Hero System design considerations

[ghost-angel]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Well, I think both CP2020 and Shadowrun screwed the pooch on simulating the genre. Neither of them do it even remotely well for my tastes. But I'm one of those wacky "Cyberpunk Purists" out there who believe it's a Literary Movement and NOT a Subculture. And BOTH those games suck monkey. So they were bad examples to go by in my book for proving your point - because I read that and you proved my point instead.

 

Maybe I've spent too long hanging out in alt.cyberpunk

 

anyways ... we can disagree no problem, now excuse me I must form a retort for KS there...

[ghost-angel]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I hate you and you suck. You are having stupid lame uncool bad fun with your HERO System. Baby Jeebus weeps for your misguidedness.

You suck too! Your armpits smell and you never bath!!1! God kills a kitten everytime you even think about playing a game, that's how much uncool lame monkey evil amusement you are having with HERO System.

 

Take That!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I am not a cyberpunk purist, by any means. Couldn't get on with Gibson; mind you I've read Snow Crash (and most of the rest of Stephenson's stuff,) and loved that.

 

My take is that cyberpunk is an attitude more than anything else, but I am no authority.

 

The mechanics of most cyberpunk worlds though: well, a big part of that is the net, in whatever form it appears, and, the only way to do it to my mind is EDM (leaves body behind). Then you have the problem of what can you do in there? As Storn points out a lot of cyberpunk is more to do with having the readies than characters being balanced, so unless you are comfortable running a game where characters have disperate points values (and even if you are, I doubt the players are).

 

Anyway, like I say, I can only comment on what I know and I don't know CP that well.

 

Mind you the balancing issues in Fantasy are a problem too: all kinds of fixes are suggested to make magic work: realistically a mind control spell with less than 50 or 60 active points is not going to be that useful, anything much more than that and it will be all conquering. FH advocates various fixes, including changing the costs of spells.

 

Point is that you can MAKE Hero fit anything if you change it enough, build house rules, or just handwave the difficult bits.

 

But then it isn't really Hero, is it?

 

BTW the way I'd do The Net is with duplication: your duplicate form being your net avatar, so the points you spend on the power are directly reflected in VR.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

The key point is that someone like RDU might look at the rules and form the impression that they can't build what they want from the tools presented for some subjective reason, whereas someone like me looks at the tools available, get as close to the effect I want with the available tools, and then I adapt and/or extemporize as needed for the rest.

 

No, the key point is that the tools available aren't adequate to the task as desired. Sure, you can use a hammer to pound in a flat head screw. You can use a hammer to beat a piece of sheet metal into a flat piece you can use to screw in the screw. But it would be a whole lot easier and save a whole lot more time, not to mention getting the job done right, to go out and buy a screwdriver.

 

It is just as subjective to say "whereas someone like me looks at the tools available, get as close to the effect I want with the available tools". Your wants. Those are subjective. They're adequate for you, fine. They're not adequate for some.

 

And if I'm going to, for instance, throw out the Hero System Powers rules and write up my own list of powers, why not just write my own game? People use the tools that are there because they're there, because they don't want to go to the effort of writing up, playtesting, fixing, and playtesting again their own stuff, not because they're necessarily the best for the job (and I'm not saying they suck, and I'm not saying people eat what they're spoon fed). When I was 25 I could do all of that stuff; I was single, had roommates, a steady game, disposable free time and disposable income. At 35 I have a wife, a kid, car payment, bills. Less money to buy the next "How to write a game of genre X using the Hero System" phone book, and less time to write the game even if I did decide to spend the money for it, so I'm using a lot more discretion in where my time and money are going.

 

But the same can be said by just about any system out there. Combat is an essentual core to almost every RPG ever made.

 

Five years ago that would have been the case. Now, not so. We're starting to discover that it's not as essential as it seems (insert old joke about "I want to design a game based on Jane Austen's works, but I can't get the movement rates and range categories right").

 

I don't know' date=' I suspect I get annoyed at threads like this. Instead of making threads about how to design custom rules to gain a particular desired effect, people start threads to fix it.[/quote']

 

I'm tired of writing custom rules. I've written so many custom rules for Hero alone that I could have designed my own game several times over (which, in fact, I have also done).

