Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Xantalos]

You could stave it off by having a vampire minion bite him.

[i2amroy]

Anybody already thinking about stuff they want to put in? >:oyou.

I'm thinking a steampunk overhaul would be pretty sweet to do.

[bulborbish]

Actually, this thought does make me want to ask one thing:

Is one possible result of an event chain for heroes that you can spawn a new hero in their adventuring party? Because if so, there could be many events that result in receiving direct aid from ancient heros. You could even have it spawn an adventurer that "defeated" you in the last scenario, and give him a tag that makes him realize that you are returning easier/make him know how to slow you down.

[Cthulhu]

I think you're going at it with the wrong goals in mind >

[bulborbish]

I think you're going at it with the wrong goals in mind >

Well, we already know you can get agents. I was just wondering if heroes could get new allies, since it was on my mind.

[KingDinosaurGames]

Originally heroes had "Allies" which were minions of their own - it was "somewhat" fun to kill their personal healer and the like, but it didn't work.  Combat had enough going on and Heroes should "feel" like heroes, so we simply made them more numerous, advanced their leveling, and made them more prone to form adventuring groups. 

However, events do have triggers to spawn heroes and it's actually a pretty importance occurrence.  For instance, the elves start with no Champion on the map, but if they get antagonized they spawn several powerful heroes.  As for your specific circumstance, you can make in the editor a "spawn hero" call that you can pass any number of settings to - anything not set will be randomized based on culture and global settings.

[Jalak]

Speaking of heroes, do they count towards your total agent limit when you corrupt/possess them or can you have as many as you can get your hands (claws) on? Also, what's the difference between possessed and corrupted heroes and how would I decide which one is better at the time? You also mentioned how heroes could become leaders of their own nations. If that happens, do they still wander around the map, making it possible to capture and convert them, or do they just "fade" into whatever city they have as their new capital as its king?

[KingDinosaurGames]

Active Corrupted Heroes do count against your limit, but like I mentioned you can keep them as Sleeper Agents providing infiltration and sabotage to quests and events so that element does not count against your limit.  You can activate a sleeper agent in combat even if you have no slots available, he will simply stop providing his passive in the future until truly activated on the map.

Possessed heroes gain abilities based on the possession, nothing special from being "Corrupted" - they tend to be a bit weaker but the possession is much easier to pull off.  There is one Agent who is himself a possession (think corrupted artifact that takes over its host).  Possessions can be undone much easier than corruption as well.

When Heroes become leaders they remain on the map, but leaders not in their capital have reduced actions available to them - so it's a choice by the AI if they want to get down and dirty still.  Leaders leading armies give it a nice morale boost, and their presence makes friendly POIs much more secure - so their are passive benefits as well to them leaving the capital. 

If a leader is captured or otherwise incapable of command his advisers will take leadership actions for the nation - one of their possible actions is to replace the leader with another leader if necessary.

[Jalak]

Does that mean that the leaders that start off in the game can also became a "hero" on the map as well? Like, say, a feudal king or horde chieftain taking personal command of their armies? Or maybe even forcing them into exile when they get ousted (either by your hand or when their possesedness is discovered)?
I admit, though, the idea of a council member or president suddenly running out to kill things with a sword would be hilarious.

[Cthulhu]

It's pretty common for leaders to be members of the military.  I mean technically Obama is the commander in chief of the US military.

[Jalak]

I don't think the US military actually expect him to go out and lead troops, though. As my extensive (Wikipedia) search has brought up, Obama doesn't have any training in leadership, so him suddenly getting gun-ho like that would be confusing, to say the least. And potentially dangerous/hilarious. We'd probably get a good episode from last week tonight at the very least...

[dennislp3]

Modern armies =/= medieval style armies...older armies did have kings and other leaders actually with the troops on a regular basis

[KingDinosaurGames]

Yep, leaders can always choose to remove themselves from their ivory tower and come down to tackle problems themselves.  Same bonuses apply - army morale tends to be increased and POIs are more organized while the leader is there.  However, in my experience it's generally beneficial for you if the leader decides to get involved.

[Zangi]

Well, when you need to get stuff done.  Sometimes, you just gotta go and do it yourself.

So, this could happen if the kingdom's heroes/generals have been dealt with/are busy/discredited?  Or would the leader just randomly decide to come out anyways based on their personality?

[KingDinosaurGames]

It based on their personality, though desperation will often force out even the most cowardly leader.  Their is at least one nation in the North Burns (a large one) that has their leader lead every major campaign.