The problem of low hit points on humans

[Twan]

In legends and books you do NOT see heroes that get hit by axes and swords and fireballs, and just chuckle and say, "Sorry, I'm a Hero(tm), and you will need to impale me another 50 times before it will have any effect!"

It's why the D&Dian definition of hit points is "capacity to survive" *including all non conventional ways to avoid being hit*. The old D&D system even (perhaps not the last editions, I've stopped at AD&D 1 and this kind of concepts have been denatured by extra rules to sell paper since then) only included hp and armor (a little influenced by dexterity), not things like parry, acrobatic moves, zigzag runs to avoid missiles, having a bible which stop a bullet (oops Conan not Robert Mitchum), use of the corpse of a dead soldier as a shield, or any other thing Conan or Fafhrd will do 42 times per book. It's also why I consider logical if extra hp are given to heroes to represent that to give them also recuperation or regeneration to reduce the number of afflictions, as the extra h(it/eroic) points they lose are not supposed to represent real wounds in the heroes case (personnally I don't believe in culturism giving more than 1 or 2 "real" hit points).

[Potatoman]

It's amusing that the primary arguments used to defend the current model of national heroes being only slightly stronger than generic HI are "realism" and "common sense".
This is a game in which knife-wielding assassins charge at their targets over an open field, Minotaurs won't swing their axes at any enemy smaller than themselves, and magic is everywhere. Realism and common sense take a back seat to playability and theme in dominions.

In both real legends and "shallow fantasy RPGs" (quoted to preserve the snootiness), heroes are heroic because of their extraordinary skill, strength, power, etc. But this didn't really translate that well into dominions, where most of the heroes didn't get enhancements that are statistically significant enough to make them survivable in combat. I'd really like to see an official implementation of the Worthy Heroes mod or something similar.

[B0rsuk]

Realism is not mutually exclusive with fantasy. And yes, most RPGs are shallow, disconnected from reality, common sense, history. What I like about Dominions is that it feels much more real than most of game worlds out there. You never see an item described like 'This is a very manly talisman, and a woman wearing it will speak in low voice, or even grow a beard' in other games. This is because, unlike many others, Dominions draws heavily from history, real world beliefs, psychology etc.
Funny how you become original by drawing heavily from history and real-world myths.

I, in turn, find it amusing that so many people can't accept that cannon fodder can also exist in ancient/medieval styled worlds. Make one different fantasy game with cannon fodder and suddenly you missed the One True Way. I don't think it's a coincidence that sides are called Nations instead of Races, and Commanders instead of Heroes.

[Potatoman]

I, in turn, find it amusing that so many people can't accept that cannon fodder can also exist in ancient/medieval styled worlds. Make one different fantasy game with cannon fodder and suddenly you missed the One True Way. I don't think it's a coincidence that sides are called Nations instead of Races, and Commanders instead of Heroes.

So you believe that Dominions invented the faceless thug, and that it's suddenly become the step in game design? Would you also find it more realistic (and therefore better) to eliminate the magic summons or abstact them to re-skinned HI? Magic is, after all, part of the mythology & fantasy aspect of the game which you hold in such disdain.

Realism and fantasy are not mutualy exclusive, but they are by definition not entirely compatible. The issue is where you chose to sacrifice realism for fantasy and where you uphold history. Human heroes feature prominently in every single mythology, legend, and culture upon which Dominions is based, yet they are unworkable in the game. I agree that this is realistic. But it is also unthematic and untrue to the source material of the game. It's also pretty disappointing to finally get a national hero event (notice the distinction from "commanders" which are recruitable), only to find out that it's just some useless human "hero" with 2 more att than a normal schmuck. This isn't an irrational desire to impose "The One True Way" on anybody, this is an opportunity to improve the game.

[Epaminondas]

Potatoman said:
It's amusing that the primary arguments used to defend the current model of national heroes being only slightly stronger than generic HI are "realism" and "common sense".
This is a game in which knife-wielding assassins charge at their targets over an open field, Minotaurs won't swing their axes at any enemy smaller than themselves, and magic is everywhere. Realism and common sense take a back seat to playability and theme in dominions.

In both real legends and "shallow fantasy RPGs" (quoted to preserve the snootiness), heroes are heroic because of their extraordinary skill, strength, power, etc. But this didn't really translate that well into dominions, where most of the heroes didn't get enhancements that are statistically significant enough to make them survivable in combat. I'd really like to see an official implementation of the Worthy Heroes mod or something similar.

You took the words out of my mouth.

1. It's not like this game is intended to be historical or "realistic" a la the Total War series. Even then, the Total War series had certain units (remember the sword saint in the original version? and Generals after certain boots became near-superhuman in many versions) that defied conventional logic, units that could single-handedly take on hundreds of units.

2. I also noticed the "snoot[y]" comment you isolated--which must've been directed at me since I am the original poster. I suppose I must be a total loser because I must've played "shallow fantasy" games in the past (which is an unwarranted speculation itself, as I prefer strategy games). Truly amusing. I didn't know that there was a caste system among hardcore gamers.

3. To put things in perspective, I think I should re-emphasize it's not a dramatic HP point increase I am asking; i.e., I am not asking human commanders to be in anyways comparable to Basalt Kings or Niefel Jarls or what not. Not even close. I am asking an increase to the extent that the more heroic or successful or exceptional human commanders can reach around 20 HPs, without being a Prophet or acquiring an HP-enhancing Heroic trait. 20. That is all. You would still have less than a third of what a Niefel Jarl has and way less than half of other heavy hitters like Dai Onis or Basalt Kings.

4. In general, I am very disappointed at the level of interaction on this forum, if I may so. Sure, this is still a gamer forum but I'd expect better than what you'd find in, say, Warcraft III forums, given the complexity of this game and the comparatively high age of its fan base. But newcomers are persistently treated rudely by some posters (see Arralen's reponse to my damage question--even though I clearly said that I don't have the game manual and I apologized in advance if the question were so elementary; in particular, see the rather innocuous thread where a new poster posted his game impressions and what needs to be improved--causing an orgy of flame fest among the believers here).

In the end, I doubt Shrapnel or even the gaming community benefits much if you guys are so intent on offending those very potential customers who are relatively new to the game (e.g. me) but have enthusiastically embraced the Demo and wish to know more.

[Mind Elemental]

Epaminondas said:

4. In general, I am very disappointed at the level of interaction on this forum, if I may so. Sure, this is still a gamer forum but I'd expect better than what you'd find in, say, Warcraft III forums, given the complexity of this game and the comparatively high age of its fan base. But newcomers are persistently treated rudely by some posters (see Arralen's reponse to my damage question--even though I clearly said that I don't have the game manual and I apologized in advance if the question were so elementary; in particular, see the rather innocuous thread where a new poster posted his game impressions and what needs to be improved--causing an orgy of flame fest among the believers here).

In the end, I doubt Shrapnel or even the gaming community benefits much if you guys are so intent on offending those very potential customers who are relatively new to the game (e.g. me) but have enthusiastically embraced the Demo and wish to know more.

Commanders: What would be nice would be twofold:

- multiple levels of the standard ability (so a Firbolg with Valor, or an emerald lord, would have a greater effect than an ordinary Pythian standard bearer or centurion);

- lower all troops' morale, and to compensate give every commander a standard. Now taking along plenty of commanders to inspire the men -- and bringing good commanders -- would be important!

Heroes: I agree with what's been said here, and in the thread where someone first suggested giving the national heroes a boost in HP. The human melee heroes have awesome flavour, and are indeed superior to ordinary humans, but ultimately aren't much more useful than ordinary commanders. Try to use them as thugs, and you will be down a hero. Since all the fancy abilities (lifedrain, regen, etc) won't matter much if one lucky sword stroke can cut them down, I think increasing their HPs to 20ish is the simplest, most balanced way of boosting them. You still won't see them taking on armies by themselves, but with proper equipment, they could be quite decent army-supporting mini-thugs.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: I prefer, in principle, the better gear/abilities approach. However, I'm not sure it would be as useful in practice, for the reason mentioned above. Besides, you could also argue that heroic persistence/determination could lead to more HPs...

Rudeness: I see your point, but it only seems to be a minority. Please, hang around? The more of us here -- even as lurkers, like myself -- the better.

