HQ EUS Version

[Gold Bearer]

I think we should creative a go-to definitive version. NO custom content, just the best bits of all official versions, maybe even the Japanese one. It would be easier for custom stuff, for instance in pbp instead of saying these rules from this version and these from this one it would just be the official Inn rules with these exceptions. Here's my suggestion.

---

Monsters & Men-At-Arms: Euro stats except with US BPs. Euro Men-At-Arms rules and costs.

Spells: EU 2nd ed. Chaos, Against The Ogre Hoard and Wizards Of Morcar spells where appropriate for the EWP. Elf and hero Wizards Of Morcar spells included. Wizard picks one of the seven sets, elf picks one of the remaining sets or three elf spells, wizard picks two more sets.

Equipment: Not limited by the amount of cards and all equipment from both versions, including the bracers and cloak of protection that can be combined with the wizards cloak. US weapon rules with Euro values except; Staff: 50gp. Short Sword: 50gp. Hand Axe: 100gp. Crossbows are two handed and can't shoot diagonally adjacent as well as directly adjacent targets. Equipment can be sold back at half it's listed value, rounding down.

Artifacts: Euro artifacts plus the US ones that aren't in the Euro version and the four Japanese ones. Two for the dwarf and wizard that mimic the ones from that raise BP and MP in the elf and barbarian quest packs. Possibly a wizard only artifact that allows the three spells from the Japanese version to be used once each per quest or just give him those three as a standard as bonus spells just for him. The orc's bane can attack two orcs and can be used before and after moving.

Rest: US disarming rules, no actions after you die (der), backtracking okay, scrolls can only be used by the wizard except for elf scrolls that can only be used by the elf.

---

What do we think?

[slev]

Some of that stuff is subjective interpretation wise...

That said, if you strip out the custom bits* I added for my "missing" US Quest packs, etc, HQR's basic game is effectvely what you propose, barring sme of the afore-mentioned specific rulings. After all, that was my original aim. Some of the ideas from the Japanese set then make the start if the "advanced" game mode, but at that point it has a LOT of custom content to make it work.

With the Armoury for example, it's tricky to simply put both sets of equipment next to each other, and some stats overlap. Realistically, there are a number of weapon ability combinations you can have, and they should each be represented by a single weapon, which involves a complete re-write of the system, and a change of prices to match. This lead to my adding a copple of extra weapons, and changing the GC values of everything to make them work.

Of course, even adding small ammounts of custom stuff pus this into contention. Similarly, your ruling on the Orcs' Bane is the opposite of mine, as it is releitvely underpowered otherwise. Your scroll limits lead to some treasure listings in quests needing to be changed.

So, while I'm not saying "no" to this projet, it's NOT simple at all. In writing my rule set, many things came up I'd not conscioned needing to cover. By the time I was finished, I'd changed the wording of everything!


*two Spell Groups (Control & Wizardry), a coupple of potions (Dwarf & Wizard specialities, MP restoring potion), a couple of "magic items", two monsters (Giant Rats & Demons), a coupple of treasure cards, two Chaos Spells, and one more Man-at-Arms.

[TMU]

Yeah this has been thought about, but eventually it can never really be done since some prefer this and some prefer that. That said, most of us have started their own rulesets for personal use.

[Gold Bearer]

I think it should be just US monster stats to keep it as simple as possible. From the Japanese version we should just make the artifacts 'official', the three unlimited use wizard spells are too much (even includes unlimited healing). We should consider the two artifacts that mimic the ones from the elf and barbarian quest packs (the one that raise BP and MP) as official too. Maybe the 2nd ed EU spells would be better than the first ed ones actually. Fire are underpowered, I think rock skin and courage were the only two that were changed.

With the Armoury for example, it's tricky to simply put both sets of equipment next to each other, and some stats overlap.

If they overlap there's no problem. The only differences are the staff and shortsword but there's a wizard's staff artefact that's the same as the EU staff. That's why I said US rules with EU prices apart the ones I priced differently so that it makes sense.

Realistically, there are a number of weapon ability combinations you can have, and they should each be represented by a single weapon, which involves a complete re-write of the system, and a change of prices to match.

Not following here.. Why does the system need rewriting?

Similarly, your ruling on the Orcs' Bane is the opposite of mine, as it is releitvely underpowered otherwise.

That ruling I used is the most powerful rule interpretation.

Your scroll limits lead to some treasure listings in quests needing to be changed.

Huh? How come?

So, while I'm not saying "no" to this projet, it's NOT simple at all. In writing my rule set, many things came up I'd not conscioned needing to cover. By the time I was finished, I'd changed the wording of everything!

I think it's fairly simple if we don't overdo/think it. A working version of it was basically done in the first post.

Yeah this has been thought about, but eventually it can never really be done since some prefer this and some prefer that. That said, most of us have started their own rulesets for personal use.

Why can't it be done? It's just a common base for everyone to work from rather than having at least four (EU1, EU2, US, Japanese) versions. People can then alter it as they like for their own needs.

[TMU]

Yeah this has been thought about, but eventually it can never really be done since some prefer this and some prefer that. That said, most of us have started their own rulesets for personal use.

Why can't it be done? It's just a common base for everyone to work from rather than having at least four (EU1, EU2, US, Japanese) versions. People can then alter it as they like for their own needs.

Because of that one prefers EU monsters as you prefer US monsters. And of course it goes with everything else as well. I mean you can do this, no problem, but I just feel that if someone feels a need to rewrite the rules, they will do it from scratch

[slev]

If they overlap there's no problem. The only differences are the staff and shortsword but there's a wizard's staff artefact that's the same as the EU staff. That's why I said US rules with EU prices apart the ones I priced differently so that it makes sense.

Realistically, there are a number of weapon ability combinations you can have, and they should each be represented by a single weapon, which involves a complete re-write of the system, and a change of prices to match.

Not following here.. Why does the system need rewriting?

X dice
X dice, throw
X dice, diagonal
X dice, throw, diagonal

All four of these can then have one and two handed versions.

What you need in practice is a swlection of weapons, armours, atc, that use the NAMES/Illustartins from te US and EU sets, to allow the different sets of weapon abilities, and THEN they need to be costed reletive to each other.

This then ALSO, much like Mendelev writing the periodic table, indicates the existiance of "other" weapons, etc, we don't know about.

Similarly, your ruling on the Orcs' Bane is the opposite of mine, as it is releitvely underpowered otherwise.

That ruling I used is the most powerful rule interpretation.

Sorry, read it backwards. There are people who think it should be the other way around though!

Your scroll limits lead to some treasure listings in quests needing to be changed.

[/quote][/quote][/quote]Huh? How come?[/quote]

I've seen Quests that grant scrolls deliberately as they're less useful than Potions, since they need a cast. In such Quests, this puts the Barbarian at a MASSIVE dissadvantage.

[Big Bene]

I tought about something like this, too, sometimes.
Should be as simple as possible (read: involving as few custom rules as possible).

The only purpose would be a ruleset that we can basically agree upon when forum members are playing togther (by post or in person). Each such game can of course still have additional custom rules or rule changes as the players wish.

Essencialy EU system with NA monster stats.
Chaos spells for enemy wizards as fitting the quest.

When you really want to amalgam the EU and NA (and perhaps even theJap) rules, you should read the threads where the key differences are collected. There are many of them (differences, not threads).

[Gold Bearer]

I think it should be Euro men-at-arms because they make a lot more sense (crossbowman should attack with two dice to be worth the same as the halberdier) but with US BP or they'd be overpriced. Because they work like that I think the monsters should as well.

I think the crossbow price should be increased to 400gp instead of reducing the longsword to 300gp. An extra 50gp for the diagonal attack isn't enough and the battle axe and crossbow should be the same price. Four dice/three dice ranged, both two handed is evenly matched I think.

Yeah this has been thought about, but eventually it can never really be done since some prefer this and some prefer that. That said, most of us have started their own rulesets for personal use.

Why can't it be done? It's just a common base for everyone to work from rather than having at least four (EU1, EU2, US, Japanese) versions. People can then alter it as they like for their own needs.

Because of that one prefers EU monsters as you prefer US monsters. And of course it goes with everything else as well. I mean you can do this, no problem, but I just feel that if someone feels a need to rewrite the rules, they will do it from scratch

I think you're missing the point of doing this. It's not to rewrite the rules. It's to create a more useable base than any of the individual versions to make custom rules simpler to implement because it's closer to most people custom rules to start with.

X dice
X dice, throw
X dice, diagonal
X dice, throw, diagonal

All four of these can then have one and two handed versions.

What you need in practice is a swlection of weapons, armours, atc, that use the NAMES/Illustartins from te US and EU sets, to allow the different sets of weapon abilities, and THEN they need to be costed reletive to each other.

This then ALSO, much like Mendelev writing the periodic table, indicates the existiance of "other" weapons, etc, we don't know about.

