Bearer wrote:I not sure what your problem is and I've tried to be patient with you but you're really start to push it now.
Return to HQ25th Brainstorming
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest