Putting my finger on it

[Sean Waters]

I've realised that, having read a few threads recently, my background dissatisfaction with 5th edition probably stems from the fact that it is now a system that is meant to be applied to any genre you can think of, rather than specific ones, like superheroes. In fact, I should go back one step further and say 'I have realsied I HAVE a background dissatisfaction....'

 

I really do think this has not been a step forward, because Hero is not the best system for any number of genres and I think that broadening the focus has reduced the impact.

 

A lot of the discussion on these boards stems from the fact that we are trying to apply concepts universally, across multiple genres.

 

Now the Hero system has not changed a lot between 4th and 5th except, for me, in feel. It has always been a superhero game to me, but with this broader focus I think that it needs a different organisation.

 

I think that we need to clearly identify 'core rules' that run across every genre (i.e. 3d6 , roll low, to succeed at a task) and other rules that are optional. OK the system does that, although the optional and core rules are often intertwined pretty inextricably.

 

The extricability is the important bit for me as the second step would be to have official genre builds: i.e. Champions uses core rules and knockback, Dark Champions adds hit locations and bleeding, Fantasy Hero uses core rules and....well you get the idea. 'Official' genre builds. Maybe even rules specifically designed for specific genres, like more realisitic killing damage rules.

 

Doesn't mean you can't do your own thing and create your own genre, of course you can, but it would mean that there is a common basis of understanding that, when we say, ' a Champions game' we know what we are talking about.

 

I think, at the heart of it, my problem is that Hero is becoming too diffuse: we live in an age where choice is seen as all-important, but ask any politician and you'll be told that one way of limiting the choice available in practice is to hand out too much of it.

[Mike W]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I can kind of see where you're going with this. While there have always been "genre specific" rules, you needed the genre book to find them(Dark Champions, Fantasy HERO, whatever). I can see that to some extent, but at the same time, it might be handy to have something in the general 5th edition book that said which optional rules are "mandatory" in a given campaign style. And while there have always been other genres, ultimately we tend to think of HERO as a superhero system. In fact, there are some of us that use Champions(or Champs) to refer to HERO in general.

 

On the other hand, I like the fact that I can grab a guy from Dark Champions, Fantasy Hero, or some other genre, power him up a bit, and drop him into Champions. Or grab a traditional knight from Fantasy HERO, change his background and put him in a Ninja HERO campaign. And through it all, I can assume that things work more or less the same. If we make too many of the rules "genre specific" we run the risk of creating things that use the same system but are no longer compatible without some more major revisions. I rather like the idea of being able to use one system for any campaign that I feel like using it, regardless of genre.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I can see Sean's point here.

 

As a kid it is exciting mixing colours - amazing that when you mix blue and yellow that you get green. The problem with it was that the more you mixed the more you inexorably moved toward brown....

 

Sometimes throwing everything in together does not make things more exciting.

 

It used to be nice picking up Fantasy Hero and seeing just what worked differently in an FH game rather than Champions.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating a return to having genre specific rules in genre books (though I think there should be big rules discussion section in genre books discussing how to achieve look and feel). I like having everything in one book, I would simply highlight what rules are core [relevant to all genres] or which relate best to particular genres [Champions, FH, SH etc]. The easiest way to do this would be using colour on title bars but even icons would be useful.

 

This way it would be easier to enforce the presence or absence of particular builds for entry level players and GMs and would provide a pointer to the casual user the number of genres that the game does cover.

 

 

Doc

[Mike W]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I can see Sean's point here.

 

As a kid it is exciting mixing colours - amazing that when you mix blue and yellow that you get green. The problem with it was that the more you mixed the more you inexorably moved toward brown....

 

Sometimes throwing everything in together does not make things more exciting.

 

It used to be nice picking up Fantasy Hero and seeing just what worked differently in an FH game rather than Champions.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating a return to having genre specific rules in genre books (though I think there should be big rules discussion section in genre books discussing how to achieve look and feel). I like having everything in one book, I would simply highlight what rules are core [relevant to all genres] or which relate best to particular genres [Champions, FH, SH etc]. The easiest way to do this would be using colour on title bars but even icons would be useful.

