New Erfworld Campaign - "Darkness Rising" - Rules

[MarbitChow]

Also, I'm not entirely sure if juice costs are properly balanced. Is it intentional, for example, for Reset Hex to be cheaper than Reset?
Finally, Shatter Ward doesn't have a juice cost.

Shatter Ward fixed. Juice costs and AP costs are a first pass. I think some of the spells should become 0.5 AP spells, but I haven't decided which yet. Juice costs are also a first pass. I just went back and revised Malpractice down, but I do want the offensive spells in Healmancy to be more expensive; you're twisting the magic against its normal inclination.

[WaterMonkey314]

Also, I'm not entirely sure if juice costs are properly balanced. Is it intentional, for example, for Reset Hex to be cheaper than Reset?
Finally, Shatter Ward doesn't have a juice cost.

Shatter Ward fixed. Juice costs and AP costs are a first pass. I think some of the spells should become 0.5 AP spells, but I haven't decided which yet. Juice costs are also a first pass. I just went back and revised Malpractice down, but I do want the offensive spells in Healmancy to be more expensive; you're twisting the magic against its normal inclination.

Right - I'm fine with offensive Healomancy being expensive. It's the normal healing (and whether it's more expensive tan the status quo) I'm worried about. Of course, I haven't had time to look at it yet (still!).

Curse RL.

[0beron]

I just noticed that Spear Quiver and Dagger Sash are MORE expensive than crafting that many individual items. I would have expected the reverse. I don't plan to ever reach the 2nd level of accessory crafting, but just wanted to point that out.

[MarbitChow]

I just noticed that Spear Quiver and Dagger Sash are MORE expensive than crafting that many individual items. I would have expected the reverse. I don't plan to ever reach the 2nd level of accessory crafting, but just wanted to point that out.

That's because equipping each individual item costs an action, but the quiver and sash are treated as a single item. So, for the cheaper version, you've got 1 shot, but then you have to spend an action to re-equip if you want to fire again.

[0beron]

AH! Forgot that bit, fair point. It makes sense now.

[Exate]

I don't plan to ever reach the 2nd level of accessory crafting

Damn you, Dollamancer. We have plenty of ways to get additional units, and you're obsessed with mucking about with golems instead of making Yuri a mightier lord of war.

[0beron]

Hahaha well actually I am making you a mighter lord of war, because with the exception of Lesser Golems, my units are better than 1st level normal units, yet they don't gain XP so you get more for yourself when you're in combat with them :p

[Exate]

Hahaha well actually I am making you a mighter lord of war, because with the exception of Lesser Golems, my units are better than 1st level normal units, yet they don't gain XP so you get more for yourself when you're in combat with them :p

Pff, that's just weaseling around the fact that you're not giving Yuri the beam sword, rocket boots, and flamethrower that he deserves.

[The Colonel]

Yuri will become IRONMAN!

[MarbitChow]

Request For Feedback - New Rules - Additional Abilities:Recruiter, Paragon; Elite Units

I'm well aware that melee need more love in the down-time. I'm open to suggestions, but I thought I'd throw out an idea that's been stewing for a few weeks and see what you think.

Additional Abilities

[Requires Leadership or Paragon] Recruiter (1 AP) : A city managed by this unit gains +12.5% UP/Turn. Only 1 unit can manage a city each turn, and a unit can only manage 1 city each turn.
[Requires Recruiter] Skilled Recruiter (0.5 AP) : A city managed by this unit gains an additional +12.5% UP/Turn, for a total of +25%.
[Requires Skilled Recruiter] Master Recruiter (0.5 AP) : A city managed by this unit gains an additional +25% UP/Turn, for a total of +50%.

[Requires Heavy, Level 4, Non-Caster] Paragon (1 AP) : All units of the same build as this unit (Warrior, Spearman, Archer, or Flyer) in this unit's stack get +1 Combat / +1 Defense Leadership Bonus per level of the highest level character w/ Paragon. Max Leadership bonus +3/+3. Cities controlled by a Paragon can pop an Elite unit of the Paragon’s build.
[Requires Paragon] Paragon Strategist (0.5 AP) : Unit can define a new Elite build, and a city controlled by this Paragon can pop units of that build.
[Requires Paragon] Paragon Recruiter (0.5 AP) : Elite units popped in a city this unit controls only require 6 UP (3 UP for Garrison).
[Requires Paragon] Paragon Commander (0.5 AP) : Increases max Paragon Leadership bonus to +6 / +6.
[Requires Paragon] Paragon General (0.5 AP) : Paragon Commander (1 AP) : Increases max Paragon Leadership bonus to +6 / +6.

Elite Units
Elite units require 8 UP to pop (or 4 UP to pop as a Garrison Unit), and have restricted builds. Each Elite unit starts at Level 1, but starts with a -3 AP deficit. All elite units are Heavy units. All Abilities and Combat Stats are predetermined for this build. (Once the -3 AP has been paid off, unit is free to spend additional AP, but must continue following the combat stat progression.) Elite units cannot purchase Leadership or Paragon, however.

Default Elite Builds:

Knight (Elite Warrior): 11 Combat / 10 Defense / 28 Hits. 8 Square Move. 8 Overland Hex Move. Attack. Special: Heavy, Well-Armed, Well-Protected, Beefy.
Combat Stats must be allocated as +2 Combat/ +2 Defense/ +6 Hits each level.

Royal Guard (Elite Spearman): 6 Combat / 5 Defense / 35 Hits. 8 Square Move. 8 Overland Hex Move. Strike. Special: Heavy, Guard, Interpose, Bodyguard, Beefy.
Combat Stats must be allocated as +1 Combat/ +1 Defense/ +12 Hits each level.

Marksman (Elite Archer): 12 Combat / 4 Defense / 14 Hits. 8 Square Move. 8 Overland Hex Move. Fire. Special: Heavy, Well-Armed, Mighty Blow, Coordinate.
Combat Stats must be allocated as +4 Combat/ +1 Defense/ +3 Hits each level.

Daemon (Elite Flier): 6 Combat / 6 Defense / 17 Hits. 12 Square Move. 12 Overland Hex Move. Fire. Special: Flying. Special: Heavy.
Combat Stats must be allocated as +2 Combat/ +2 Defense/ +6 Hits each level.

[0beron]

Not having experience with melee units and such, I can't comment on the balance aspect of these, but in terms of concept and flavor I love it! Definitely seems like the kind of thing that can make our PCs (and even some units we pop) more unique and significant.

[Exate]

I'm not a fan of most of that. As to why...

The Elite Unit rules as presented let us pop units at a sort of halfway-to-high-level status and then let them play catchup later. It frontloads them with power and lets experience matter less in exchange for massive UP costs. You might as well just let us pop units above level 1, if you're going to let us directly trade UP for power while marginalizing XP.

The Paragon concept basically reads "any heavy that hits level 4 can become a warlord on the cheap". In fact, they're not only a warlord, they're super-warlords who can get their bonuses faster and pop unique units which normal warlords can't access; all they lose is a little bit of flexibility. In my opinion, this is not a good thing.

The Recruiter idea is actually not bad. We should really have a default city management bonus, though- one of the things I tried to do with Yuri when he was left in charge was manage the city, but like with training there was no real effect due to the lack of mechanics for it. A cohesive set of city management rules would help.

[MarbitChow]

The Elite Unit rules as presented let us pop units at a sort of halfway-to-high-level status and then let them play catchup later. It frontloads them with power and lets experience matter less in exchange for massive UP costs. You might as well just let us pop units above level 1, if you're going to let us directly trade UP for power while marginalizing XP.

With the addition of special units like the Naughty Kitty and Bad Ass, as well as dollamancer golems, the ability to pop more powerful units already exists. I'm looking for a way to allow melee to have more of an impact on how the side grows above just fighting, but if the ideas aren't something that the players are excited about, they're not going to be implemented.

The Paragon concept basically reads "any heavy that hits level 4 can become a warlord on the cheap". In fact, they're not only a warlord, they're super-warlords who can get their bonuses faster and pop unique units which normal warlords can't access; all they lose is a little bit of flexibility. In my opinion, this is not a good thing.

I can think of a couple of ways to address this. Upping the cost of the Paragon to 2 AP would bring it more in-line with the Leadership cost, but your second point is the bigger issue: while it's not technically nerfing leadership, it does provide many similar benefits and the ability to pop new units.

What would your opinion be if we were to leave Paragon as-is, but grant the ability for a Heavy Leader to pop any of the Elite units (not just ones that match their build), plus add in non-heavy Elites that a non-heavy Leader could pop? Basically, to expand on the idea of allowing higher-level non-casters to influence unit type creation, with regular Leadership unlocking non-heavy elite units, and Heavy Leadership unlocking all, for 1 AP?

The Recruiter idea is actually not bad. We should really have a default city management bonus, though- one of the things I tried to do with Yuri when he was left in charge was manage the city, but like with training there was no real effect due to the lack of mechanics for it. A cohesive set of city management rules would help.

In Erfworld, the default 'city management' bonus grants additional shmuckers, and I've been assuming that you've been getting it each turn. While I like the idea of training, I don't like the idea of free XP for every unit of a side every turn, so I'd like to limit that somehow. I wouldn't be opposed to adding in an Ability that allows you to train others, but I think I'd limit it to a single stack each turn (so only 7 other units can benefit), as well as a few other limitations (trainer doesn't get XP, can't train higher than 1 level below trainer's level, etc.)

Another possibility includes having "random encounters" as another way to be able to train up XP (which wouldn't necessarily need to be played out like the last few major encounters have been), but that subjects the method much more to the GMs whim. Keep in mind that any training method that I institute is also available to your opponents, who have had significantly longer to exist and capitalize on them (although I can use the ongoing Ixian war as an excuse to keep this somewhat limited by saying that most of the trained units are consumed in the war). I always need to factor that in when designing these rules and abilities.

[Exate]

With the addition of special units like the Naughty Kitty and Bad Ass, as well as dollamancer golems, the ability to pop more powerful units already exists.

I wasn't objecting to the ability to pop more powerful units, I was objecting to the concept of basically spending UP to enable mortgaging of advancement through experience.

What would your opinion be if we were to leave Paragon as-is, but grant the ability for a Heavy Leader to pop any of the Elite units (not just ones that match their build), plus add in non-heavy Elites that a non-heavy Leader could pop? Basically, to expand on the idea of allowing higher-level non-casters to influence unit type creation, with regular Leadership unlocking non-heavy elite units, and Heavy Leadership unlocking all, for 1 AP?

I do like the concept of high-level leader units being able to influence the sort of units that their side can pop through sheer personal distinction- it's not particularly in line with what we've seen of Erfworld, but it's fun nevertheless. That said, I still think elite units as currently described are a poor way to accomplish that objective.

I am also not incredibly into the idea that the Heavy ability should be used as a key prerequisite for things like this- either custom unit pops or the Paragon ability if you use it. Choosing Heavy is a statement that a unit is willing to trade some of its flexibility for sheer power; any abilities which use Heavy as a prerequisite should reflect that choice rather than open up all the options available to non-heavy but otherwise identical units and then some.

While I like the idea of training, I don't like the idea of free XP for every unit of a side every turn, so I'd like to limit that somehow. I wouldn't be opposed to adding in an Ability that allows you to train others, but I think I'd limit it to a single stack each turn (so only 7 other units can benefit), as well as a few other limitations (trainer doesn't get XP, can't train higher than 1 level below trainer's level, etc.)

Any unit with Leadership can train themselves and a single stack of infantry in any turn in which they don't use any Overland Move, gaining all units (including themselves) 1 XP. A bonus Trainer ability lets them train 2 stacks at once with Improved Leadership and 3 stacks at once with Commanding Leadership, a Beastmaster ability lets them train beast-type units, and a Master Trainer ability lets them gain 2 XP/turn for Improved Leadership and 3 XP/turn for Commanding Leadership. Casters are not subject to training.

Bam. A training system that doesn't result in free XP for everyone every single turn or allow runaway XP, keeps the Leadership ability valuable (particularly if you're muddying the waters in terms of combat bonuses by bringing Paragons into it), and still makes training worthwhile. It also makes melee units- warlords, at least- have rather pressing choices with what to do with their time- go on campaign, or stay home and get their troops up to snuff?

Sure, this results in many units not being level 1. But you're already throwing around level 2 units not infrequently, and any unit that's sitting around not using Move isn't being used on the front lines. Mostly this system would mean that any garrison is going to have one stack that's mid-to-high-leveled per warlord that's been sitting around in garrison rather than actually fighting. I wouldn't expect any side to find it worthwhile to get any but the most expensive units up past level 3 through sheer training, and very few would ever be trained past level 2.

[MarbitChow]

I do like the concept of high-level leader units being able to influence the sort of units that their side can pop through sheer personal distinction- it's not particularly in line with what we've seen of Erfworld, but it's fun nevertheless. That said, I still think elite units as currently described are a poor way to accomplish that objective.

The 'Heavy' mechanics and negative AP were an easy way for me to quickly work out a way to allow for heavier units w/ higher starting stats without working out entirely new rulesets. The rules are already very intimidating.

Maybe it would be simpler to just make "Elite" a modifier that can't be purchased w/ AP, but could be applied to a unit when it is popped if the city is controlled by a Leader or Paragon w/ the appropriate ability, and adding the ability increases the UP cost. Something like +3 Combat / +3 Defense / +10 Hits for +8 UP (+4 UP for Garrison Elite). The ability to apply modifiers to popped units would be a level-dependent AP-purchased ability, though. Thoughts?

I am also not incredibly into the idea that the Heavy ability should be used as a key prerequisite for things like this- either custom unit pops or the Paragon ability if you use it. Choosing Heavy is a statement that a unit is willing to trade some of its flexibility for sheer power; any abilities which use Heavy as a prerequisite should reflect that choice rather than open up all the options available to non-heavy but otherwise identical units and then some.

Agreed. I'll be dropping Heavy from requirements for the Paragon ability.

Any unit with Leadership can train themselves and a single stack of infantry in any turn in which they don't use any Overland Move, gaining all units (including themselves) 1 XP. A bonus Trainer ability lets them train 2 stacks at once with Improved Leadership and 3 stacks at once with Commanding Leadership, a Beastmaster ability lets them train beast-type units, and a Master Trainer ability lets them gain 2 XP/turn for Improved Leadership and 3 XP/turn for Commanding Leadership. Casters are not subject to training.

Based on this, a Level 7 w/ Leadership (all levels), Multi-Stack Trainer (both levels) and Master Trainer (both levels) could crank out 3 stacks of Level 4 units every 12 turns. If he spends his first 12 turns cranking out 3 stacks of Level 4 Leaders w/ 2-stack, 2 XP Trainers, they can then spread out and start leveling up hundreds of other units...

I like the basic idea, but I don't think I'm going to allow an increase in either XP or stack size that can be trained, and I'll probably limit training to only training units of the same build, plus the trainer gets no XP and the trainees can't be trained once they reach the level below the current trainer's level.

I want to give non-casters a lot to do between combats, but I also want combats to remain the primary method of gaining XP. I'll keep chewing on this while we work out the next few scenarios. In the meantime, please continue to post feedback and additional suggestions!

[Exate]

Maybe it would be simpler to just make "Elite" a modifier that can't be purchased w/ AP, but could be applied to a unit when it is popped if the city is controlled by a Leader or Paragon w/ the appropriate ability, and adding the ability increases the UP cost. Something like +3 Combat / +3 Defense / +10 Hits for +8 UP (+4 UP for Garrison Elite). The ability to apply modifiers to popped units would be a level-dependent AP-purchased ability, though. Thoughts?

Still not a fan of Paragons as designed in general, and I'm not sure that making units more powerful, instead of more flavorful, is the appropriate way to go about this. Perhaps this- right now, units get massive automatic bonuses at levels 4 and 8 in the form of additional attacks. What if we get another one at level 6, in the form of a unique ability to be negotiated with the GM for balance but to approximate the value of 2 AP, which units popped at cities under their control will also have available during their careers at the cost of 2 AP? Then we see a situation where we don't raise the cost or overall power level of the units, but there's still a strong influence in both mechanics and flavor.

Based on this, a Level 7 w/ Leadership (all levels), Multi-Stack Trainer (both levels) and Master Trainer (both levels) could crank out 3 stacks of Level 4 units every 12 turns. If he spends his first 12 turns cranking out 3 stacks of Level 4 Leaders w/ 2-stack, 2 XP Trainers, they can then spread out and start leveling up hundreds of other units...

Honestly, I'd consider the greatest flaw in this flavor-wise the fact that any given city could possibly pop 24 warlords over the course of 12 turns, but I suppose in this system it's just a matter of having 96 UP to spend. If you've got a high-level warlord who has devoted all his AP to becoming a super-trainer unit and spends all his time at home instead of out smiting your enemies, then you kind of deserve to have substantial rewards for it just like if you've got a high-level Dollamancer at home pounding out awesome golems.

Leadership (and leadership bonuses) really are excessively easy to come by in this game, in my opinion. No "token force" should be running around with no less than five warlords, none of which are first-level. The norm should be that most units on the field do not have a leadership bonus, and that if there are multiple warlords present with a force it's because that force is an important one to its side and merits the substantial investment of resources.

As things stand, you are right and the suggestion is subject to runaway builds. If you put the kibosh on fresh warlords popping up like weeds, then it would not be so.

I like the basic idea, but I don't think I'm going to allow an increase in either XP or stack size that can be trained, and I'll probably limit training to only training units of the same build, plus the trainer gets no XP and the trainees can't be trained once they reach the level below the current trainer's level.

Training only units of the same build and the trainer not getting XP are in conflict with the comic, where we have an example of an archer warlord who trains melee units and leveled herself through training. I also find them fairly pointless restrictions that don't assist with balance significantly. As far as stack size and XP increase go... those might well merit throttling back or elimination, but I would like to see there be some way of training units better for someone who invests in that.

[Werebiscuit]

I'm sensing "power creep" in that now the mancers have had some lovin and gained a little power and then the same has been done for the non-heavies in the form of mounts... then something "has" to be done for the heavies. Much as I appreciate the lovin and the thought, you're going to end up having to re-balance a now top heavier system for the new players and the ones who've spent on abilities that don't look quite as good as some of the "new stuff". Not while there's a lot of the stuff that's already in the rules that could be used to throttle back the power gain

It's not that I don't appreciate some of the new abilities but they should give the player a tough decision as to how to spend those valuable AP's. The heavy/mount decision was a tough one for me and one I'm still not sure I "got right". Given T Coils now I'm in LOS...now I'm not.. manouver as an example I'd see that as an ability that maybe goes with investment of AP's in Horeseman...not one right off the "I can get on a mount so it'll do my bidding".
So if you want your mount to do anything other than go at top speed in a straight line you'd need to invest AP's. Horeseman APs could also make you harder to dismount. Maybe tougher mounts require higher control...I don't know. Maybe the dragon (or rhinoceros )that's able to carry a heavy require a "horseman level 4" to manouver or horsemen 2 just to stay in the saddle.

So for heavy lovin how about investment in say "shield bash" that buys extra d6's to your bull rush roll (not necessarily just for Heavies either). Or something like rock throw that buys a siege attack ( definitely heavies only) with a range the same as a gumps reach. Each AP (or multiple if you decide it's worth more than 1AP per tier) adds an extra D6 siege and an extra square of range up to a max. Maybe dodge shouldn't work on char level but again level determined on how many Ap's were invested ? The basic +4 dodge bonus comes free +'s after that are bought. (that'd be a no-brainer for the movement limited non mounted warrior)...you ain't gonna hit me till I get in melee range

There's a lot of scope for making choices with just the rules we have without inventing new abilities.

[MarbitChow]

Ok, some random thoughts:

Regarding Warlords - The game has evolved in such a way that warlords (and dance fighting) are pretty much required for most regular stacks, although I will try to stay true-to-canon regarding established sides (Jetstone's, for example, won't have dance fighting at all). Since warlords are an essential part of the game at this point, I'd rather build on what we've got than try to "fix" what has been established for months. We know that we're diverging from Erfworld on a significant number of points, and just guessing about the representation on others, so I'm going to create rules in favor of "fun factor" vs. authenticity every time, although I'll always strive to hit both.

I think 'sub-warlords' or limited warlords seems like it would be fun for players. I'll remove the heavy requirements (or, more accurately, add additional bonuses for heavy sub-warlords vs. non-heavy) but units with Leadership should always be better than sub-warlords in all ways. Anything that ANY sub-warlord would be able to do (pop units, etc.) a unit with Leadership should also be able to do. Enhanced training and city management also seem like nice abilities to add.

Regarding Dodge - Dodge does seem to be a bit over-powered at this point (other than the base +4 for free). I like the idea of Enhanced Dodge tiers as an ability. I agree that the Coil Shuffle is probably going to get nerfed, probably by something as simple as "an action by either the mount or rider ends the mount's movement" in the next revision.

Regarding "Power Creep" - Remember that Heavies just got a massive boost in the last rules update. I don't think they need any additional lovin' at this point. The Paragon idea evolved from an idea I discussed with HerbieRai privately some weeks ago, and as I started to expand the concept to Yuri/Rolf, then to William, a pattern emerged, but I didn't think to remove the heavy requirement from the original idea.

Giving siege attacks to heavies, however, isn't really likely. Rolf's already reached the point where he can start bringing down a gate in about 3 rounds on his own, with his regular unmodified attacks. If he goes for +6 combat next level, he can reduce that down to 2. Thanks to the dodging and delay rules, he can even time those to occur on 2 consecutive phases, so Rolf's really only 1 level away from Gatecrasher status. That's what I'd expect a heavy to do. (I'll be modifying the structural attacks in the Siege update so that Fire attacks don't do any damage, though, unless the attacks also have a Siege value; arrows can't destroy walls.)

Please keep the suggestions coming. While I will be the ultimate arbiter, I want everyone to have a game that they enjoy - from those who check in occasionally and lob a few shots, to those who enjoy planning complex and elaborate strategies and tactics; with plenty of chances for role-playing and side-building during the down-time.

[Exate]

Regarding Warlords - The game has evolved in such a way that warlords (and dance fighting) are pretty much required for most regular stacks, although I will try to stay true-to-canon regarding established sides (Jetstone's, for example, won't have dance fighting at all). Since warlords are an essential part of the game at this point, I'd rather build on what we've got than try to "fix" what has been established for months.

I disagree with that choice. The game is constantly evolving in fairly major ways; particularly seeing as we will probably be dividing our group into multiple armies as the front broadens, it's not too late to handwave the high availability of warlords thus far and try to bring things down a level, to where leadership bonuses on every stack aren't essentially mandatory for an army to properly function. Cut down on the availability of warlords, and require that there be at least one dancing warlord in a hex for dance fighting to be possible.

I think 'sub-warlords' or limited warlords seems like it would be fun for players.

Since I'm arguing that the presence of warlords on the battlefield should be drastically reduced, you can probably guess that I consider this a counterproductive idea.

[Lord of Monies]

I'm not sure if drastically reduced is fair. I mean, think of Transylvito. When they went to stop Stanley as he fled to Faq, they had 11 warlords in the same hex. 11 for a single job. True, Don prefers to have lots of warlords in place of having court, but it still shows that having a ton of warlords isn't exactly unheard of. The attack on Jetstone when they arrived had about 4 warlords which includes the chief warlord but does not include casters which are kinda warlords anyway. The Elves are a big side. They have a lot of cities, so seeing a few warlords in their group doesn't really surprise me. I've not thought at length about the sub-warlords though so not got anything to say on that right now.