[Agrajag]

Epaminondas said:
4. In general, I am very disappointed at the level of interaction on this forum, if I may so. Sure, this is still a gamer forum but I'd expect better than what you'd find in, say, Warcraft III forums, given the complexity of this game and the comparatively high age of its fan base. But newcomers are persistently treated rudely by some posters (see Arralen's reponse to my damage question--even though I clearly said that I don't have the game manual and I apologized in advance if the question were so elementary; in particular, see the rather innocuous thread where a new poster posted his game impressions and what needs to be improved--causing an orgy of flame fest among the believers here).

In the end, I doubt Shrapnel or even the gaming community benefits much if you guys are so intent on offending those very potential customers who are relatively new to the game (e.g. me) but have enthusiastically embraced the Demo and wish to know more.

If I had to hazard a guess, it would be that Arralen thought that the lack of manual on your side has less to do with you playing the game's demo, and more to do with you obtaining a copy of the game in what we call here* cynically "my uncle from america"
Furthermore, I'm sure by looking at the date I registered and my post count you can see I've been here for a while (though much less time than the veterans, and quite a lot of none-veterans like myself), and I can tell you from experience that this community usually treats other people (including new guys) quite well, and often much better than in other communities I frequent**, with the exception of few who tend to be a bit more flame-happy (but are otherwise nice people).


*-here being Israel, but I'm sure you get my point.
**-This has a bit to do with the average age over here, but also about this being a small and "sheltered" community, in another forum I visit, seeing spam posts from random bored people, registering just to annoy other people, is not uncommon.

[mivayan]

Potatoman said:
It's amusing that the primary arguments used to defend the current model of national heroes being only slightly stronger than generic HI are "realism" and "common sense".
This is a game in which knife-wielding assassins charge at their targets over an open field, (...)

The last guy to tell the general to not go for a morning walk alone was hanged. The general *always* goes for morning walks. Over fields. Too bad he's dead. Perhaps the next one will bring bodyguards.

Anyone got a quick reference to fun heroic tales that cant happen in current dominions?

[Taqwus]

Heroes, even in fantasy literature, are not exactly considered to be common. They're heroic due to persisting despite the fact that the odds ARE against them -- even the exceptional ones -- and because others WILL get stomped. Heroes try or die -- and the odds are that they die. Those piles of jewels, magical armor and ancient weapons lying around the dragon's lair didn't come from peasants or their goats. Those hordes of ravaging monsters are fearsome because they're NOT easy to defeat. That legendary beast which slew all the wannabe slayers for years... was killing those who thought themselves the best equipped, the bravest, the most skilled. Eventually, somebody succeeds and gets regarded as the savior of the realm to be respected while the also-rans get... some posthumous appreciation. Or the monsters run riot and destroy the kingdom, but that sort of dampens the ability to write sequels, and there aren't that many orcs or trolls to constitute a market for that sort of literature.

To make recruitable commanders have more hp to turn them into superhuman warriors is to ignore the point of heroism unless you're turning it into a vast nation of superior humans and pricing them accordingly. The few exceptional heroes themselves -- I'd concur with the notion that it's their skill, their guile, their luck, their willpower, and not too infrequently their gear that makes the most of the difference, at least for the humans. For half-human, half-sidhe champions or that sort of thing, other properties make some sense.

[Ewierl]

Twan said:
(I would even say 25-30 hp + recup or regen, as hp here represent their extra capacity to avoid any kind of dammage

That is, I'm afraid, a fundamental misconception about how Dom3's system represents its world. If hp represented abstract damage avoidance ability, units wouldn't get afflictions based on damage dealt.

In Dominions, hp quite explicitly represent raw physical durability. Basically, meat and muscle! Even human "heroes" are still human, and will still die if they take an unlucky sword to the face. That realistic lethality is a core conception of how Dominions' mechanic works. If you find that particularly annoying, I'd recommend playing any of the numerous nonhuman races with higher-hp commanders. (Although you can replicate the general idea quite well with Summon Firbolg.)

Dominions isn't the kind of fantasy setting where the badass human singlehandedly slays the dragon. It's the kind of setting where an army of humans with greatswords and mage support kills the dragon.

As an aside, though, I do agree that it'd be nice to have HoF bonuses try to be appropriate to the commander type. Mages with boosted attack skill are pretty sad heroes!