 

This way it would be easier to enforce the presence or absence of particular builds for entry level players and GMs and would provide a pointer to the casual user the number of genres that the game does cover.

 

 

Doc

 

I like the Icon idea, although it might get a bit confusing if you put icons on powers(Extradimensional movement and Dark Champions don't necessarily go together) when we already have icons like the Stop Sign. Maybe a chart instead?

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I like the Icon idea' date=' although it might get a bit confusing if you put icons on powers(Extradimensional movement and Dark Champions don't necessarily go together) when we already have icons like the Stop Sign. Maybe a chart instead?[/quote']

 

I reckon it is all a matter of design.

 

Colours would work best but I think that you could easily use the power with the title

 

Extra-Dimensional Movement [sTOP]

[FH],[Ch],[sH]

 

Keep the icons separate by design so that you are looking for them in the right places.

 

Or perhaps a good designer would come up with another way. I do believe in the master list in alphabetical order but there should be some way to provide guidance, direction and distinctiveness without having to cross reference charts.

 

 

Doc

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

Oh good. Does this mean we can implement things like "Life Support, Perquisites and Talents double in cost for Heroic campaigns" and "STR is 2:1 in Heroic campaigns?"

[OddHat]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

We do have genre specific rules recommendations, including frameworks (1/3 price for every spell in Fantasy Hero), limitations, ways of looking at damage (the bleeding and disabling rules), etc. What, specifically, would you like to see done differently?

[Markdoc]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

We do have genre specific rules recommendations' date=' including frameworks (1/3 price for every spell in Fantasy Hero), limitations, ways of looking at damage (the bleeding and disabling rules), etc. What, specifically, would you like to see done differently?[/quote']

 

Technically, the "1/3 rule" is for Turakian age and it's such a daft and "unhero-system" idea, it's why I have never bothered to look at any Turakian age material.

 

And there's the rub: if we started to move towards books with genre-specific rules, I'd simply stop buying them: currently, if I buy a Hero system book - even one for a genre I don't plan to run - I can be certain it contains material I can use directly. To take an example, the guns and equipment from Dark Champions function perfectly in a modern-day martial arts campaign because they're built on standard hero system mechanics. If I knew - or even strongly suspected - that there were "DC-specific rules" involved, that'd be a purchase Hero games would not have gotten.

 

Guidelines on how to use (and break, if necessary) hero system rules are a useful part of genre books - although the further you move from the core rules set, the smaller your market will be. *New* rules brings the Curse of GURPS, or the d20 Mashups we were discussing in another concurrent thread: similar, but incompatible characters.

 

Ick.

 

cheers, Mark

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

Guidelines on how to use (and break, if necessary) hero system rules are a useful part of genre books - although the further you move from the core rules set, the smaller your market will be. *New* rules brings the Curse of GURPS, or the d20 Mashups we were discussing in another concurrent thread: similar, but incompatible characters.

 

I think that's where I sit. I would like the genre books to do some rule specific discussions on how to achieve certain 'look and feel's within a particualr genre. That would mean discussing changes such as the 1/3 cost change as a possibility and why you might want to use that in your campaign.

 

I'm not sure I believe in 100% portable characters but Hero is so detailed that it would rarely be a problem to convert if that was what was truly required. If there were recognised rule options for particular genres then it might even be possible that a future edition of Hero Designer would be able to do the conversion for you....

 

 

 

Doc

[Sean Waters]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

Yes we do have genre specific ideas but what we don't have, or if we do I'm missing it, is a sort of 'genre ready reckoner'; you can do it how you like, but when we refer to Dark Champions, THESE are the rules and options we will be using.

 

Part of the problem with Hero from certain perspectives is that it is so BIG. Most people who play don't want to be able to play any game they can imagine, or flip endlessly between genres - who has the time?

 

A clear build for particular genres, always acknowledging that the precice mix is a matter for the player and GM, would give a degree of structure that might help new players get a handle on the game and allow old players to get a particular feel: that is what is missing I think - a 'feel'. That is often what I like about games, even if the rules aren't great - a structure and feel (look at WarHammer 40k: like it or loathe it has a feel to it. What you can't do with W40k is change it to suit you - you don't like it you don't buy it).

 

The Genre by Genre section could address appropriate rule groups. Make specific rather than general suggestions. I know that genre books can do that, but, for instance, FH is a big book that is still covering a lot of ground.

 

Maybe it shouldn't be in the rule book (although I'd rather see a set of specific example suggestions than the genral genre discussion that IS in there), but should be addressed in seperate and much smaller books:

 

FH Middle Ages

FH Low Fantasy

FH Swords and Sorcery

 

You know, actually building something with the toolkit, or providing the plans to do so. I suppose, using a literal analogy, what we have is a toolkit and some wood and we are told to get on with it with only the broadest suggestions as to how. If I am familiar with the tools and know I want a table for a room with odd dimensions, I'll sit down and draw up my own plans. If not I'll probably wind up not making the table in the first place.

[OddHat]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

You know, actually building something with the toolkit, or providing the plans to do so. I suppose, using a literal analogy, what we have is a toolkit and some wood and we are told to get on with it with only the broadest suggestions as to how. If I am familiar with the tools and know I want a table for a room with odd dimensions, I'll sit down and draw up my own plans. If not I'll probably wind up not making the table in the first place.

 

The Valdorian Age builds something detailed and specific with the HERO rules, something that plays differently than a Champions game. THe same can be said for Alien Wars, etc. Are more supplements like that what you're asking for?

 

I'd say that we have detailed examples of the powers, spells, talents, equipment, etc that appear in various genres. What exactly is the step beyond that you'd like to see?

[Markdoc]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

Now the Hero system has not changed a lot between 4th and 5th except' date=' for me, in feel. It has always been a superhero game to me, but with this broader focus I think that it needs a different organisation.[/quote']

 

And maybe this is why you feel like this - for more than 20 years, Hero system has NOT been a superhero game to me - in fact, 99% of my gaming time has been spent in the total absence of spandex.

 

My problems with 5th have nothing to do with focus (or lack thereof) - as you comment, that hasn't changed to much from 4th. Its the pervasive attitude that every possible permutation can/should be covered. In an attempt to anticipate and discuss all the things you might want to do, it's become harder to find what you want: core rules. Compared to 4th, I feel that we got relatively little extra useful stuff in 5th (apart from durability), in return for the extra mass.

 

I bought it anyway but if/when there's a 6th Ed., I'd prefer to see some tightening up and editing rather than more explication - shunt that off into genre and ultimate books.

 

There's no real dividing line between sacrosanct core mechanics and "other" mechanics anyway - you list the 3d6 "roll low" mechanic as core - but I use a "roll high" mechanic in combat for my games. Any mechanic can be changed and GM's will always change things - the last thing we need to do is encourage them!

 

cheers, Mark

[Sean Waters]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

And maybe this is why you feel like this - for more than 20 years, Hero system has NOT been a superhero game to me - in fact, 99% of my gaming time has been spent in the total absence of spandex.

 

My problems with 5th have nothing to do with focus (or lack thereof) - as you comment, that hasn't changed to much from 4th. Its the pervasive attitude that every possible permutation can/should be covered. In an attempt to anticipate and discuss all the things you might want to do, it's become harder to find what you want: core rules. Compared to 4th, I feel that we got relatively little extra useful stuff in 5th (apart from durability), in return for the extra mass.

 

I bought it anyway but if/when there's a 6th Ed., I'd prefer to see some tightening up and editing rather than more explication - shunt that off into genre and ultimate books.

 

There's no real dividing line between sacrosanct core mechanics and "other" mechanics anyway - you list the 3d6 "roll low" mechanic as core - but I use a "roll high" mechanic in combat for my games. Any mechanic can be changed and GM's will always change things - the last thing we need to do is encourage them!

 

cheers, Mark

 

 

The high and low roll mechanics are functionally identical though, and there are other ways of doing it: the 3d6 bit is the sacrosanct bit to me - it would play very differently indeed - albeit about the same averages - if we used 1d20.

 

The 'all things to all people' is my gripe here, although I come at it from a different angle.

 

I loved the old Pulp Hero with its unique mechanics, I loved the old Danger INternational and indeed the much smaller original FH. They were products with a common HEero thread but very much their own products with quite individual feels: I am not wedded to spandex, although it is my main influence.

 

The trouble is now if I play FH it feels like Champions with dirty clothing.

 

I don't think I'd mind a Hero product that just did the rules, and left the second half of the book largely for other media, but if it is going to be there I'd like to see it done differently.

[Markdoc]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I don't think I'd mind a Hero product that just did the rules' date=' and left the second half of the book largely for other media, but if it is going to be there I'd like to see it done differently.[/quote']

 

I really think it IS a matter of perspective - to me the Big Fat Black Book is the rules and the sort of example you gave - suguggestions on how you do medieval fantasy, how you do D and D style high fantasy, how you do Thieve's World style low fantasy are exactly what ended up in the Fantasy Hero genre book.

 

I have had - long ago - the problem of FH seeming like Champions with swords, but that went away as soon as I realised that to define a genre, in general it's not a case of what to put in, but what to leave out.

 

That applies not only to FH versus Champions, but also to different genres of FH - and it's going to vary from game to game. A game where all magic users must take concentation, skill roll, side effect and extra time on their spells and every player must be human is going to be very different from one without those restrictions, just as Champions games where the GM requires 4 colour characters and morality versus a game where the PCs include characters that go stabby.

 

And if you DO have such restrictions, then defining what powers are available is often unneccessary.

 

My feeling is that defining certain powers and frameworks as "unsuitable" for a genre is simply going to cramp creativity, as many GM's are inclined to simply say "No, that's not in genre". Lest we forget, we had exactly that response many times on these very boards with regard to power frameworks in FH games - because the long ago FH source book simply suggested they were not appropriate.

 

A far better response is to lay out what you can expect if you allow certain powers and frameworks in different genres. and that belongs in the genre book, not in the rules book.

 

cheers, Mark

[OddHat]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

As strongly as I support DoJ, and as actively as I both buy and promote their products, I prefer the old school approach of rules, setting, and sample NPCs all in one book. Failing that, I like a Rules book and a Genre & Setting or Setting & NPCs book (The Algernon Files and Fires of War being good examples of the third). Genre books separated from setting books I could do without entirely. I understand the business model built in to the DoJ's current approach, but it isn't what I want as a consumer.

 

All of that said, I'm still not clear on what specifically Sean is asking for that's different from what we're already getting.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

As strongly as I support DoJ' date=' and as actively as I both buy and promote their products, I prefer the old school approach of rules, setting, and sample NPCs all in one book. Failing that, I like a Rules book and a Genre & Setting or Setting & NPCs book ([i']The Algernon Files[/i] and Fires of War being good examples of the third). Genre books separated from setting books I could do without entirely. I understand the business model built in to the DoJ's current approach, but it isn't what I want as a consumer.

 

All of that said, I'm still not clear on what specifically Sean is asking for that's different from what we're already getting.

 

I am pining for the fjords, or possibly the past. I think you may have put your finger on it: the 'all-in-one' books seemed to capture more of the genre spirit than the current approach - understandably - and I think that I liked that better. There felt like there were lines of demarcation even if we were in fact using the same rules and buying them multiple times

[OddHat]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I am pining for the fjords' date=' or possibly the past. I think you may have put your finger on it: the 'all-in-one' books seemed to capture more of the genre spirit than the current approach - understandably - and I think that I liked that better. There felt like there were lines of demarcation even if we were in fact using the same rules and buying them multiple times [/quote']

 

Ah. I can see that POV, and largely share it. It certainly makes it easier to clarify which optional rules are best used in a given setting. I'd like to see a Sidekick (with genre specific optional rules), Setting & NPCs book as the default myself, with the Bib Black Book containing all the rules and options for all settings and individual Rules & Powers books (Ultimate ________ style) used to expand on this or that and genre specific NPC and Campaign books to round out popular worlds. Probably not a possibility.