Nooo! That's well and truly into custom territory. It needs to be only the official equipment and as close to possible to the original casts but so it makes sense. Then people can use it as a base to mod because it will have all the official equipment.

Similarly, your ruling on the Orcs' Bane is the opposite of mine, as it is releitvely underpowered otherwise.

That ruling I used is the most powerful rule interpretation.

Sorry, read it backwards. There are people who think it should be the other way around though!

I don't know how it's worded in the other versions but in the 1st ed Euro version it's not clear at all (big surprise ), it just says can attack twice when attacking orcs so I think the generous interpretation is fair enough.

Your scroll limits lead to some treasure listings in quests needing to be changed.

Huh? How come?

I've seen Quests that grant scrolls deliberately as they're less useful than Potions, since they need a cast. In such Quests, this puts the Barbarian at a MASSIVE dissadvantage.

You forgot about the poor I don't think this is a problem as they tend to work together anyway, like the dwarf being the only one who can disarm traps but they all benefit. A good idea might be to rule that only the wizard can use scrolls except for elf spells that can only be used by him.

[slev]

I think the crossbow price should be increased to 400gp instead of reducing the longsword to 300gp. An extra 50gp for the diagonal attack isn't enough and the battle axe and crossbow should be the same price. Four dice/three dice ranged, both two handed is evenly matched I think.

X dice
X dice, throw
X dice, diagonal
X dice, throw, diagonal

All four of these can then have one and two handed versions.

What you need in practice is a swlection of weapons, armours, atc, that use the NAMES/Illustartins from te US and EU sets, to allow the different sets of weapon abilities, and THEN they need to be costed reletive to each other.

This then ALSO, much like Mendelev writing the periodic table, indicates the existiance of "other" weapons, etc, we don't know about.

Nooo! That's well and truly into custom territory. It needs to be only the official equipment and as close to possible to the original casts but so it makes sense. Then people can use it as a base to mod because it will have all the official equipment.

However, if we take the EU equipment, and then add the US, some overlaps and some of the GC values don't add together. Your price adjustment similarly then becomes a custom change.

The fact is that even the merge of the armouries becomes a custom change if done in a ballenced way.

Your scroll limits lead to some treasure listings in quests needing to be changed.

Huh? How come?

I've seen Quests that grant scrolls deliberately as they're less useful than Potions, since they need a cast. In such Quests, this puts the Barbarian at a MASSIVE dissadvantage.

You forgot about the poor I don't think this is a problem as they tend to work together anyway, like the dwarf being the only one who can disarm traps but they all benefit. A good idea might be to rule that only the wizard can use scrolls except for elf spells that can only be used by him.

OK, so you'd then have to add appropreate previsos for Sepll Scrolls found in solo quests, since these are tings too!

[Gold Bearer]

I think the crossbow price should be increased to 400gp instead of reducing the longsword to 300gp. An extra 50gp for the diagonal attack isn't enough and the battle axe and crossbow should be the same price. Four dice/three dice ranged, both two handed is evenly matched I think.

X dice
X dice, throw
X dice, diagonal
X dice, throw, diagonal

All four of these can then have one and two handed versions.

What you need in practice is a swlection of weapons, armours, atc, that use the NAMES/Illustartins from te US and EU sets, to allow the different sets of weapon abilities, and THEN they need to be costed reletive to each other.

This then ALSO, much like Mendelev writing the periodic table, indicates the existiance of "other" weapons, etc, we don't know about.

Nooo! That's well and truly into custom territory. It needs to be only the official equipment and as close to possible to the original casts but so it makes sense. Then people can use it as a base to mod because it will have all the official equipment.

However, if we take the EU equipment, and then add the US, some overlaps and some of the GC values don't add together. Your price adjustment similarly then becomes a custom change.

The fact is that even the merge of the armouries becomes a custom change if done in a ballenced way.

Yes but it's the bare minimum customisation for including all the equipment and the costs making sense.

Your scroll limits lead to some treasure listings in quests needing to be changed.

Huh? How come?

I've seen Quests that grant scrolls deliberately as they're less useful than Potions, since they need a cast. In such Quests, this puts the Barbarian at a MASSIVE dissadvantage.

You forgot about the poor I don't think this is a problem as they tend to work together anyway, like the dwarf being the only one who can disarm traps but they all benefit. A good idea might be to rule that only the wizard can use scrolls except for elf spells that can only be used by him.

OK, so you'd then have to add appropreate previsos for Sepll Scrolls found in solo quests, since these are tings too!

Hmm, well they can always save them until they meet up with the others again but it's not ideal.