 

You want to make a minature ferris wheel for your living room about as tall as hard cover textbook. You have multiple options available. You can use tinker toys' date=' you can use legos, you can use craft supplies, you can use ceramics, you could also use iron working supplies with electronics and make a completely 100% replica that moves and sound like the real thing. Each has their benefits and drawbacks. The metal replica takes a while and requires lots of skill to complete. The tinker toy version has the basic features of a ferris wheel but it doesn't look like a ferris wheel.[/quote']

 

Or I could just go buy a miniature ferris wheel.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

BTW the way I'd do The Net is with duplication: your duplicate form being your net avatar' date=' so the points you spend on the power are directly reflected in VR.[/quote']

 

I'd probably pull up my old copies of GURPS Cyberpunk, Cyberpunk 2020, or Shadowrun and start adapting. Then again, I might get halfway through the adaptation process and start wondering why I don't just use GURPS, or CP2020, or Shadowrun instead.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I think that folks are not stupid. I had no problem switching from 3rd ed Fantasy Hero to Champions to Danger International at will. If I liked something in one book and wanted to take it to another genre... just plug in and play. It was no biggie. But the 3rd Ed's felt different from one another... and to me' date=' that was a good thing. Feel is a big part of how I approach gaming.[/quote']

 

Repped.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

No' date=' the key point is that the tools available aren't adequate to the task as desired. Sure, you can use a hammer to pound in a flat head screw. You can use a hammer to beat a piece of sheet metal into a flat piece you can use to screw in the screw. But it would be a whole lot easier and save a whole lot more time, not to mention getting the job done right, to go out and buy a screwdriver......................[/quote']

 

Indeed.

 

Although I think there may actually be a screwdriver in the toolbox

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

No, the key point is that the tools available aren't adequate to the task as desired. Sure, you can use a hammer to pound in a flat head screw. You can use a hammer to beat a piece of sheet metal into a flat piece you can use to screw in the screw. But it would be a whole lot easier and save a whole lot more time, not to mention getting the job done right, to go out and buy a screwdriver.

 

It is just as subjective to say "whereas someone like me looks at the tools available, get as close to the effect I want with the available tools". Your wants. Those are subjective. They're adequate for you, fine. They're not adequate for some.

 

And if I'm going to, for instance, throw out the Hero System Powers rules and write up my own list of powers, why not just write my own game? People use the tools that are there because they're there, because they don't want to go to the effort of writing up, playtesting, fixing, and playtesting again their own stuff, not because they're necessarily the best for the job (and I'm not saying they suck, and I'm not saying people eat what they're spoon fed). When I was 25 I could do all of that stuff; I was single, had roommates, a steady game, disposable free time and disposable income. At 35 I have a wife, a kid, car payment, bills. Less money to buy the next "How to write a game of genre X using the Hero System" phone book, and less time to write the game even if I did decide to spend the money for it, so I'm using a lot more discretion in where my time and money are going.

 

 

 

Five years ago that would have been the case. Now, not so. We're starting to discover that it's not as essential as it seems (insert old joke about "I want to design a game based on Jane Austen's works, but I can't get the movement rates and range categories right").

 

 

 

I'm tired of writing custom rules. I've written so many custom rules for Hero alone that I could have designed my own game several times over (which, in fact, I have also done).

 

 

 

Or I could just go buy a miniature ferris wheel.

 

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Chris Goodwin again."

[ghost-angel]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I'd probably pull up my old copies of GURPS Cyberpunk' date=' Cyberpunk 2020, or Shadowrun and start adapting. Then again, I might get halfway through the adaptation process and start wondering why I don't just use GURPS, or CP2020, or Shadowrun instead.[/quote']

The Hardwired CP2020 Supplement/Alternate World had the best Net Rules I've seen to date - you actually had to hack it at the code and social level, i.e. a lot like today. No fancy avatars and pretty pictures - which always struck me as stupid anyway. It took less game time than the others too.

 

Sean, if you want a book that captures the Feel of Cyberpunk find City Come A Walkin' by John Shirley, pre-Gibson and is where he got part of the idea for Molly Millions (since you don't read Gibson I don't expect you to know the character... doh!), Stephenson was definitely a different breed of Cyberpunk than what I started out reading and epitomized the second rule of "Style Over Substance." Though he is a good author.

 

Anyways... the Point I wanted to make is:

 

I've seen arguements where people state that they liked it better when Fantasy Hero had it's own elements and Champions had it's own, and Danger Inc had it's own seperate elements, effectively making them different games with a generally shared background...

 

But somehow when we take the new HERO System and alter a part to better fit the genre we're not playing Hero anymore?!?

 

Um, disconnect there. Seriously.

 

The HERO System is an empty canvas (to use yet another metaphor) with a bucnh of paints and a bunch of brushes and sometimes we use the blues, and sometimes we don't. And sometimes we mix some of the paints and sometimes we never let them touch. Sometimes we get a new color when we mix that we use only for one painting and never again.

 

I don't see how Changing a part of the System to make a Genre/Setting is any different from what we had before aside from collecting it all in one giant Tome and calling it "The Toolkit"

[keithcurtis]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I think one of the perceptions is that altering Hero makes it not Hero, or "based on Hero". That's probably my point of contention. I feel that Hero is designed to be a starting point for alteration. All hero games are "based on Hero" in this sense.

Look, every genre and setting book adds a few new tweaks or constructs to simulate the genre. FH divides spell cost by 3. PH has Luck points, and so forth. My opinion (and hopefully that shared by Herogames) is that they are all still Hero.

Using Hero "out of the box" is woefully limiting and doesn't take advantage of the wonderful building-block, hood-off metaphor of the system.

Are there games that are better at simulating one particular genre? Undoubtedly. Is Hero truly universal? It's about as universal as a comprehensive game system can be. It appeals to designers (of characters, games, systems, worlds, what have you), because of its ability to adapt itself to a wide variety of modelings.

 

Here's another metaphor:

HERO is a descriptive language that contains tools for dramatic resolution.

Some feel that it's a wordy language. Oh, yes it is. That appeals to some folks. Other people would like to learn a much more concise language for each genre that specifically applies itself to that genre. To use a hoary (and untrue but useful) analogy, think of the old chestnut about the Eskimos having 30 words for Snow. If you're going to be dealing with a lot of snow, Inuktitut is the language for you. If you are going to be occasionally dealing with cutting edge computer applications, Japanese Mafia, African gods and varieties of coconut, it's a poor choice. The wide-spread and acquisitive nature of English would be a better choice. When you need to deal with those 30 varieties of snow, though, you will need a thesaurus with a lot of adjectives.

To bring the discussion full circle, if you are speaking a dialect of English common to Sri Lanka which borrows a lot of Indian words, it's still English. It is specialized for a particular application (talking to English-speaking Sri Lankans), and may require a brief period of adjustment. But if I move there, I'm not going to start to call it Sringlish. It would have to diverge much, much farther before that happens. I don't think removing the speed chart, adding some characteristics or changing the formula for skills is anywhere near that point.

 

Keith "What's a Metta for?" Curtis

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Right' date=' that's it! Where's my Guinness?[/quote']

 

 

Over there on that tray next to my Killian's.

 

Where's that girl?!

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I find that a lot of the 'feel' comes from the builds themselves. The more cobbled a build, the less 'right' it feels. Cobble seems to restrict the flow of feel.

 

Granted, these are all subjective emotional interpretations, and therefore difficult to relate, but I hope some sense of it comes across.

 

It's part of why I am almost always willing to go with an unusual or simplified build, even to the point of tossing cannonized published builds into the round file forever and going with something wild-- advantaged advantages as spells, etc.

 

Sometimes it's reason from effect. But just as often, it's reason from gut feeling.

 

Sometimes I find that changing a mechanic does more to enhance the feel than a list of builds.

 

Just my two coppers.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I've seen arguements where people state that they liked it better when Fantasy Hero had it's own elements and Champions had it's own' date=' and Danger Inc had it's own seperate elements, effectively making them different games with a generally shared background...[/quote']

 

Count me into this camp.

 

But somehow when we take the new HERO System and alter a part to better fit the genre we're not playing Hero anymore?!?

 

As for this statement.... there's a lot to me that is Hero (maybe because I have been playing it through all of those other incarnations). Probably a discussion for another thread, but what "is" Hero to me: primary stats, figured stats, all with base values; spending points to buy them up or down linearly; 9+CHA/5 and CV and ECV; 3d6 to roll X or less; BODY and STUN; normal and killing damage, normal and resistant DEF; physical and energy defense; 5 points per 1d6; advantages and limitations; base points plus disadvantages. All of those things together are Hero; you might take one or two of them away and still be Hero, but the line one side of which is Hero and one side of which is not-Hero is very murky.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Yes, but...

 

Imagine an excellent fantasy RPG as a screwdriver, an excellent superhero RPG as a pair of pliers, an excellent sci-fi RPG as a knife, etc.

 

The HERO System is a Leatherman multi-tool.

 

Is it as good a screwdriver as a high-quality stand-alone screwdriver? No. Is it as good a pair of pliers as a high-quality stand-alone pair of pliers? No. Is it as good a knife as a high-quality stand-alone knife? No.

 

But it's one tool to buy and carry around, not a bunch of separate tools. And -- as a high-quality multi-tool itself -- it is better than low-quality stand-alone tools.

 

I like your analogy, but I disagree somewhat. I think of Hero System as a box of high quality tools. One of those uberlarge machinist tookkits that take up a wall of your garage. You don't necessarily need every tool for any job, and for every job there is a tool.

 

Unfortunately, those tools are numerous and complicated. They have also been used (for some) for only a few particular jobs for so long the entire toolkit looks like it's just for those few particular jobs, even though it isn't.

 

GURPS is the leatherman (one tool for every job, with nifty attachments for special orders).

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

No, the key point is that the tools available aren't adequate to the task as desired. Sure, you can use a hammer to pound in a flat head screw. You can use a hammer to beat a piece of sheet metal into a flat piece you can use to screw in the screw. But it would be a whole lot easier and save a whole lot more time, not to mention getting the job done right, to go out and buy a screwdriver.

 

It is just as subjective to say "whereas someone like me looks at the tools available, get as close to the effect I want with the available tools". Your wants. Those are subjective. They're adequate for you, fine. They're not adequate for some.

 

And if I'm going to, for instance, throw out the Hero System Powers rules and write up my own list of powers, why not just write my own game? People use the tools that are there because they're there, because they don't want to go to the effort of writing up, playtesting, fixing, and playtesting again their own stuff, not because they're necessarily the best for the job (and I'm not saying they suck, and I'm not saying people eat what they're spoon fed). When I was 25 I could do all of that stuff; I was single, had roommates, a steady game, disposable free time and disposable income. At 35 I have a wife, a kid, car payment, bills. Less money to buy the next "How to write a game of genre X using the Hero System" phone book, and less time to write the game even if I did decide to spend the money for it, so I'm using a lot more discretion in where my time and money are going.

 

 

 

Five years ago that would have been the case. Now, not so. We're starting to discover that it's not as essential as it seems (insert old joke about "I want to design a game based on Jane Austen's works, but I can't get the movement rates and range categories right").

 

 

 

I'm tired of writing custom rules. I've written so many custom rules for Hero alone that I could have designed my own game several times over (which, in fact, I have also done).

 

 

 

Or I could just go buy a miniature ferris wheel.

 

 

Is there a point to all this? Do you want a hug or something? Sounds like you would be happier playing some other game system, so feel free to go do so.

 

However, dont make the mistake of thinking that because you have issues or perceive flaws it doesnt mean that they are universal. There are plenty of us making the campaigns we want with the HERO System without issue, so maybe, call me crazy here, its not the System.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Hold on evverone. Jes' step back from the keyboard and take a breather. I'll pour y'all a sarsparilly.

 

Keith "keeping it in perspective" Curtis

[Trebuchet]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Imagine an excellent fantasy RPG as a screwdriver, an excellent superhero RPG as a pair of pliers, an excellent sci-fi RPG as a knife, etc.

 

The HERO System is a Leatherman multi-tool.

 

Is it as good a screwdriver as a high-quality stand-alone screwdriver? No. Is it as good a pair of pliers as a high-quality stand-alone pair of pliers? No. Is it as good a knife as a high-quality stand-alone knife? No.

 

But it's one tool to buy and carry around, not a bunch of separate tools. And -- as a high-quality multi-tool itself -- it is better than low-quality stand-alone tools.

I fall into this camp myself. Some genres such as superheroes, because of the evolution of the game, HERO does very well indeed. Others it is only pretty good. It hasn't been poor at any of the genres I've used it for, although I have by no means tried every possible genre. (Thus far I've done Champions, Fantasy Hero, Pulp Hero, Dark Champions:TAS, and Danger International.) It worked just fine in all of them, at least from my point of view. I became sold on Fantasy Hero as a solid performer for fantasy games when it permitted me to build an entirely noncombat-oriented character (something flatly impossible in AD&D); and he worked beautifully. Nothing but languages and Knowledge Skills, and Old Thom the Sage was one of my favorite characters (in any genre) in 28 years of RPG gaming.

 

Now a lot of my own comfort with this game system comes simply from long experience. I've been playing with some variant of the system since 1981 (My original Champions character, Ranger, has been retired for 20 years.) I'm comfortable tinkering if necessary, and my friends who play the system all speak the same language. There's a real advantage to having a gaming lingua franca we all can communicate in. We have resources (genre books, etc.) which can be raided for ideas or opponents without worrying about how to translate it into Herospeak. That investment in both time and dollars makes looking hard at another system very unlikely, at least for me. I simply don't have the time or bucks (and neither do most of my friends) to invest in another system, especially when this one is doing what we want quite well. As always, YMMV.

[Super Squirrel]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Or I could just go buy a miniature ferris wheel.

Then go out and buy you minature ferris wheel if it is that simple.

[Markdoc]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

From my perspective, there's two issues here and they're bleeding into each other in this discussion.

 

One is the "Hero can build anything" line. While that's mostly true (for many people Hero, does Fantasy better than specialised fantasy systems such as DandD) in some cases it's not. Many of the difficult "how do I build this" questions are on how to recreate specific mechanisms from different games (the magic missile the always hits, for example, or how to simulate level-based advancement). For me there's a difference between simulating a genre (something I've never found to be hard while sticking close to core Hero system) and simulating a game - which can often be quite difficult.

 

The second point is "feel" - and that's totally subjective. Statements like "5 points per d6 feels superhero-ey" or "magic should be mysterious and uncontrollable" to me are unfathomable. While they might be true for others, for me they have no engagement at all.

 

Personally I have no particular reason to believe that magic *should* be mysterious or capricious - but then I grew up reading history books aas much as fantasy, and through most of western history, magicians attempted to lay down the basic rules of magic - to standardise it. Sort of proto-science, if you will. That's doubtless coloured my viewpoint.

 

Now that's not a slam on the original point of view. Just pointing out that it's not an absolute, that it's a matter of opinion and - here's the important part - that matters of opinion are perhaps more easily reflected by GM'ing style. It only becomes a problem if the rules directly inhibit you as a GM.

 

To take one example - in my just-started fantasy game there are three forms of magic. One form is comfortably simple and predicatable. You make a deal with a god - he invests you with powers. As long as you obey the accompanying geas, you get the power. If you are careless, someone else could steal your power. Simple and straightforward. One could say that these are "powers in fantasy game" and therefore inappropriate, but this approach gives exactly the "feel" desired. Cu Cuhulain doesn't need to make a roll to do his mighty salmon leap over Formall's wall nor are his powers mysterious or capricious. He knows exactly what they are and so does everybody else. And the "feel" is in the presentation. In this case, I don't say to the player "1d6 RKE damage shield and LS:immunity to cold". I tell them "The Forest Man offers to change your blood to fire - so that any man who cuts you will burn and you'll never be cold in any weather. But in return, you must pledge never to sleep two nights under the same roof until the Black Hand is defeated."

 

The third style of magic offers a much wider range of powers, and more cheaply. But these are granted by beings from outside the world. The system is based off the Valdorian age magic system with some variations, and the player using this system knows that he gets his powers as part of a deal with a higher power. If he fails to keep his end of the deal, he may become warped, or go mad, or be haunted, or ... something. But he doesn't know exactly what, nor how bad it might be. That also uses exactly standard hero system mechanics, but gives both a different feel. In this case, the player both seeks to serve his patron and fears him - but also realises that his power depends on the Patron. A Patron can be capricious, vindictive or even occasionally generous - encouraging the player to interact with his own powers. Magic - to this player - *is* wild, capricious and dangerous, because much of what might happen to him goes on in the background and only the GM has the numbers. He knows how much damage in general terms his Shadow Arrow spell does. But he *doesn't* know what effect casting it is going to have on him. In short, the player behaves entirely differently and the "game feel" is different.

 

To me, game feel is an example of the GM's art. Rules are only a part of it when they actively inhibit the GM from generating the feel he wants. I haven't yet seen any concrete examples of that in this thread, but it could be they exist - can anyone suggest some?

 

Last of all - there's a third completely unrelated issue: some GM's just love to tinker with rules (Chris and Zorn seem to fall into that camp). Ain't nothin' wrong with that, but GMs who do like to tinker, will do that regardless of ruleset. In that case, you often end up with something that "Isn't Hero" or "isn't D20" or "Isn't VtM". But so what? if the GM and players are happy, that's validation by itself.

 

cheers, Mark

[Storn]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Is there a point to all this? Do you want a hug or something? Sounds like you would be happier playing some other game system, so feel free to go do so.

 

However, dont make the mistake of thinking that because you have issues or perceive flaws it doesnt mean that they are universal. There are plenty of us making the campaigns we want with the HERO System without issue, so maybe, call me crazy here, its not the System.

 

This is just me (and those poor sods call players that I drag in with me, looking over at RDU Neil).... but my point is that Hero 5 was a step in the wrong direction. That I though the 3rd eds were better and oddly, more easy to use during game play... and Danger International has tiny type and terrible layout... so go figure... although FH 3rd Ed is still one of my favorite Hero books ever.

 

It overcomplicated things for the sake to staying "true to its roots". Why Instant Change is gone... I dunno. Why there is no Heal ability... I dunno. Instead, we have twisting the system into pretzels to create those. 3rd Ed Fantasy Hero had Heal and LIght, simply because those are very common spell SFX. And that made sense to me.

 

I would have prefered a streamlining and more elegance of the system. Do we need END for Champions... I don't think so. I very much like RDU Neil's new house rule on it, because it uses the END stat but doesn't require book-keeping... see? Elegant.

 

Do we need a Com stat?, when pretty much every Hero is one of the beautiful people? This is a hold over from 1978 era game concepts. If the looks of the character are a detrement (hideously ugly, or unbearable beauty) this is easily handled in Disadvantages.

 

STR should be 2 pts.

 

ED shouldn't be in most genres... Supers, sure. But Danger International? How many laser beams are there?

 

Do we need powers expressed in inches? Just expressed it in yards/meters and be done with it. When that is truly a hold over from the early wargaming roots of RPGs? Especially in superhero games, where knowing if Flight Gal is doing 45 mph or 300 mph or 3000 mph is really a key thing to know.

 

 

And I happily play other systems. And I'm not throwing Hero completly out... that is like throwing the baby out with the bath water,... but I am stating that I THINK it can be BETTER. And it can be more genre specific and mechanically tailored towards making it elegant for that genre.

 

Now, the problem with my arguement is that *what* I think is better, might be anathema to the next dice-junkie. I admit that. And I will always choose Fantasy Hero over d20... but I have chosen Savage Worlds over Fantasy Hero. Just as we've chosen Champions over M&M. My group is having fun with Necessary Evil... I don't think it will replace Neil's Champions evar. And I just started a Burning Wheel game last night... which is really an interesting system.

[Storn]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

To me, game feel is an example of the GM's art. Rules are only a part of it when they actively inhibit the GM from generating the feel he wants. I haven't yet seen any concrete examples of that in this thread, but it could be they exist - can anyone suggest some?

 

I want magic to be more like ARs Magica. One has rote spells, practiced and polished and are quantified. But magic can also be dangerously made up on-the-fly with the elements that particular mage is skilled with.... I've seen some Hero attempts... one, my friend Ilan toyed with, mages bought free floating Advantages and could combine them with any power under the cap, like 30 pts. So "Sticky" could be applied to any 30 pt power.

 

The tough part is that I know Hero in and out. But not every player at the table does. So the player who wants to play the mage invaribly gets the Variable power pool character and doesn't know the system that well. And one thing that will make me grind my teeth is the looking up CONSTANTLY every action to figure out what to do next. Occasionaly looking something up is fine, we all do it.

 

So for me, Hero magic doesn't seem as well done as even GURPS magic, which is similar, but its web of prerequisites and its cheap buy-in allows me to have really cool mages. Savage Worlds has got spells that are scalable, allowing flexibility that make up for the complete lack of lots of neat spells and spells are expensive to have.

 

I think M&M does a better job of incorporating on-the-fly application of superpowers than Hero does. Hero wants everything spelled out. But the case I always cite is Spiderman is pushed out of an airplane in the Romita Sr. days. He fashions a glider out of his webbing. Clever. I want to reward my players who come up with similar solutions. How do you do that in Hero? Spidy shouldn't have gliding on his character sheet... he would use it all the time. Spidy doesn't, he swings. The Power Skill is an afterthought add-on in 5th ed.

 

Mutant and Masterminds builds the entire system around Hero pts. Spend a Hero pt.... Spidy can web himself a glider. A finite resource is expending during the evening ep and its a one time deal. No fuss, no muss.

 

Again, I'm not knocking Hero. I just think that a lot of Hero is very dated. And that other games have pushed the envelope where as Hero has treaded water. The impact that Feng Shui had on our group was astonding, despite only playng it a few times. The impact Burning Wheel is going to have I think will be similar. Deadlands help pave the way for Neil's Luck rules, which are brilliant and were doing the Hero Pts from M&M before M&M was a blip on the radar.

 

The Good Borrow, Genius Steals.

[Markdoc]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Do we need a Com stat?' date=' when pretty much every Hero is one of the beautiful people? This is a hold over from 1978 era game concepts. If the looks of the character are a detrement (hideously ugly, or unbearable beauty) this is easily handled in Disadvantages.[/quote']

 

Dunno about you, but I use COM all the time in my games. I find it useful to have a visual key. If someone is truly hideous or stuningly gorgeous then powers or disadvanatges come into play, but what about "that girl at the bar is kind of cute" situations? If everyone's good-looking then describing an NPC as "atttractive" merely means "still warm"

 

STR should be 2 pts.

 

Agreed.

 

ED shouldn't be in most genres... Supers' date=' sure. But Danger International? How many laser beams are there? [/quote']

 

What about molotov cocktails? Getting out of the burning building? Like Com, it's true you don't use it much, but I can't see it does harm by being there....

 

Do we need powers expressed in inches? Just expressed it in yards/meters and be done with it. When that is truly a hold over from the early wargaming roots of RPGs? Especially in superhero games' date=' where knowing if Flight Gal is doing 45 mph or 300 mph or 3000 mph is really a key thing to know.[/quote']

 

Here I'd mostly agree. Dispense with inches? Seems to make sense. But you need to know both how many metres/phase Flightgal is doing in combat, and how many kilometres per hour when she's racing to a PTA meeting after the fight.

 

Now' date=' the problem with my arguement is that *what* I think is better, might be anathema to the next dice-junkie. I admit that. And I will always choose Fantasy Hero over d20... but I have chosen Savage Worlds over Fantasy Hero. Just as we've chosen Champions over M&M. My group is having fun with Necessary Evil... I don't think it will replace Neil's Champions evar. And I just started a Burning Wheel game last night... which is really an interesting system.[/quote']

 

Yep, same for me. I do agree that with 5th attempt to be "all things to all people" the rules actually went *too*far* in suggesting variants, alterations and generalised weird stuff - Fantasy Hero was particularly bad in this regard.

 

But even so I haven't found the Hero rules-set to be inhibiting. Our Ars Magica-inspired magic system used MPs (for rotes) and a VPP (to add to rotes or to use alone, for spontaneous casting). Now, to make that work really smoothly, either the players or the GM (or preferably both) needs to be familiar with the game system - but the same is true of Ars as well. In fact we spent less time debating/searching rules with Hero Ars than with Ars itself - mostly because of the vagueness in Ars descriptions, not the rules - for example, is Age a property? If it is, how is it affected by Perdo? What form is electricity? That kind of thing.

 

Of course that's not to say I don't enjoy other games. I have a totally irrational fondness for RQ2 - but when I switched to GM'ing for the RQ group, actually found that Hero worked better for some aspects - specifically heroquesting and sorcery - than RQ does and was no worse at other aspects. That doesn't stop me enjoying the original system, though.

 

Last of all, I agree that any GM worth his salt should steal things from other systems - amusingly enough the first two adventures for my current FH game were culled from RQ (the Garhound contests) and Ars (the ghoul of St. Lazaire) warped to Hero system and my own setting.

 

In the end, though, system preference comes down very much to taste. Karl (our Ars GM) was never very happy with Hero Ars: it wasn't quite the same as the original. On the other hand, he wasn't that happy with original Ars either - the freeform system and the fact that the descriptions had no mechanistic basis lent itself to bizarre or difficult to GM outcomes. As I noted, I like old school RQ. My friend Fitz, who posts to these boards, hates it. De gustandibus non disputandum as they would say in Ars.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Again, I'm not knocking Hero. I just think that a lot of Hero is very dated. And that other games have pushed the envelope where as Hero has treaded water. The impact that Feng Shui had on our group was astonding, despite only playng it a few times. The impact Burning Wheel is going to have I think will be similar. Deadlands help pave the way for Neil's Luck rules, which are brilliant and were doing the Hero Pts from M&M before M&M was a blip on the radar.

 

This I pulled off into a seperate answer because it kind of illustrates my point. We also played Feng Shui a few times but it didn't really have any impact on our style of play because we were *already* using powers in heroic games - and there's not a great deal of difference between "Carnival of Carnage" and "2d6RKA, area effect, nonselective". It just has a cooler name. So all Feng Shui did was give us useful phrases (like mooks and shticks and so on). I can see the impact it might have if you were not used to that sort of over-the-top style of play, though.

 

But again - and here's the point - that's a GM style thing, not a rules thing.

 

I've always allowed powers in heroic level games, and always given bonus points for clever combat maneuvers, so the good players learn quickly to be inventive, and I've always used movement and the environment to effect in combat - complete with plenty of property damage! And I've always differentiated between mooks (what we used to call cannon-fodder) and named characters. So Feng Shui didn't change anything for me - the actual rule differences were largely irrelevant, and the attitudes were the same.

 

It is a nifty setting, tho....

 

The M&M style hero points thing is a good example - we've never done that, but for some games we adopted the non-renewable fortune points thing from Top Secret. Basically you get so many fortune points at inception and can earn more as you advance. You can use them to dictate any roll or specific event, but once used they are gone forever. You don't have a lot, so people tended to hoard them for when you REALLY needed it.

 

For my own Medieval japanese game, I introduced invented Karma points, which were gained or lost by appropriate behaviour. They could not be used - only accumulated - until you died. Then every positive karma point added 5 experience points to your next character. This was to encourage players - especially samurai, which was most of them - to desire a worthy death. I also like to randomise the SPD chart, although I still use SPD.

 

All of these minor (or not so minor) tweaks work well in specific settings, but they don't affect the mechanics of the game much. I certainly don't think it means you are not playing Hero system, because they sit on top of the rules rather than altering them.

 

To me saying "in this game, you may use hero points - one use per session to perform GM-approved power stunts" is no different to saying "in this game divide the real cost of all powers defined as spells by 3" or "in this game we will use a cap of 12 DC on all attacks"

 

But I don't necessarily think they belong in the basic rules-set. Karma points worked for my Japanese game, but I wouldn't want them in my current fantasy game - they're essentially setting-specific meta-rules.

And that's what we have GMs for!

 

cheers, Mark

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

It only becomes a problem if the rules directly inhibit you as a GM.

 

To take one example - in my just-started fantasy game there are three forms of magic. One form is comfortably simple and predicatable. You make a deal with a god - he invests you with powers. As long as you obey the accompanying geas, you get the power. If you are careless, someone else could steal your power. Simple and straightforward. One could say that these are "powers in fantasy game" and therefore inappropriate, but this approach gives exactly the "feel" desired. Cu Cuhulain doesn't need to make a roll to do his mighty salmon leap over Formall's wall nor are his powers mysterious or capricious. He knows exactly what they are and so does everybody else. And the "feel" is in the presentation. In this case, I don't say to the player "1d6 RKE damage shield and LS:immunity to cold". I tell them "The Forest Man offers to change your blood to fire - so that any man who cuts you will burn and you'll never be cold in any weather. But in return, you must pledge never to sleep two nights under the same roof until the Black Hand is defeated."

 

This is an excellent example... and it illustrates my point as well as yours.

 

I run a small off-shoot game called "Kingdoms" which is a magical realm within my superhero world. Modern world/fantasy mix. I used this game to take two brand new to Hero players and one longer term player and get them up and running in the system. I did all that you described above, as they were three Yanks travelling to the Kingdoms (the UK islands where magic works, the fey lands are overlapping again, and the more advanced the technology, the more unstable it is) and they found themselves swept up in acts of great play between the three Kingdoms. The resurgence of the human monarchy, the Fey Kingdoms, divided between the Summer/Seelie and Winter/Unseelie courts, and the Kingdom of the earth itself and the dark drives of the Black Druid. Each found themselves to be one of the aspects of a Kingdom... one is Nuadha reborn... lost his hand first battle, was given the silver hand which becomes the silver sword.... another is the Bloddeuwedd, the lady of flowers,aspect of Danu... the last, a blind poet, turns out to be the latest Merlyn. All are totally in over their heads... don't know exactly what is going on... struggling to understand their powers... dealing with the trickery of the fey... etc.

 

All of this worked brilliantly, capturing the feel and mystery and majesty of any great fantasy story... and it worked, IMO, because for the longest time I never gave them character sheets. Never asked 'em to look up stats or how many dice is that? Never quantified for them exactly what they could and couldn't do. Never put numerical limits and mechanics that needed to be translated... kept it purely as descriptive narrative and story telling.

 

As a GM, I knew what they could do. I was busily translating active points and such in my head... I could say to them, roll X dice... then describe what happens without referring to rules. I can do exactly that quite well... take abstract forumulas in hero and describe them as "inky black, night taken form that licks around your feet with an unliving hunger"

 

Slowly I introduced character sheets, first with just mundane stats, some basic skills, then as they discovered powers, filled in those as they discovered them. Some of this worked fine... Kent/Nuadha discovering he could form his silver hand into a sword or club... Hero mechanics for that are very straightforward. Marlee/Lady of Flowers, finding she could cause all kinds of plant growth and magical plant control... not so much. Marlee's player, could also cause any wood to come back to life and grow and sprout. One time, after the gov't had caught up to them and was holding them in a hotel, she decided to escape. She used the old wooden bed frames and window frames to begin growing branches and vines to carry them out of the Russell Hotel. This was well within my concept for her powers... I just let it happen at a very slow rate, but was a brilliant moment of her discovering what she could do, using it to drive story.

 

But try to actually quantify that in Hero? TK? Can't lift self. Change environment to grow new plants? Doesn't help movement. Transform? Etc. When I sat down after the game and tried to deconstruct the power and "build it in Hero" it wasn't that I couldn't do it... but that when it was all put out on paper, it was a kludgy, technical, very un-magic like power. To this day, with it on the sheet, the player looks at it like, "What is all this again? Compound power, linked, flight and transform, UOO,?" I just say, "Forget all that, go with the name Wild Growth... it is just your plant control and growth. Just describe what you want in real terms... forget the mechanics."

 

Then, when she later, understandably, wanted to use her plant growth to create twisting vines to grab and hold an assailant (all without prompting or looking at the book) it was very easy to assign that as an "Entangle" after she'd gotten used to using it, we put it on her sheet with the name "Grasping Vines" and it works just fine.

 

Two examples of where Hero in the mechanical side both does and does not support the desired play style. In straight forward "magic as superpowers" type of abilities, especially combat related ones... it is great. Almost a 1 to 1 translation. Start to get into the more nuanced, side effect, heavily SFX flavored elements of magic... it doesn't do so well.

 

Your example above, of the "blood to fire" is great. I would totally grok on your description... but as soon as it was quantified on my character sheet as Damage Shield plus Life Support... eh, the magic is gone.

 

I am far from your roots in the historical context of magic as pseudo science. I can agree that was what it was... but that is not magic to me in a story telling sense. If you can quantify it and catalogue it and make it conform to repeatable experiments... that starts to feel much more like science than magic... and those are anethema to each other, IMO.

 

This is hard to explain... and it is totally subjective... which is the point I'm trying to make. Hero can do many things... IF you are extremely adept at making intutive leaps within the rules... and IF your personal play style of quantifiable, mechanistic construction (and I do think Hero self-selects for this play style) can still generate a magical feel for you, great. But it doesn't for me. It works for supers (for the most part.) It works for gun fights and sword fights and fist fights. It works for things that extrapolate from the real world quite well. (Quantifiable scalings of real world stuff.) When it gets into things that are decidedly not so real world quantifiable... belief, emotion, dream, perception, nature, elemental, etc. Hero just doesn't really stand up unless you go to great lengths to hide the mechanics, and hiding the mechanics is very "unHero" like.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

...and hiding the mechanics is very "unHero" like.

I can agree with everything you said except this.

 

A good game will describe SFX, the Special Effects should hide the mechanics, that's what they're for. It is, or it SHOULD be, very HERO to not only have SFX but use them liberally in gameplay.