[zornwil]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I've realised that, having read a few threads recently, my background dissatisfaction with 5th edition probably stems from the fact that it is now a system that is meant to be applied to any genre you can think of, rather than specific ones, like superheroes. In fact, I should go back one step further and say 'I have realsied I HAVE a background dissatisfaction....'

 

I really do think this has not been a step forward, because Hero is not the best system for any number of genres and I think that broadening the focus has reduced the impact.

 

A lot of the discussion on these boards stems from the fact that we are trying to apply concepts universally, across multiple genres.

 

Now the Hero system has not changed a lot between 4th and 5th except, for me, in feel. It has always been a superhero game to me, but with this broader focus I think that it needs a different organisation.

 

I think that we need to clearly identify 'core rules' that run across every genre (i.e. 3d6 , roll low, to succeed at a task) and other rules that are optional. OK the system does that, although the optional and core rules are often intertwined pretty inextricably.

 

The extricability is the important bit for me as the second step would be to have official genre builds: i.e. Champions uses core rules and knockback, Dark Champions adds hit locations and bleeding, Fantasy Hero uses core rules and....well you get the idea. 'Official' genre builds. Maybe even rules specifically designed for specific genres, like more realisitic killing damage rules.

 

Doesn't mean you can't do your own thing and create your own genre, of course you can, but it would mean that there is a common basis of understanding that, when we say, ' a Champions game' we know what we are talking about.

 

I think, at the heart of it, my problem is that Hero is becoming too diffuse: we live in an age where choice is seen as all-important, but ask any politician and you'll be told that one way of limiting the choice available in practice is to hand out too much of it.

First - disclaimer, haven't read the thread - just a quick gut reaction before further reading -

 

You can't blame 5th as 4th started this trend, just as a comment. But I essentially agree it is an issue, regardless of which way we resolve it (including the valid solution of leaving more or less as is). I still like the idea of a core HERO book for some purposes but I also think that the idea of self-contained genre and rulebooks worked well, personally, and that the problem that "but there's no universal rules" is a red herring, essentially. Even today, the core book is NOT A SET OF UNIVERSAL RULES, it is a set of options with a core engine, and you apply it to create the game you need. The genre books have gone arguably too far in this direction, each one now being another set of options to explore the sub-genra of any genre, and various styles. However, not to knock the current genre books - they still get one a LOT closer to playing a game. Anyway, the point is no two games out there (at least, I should say, as run by different groups) abide by a universal engine making transport of PCs between games transparent and without work. And the old Justice and Champions and FH all were interoperable to that same degree, I would argue, in that they did use the same corre mechanics and could be adapted to compatibilty IF needed. I would still like to see game packages from HERO that have self-contained rules and setting (ideally a genre book could do this, with the options and so on for other versions either as part of the book if it's a smaller genre or having some sort of supplementary material or moving this idea into the setting books, making the genre book the how-to and the first setting book of a series be an actual game, so you get Champions as how-to, and Champions Universe as complete game - obviously, room here to configure how you do it and maybe you still require a core book rather than write out core rules which are always repeated).

[zornwil]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

Technically, the "1/3 rule" is for Turakian age and it's such a daft and "unhero-system" idea, it's why I have never bothered to look at any Turakian age material.

 

And there's the rub: if we started to move towards books with genre-specific rules, I'd simply stop buying them: currently, if I buy a Hero system book - even one for a genre I don't plan to run - I can be certain it contains material I can use directly. To take an example, the guns and equipment from Dark Champions function perfectly in a modern-day martial arts campaign because they're built on standard hero system mechanics. If I knew - or even strongly suspected - that there were "DC-specific rules" involved, that'd be a purchase Hero games would not have gotten.

 

Guidelines on how to use (and break, if necessary) hero system rules are a useful part of genre books - although the further you move from the core rules set, the smaller your market will be. *New* rules brings the Curse of GURPS, or the d20 Mashups we were discussing in another concurrent thread: similar, but incompatible characters.

 

Ick.

 

cheers, Mark

Shrug, I feel the options in many of the genre books are very specific already and cannot be applied without serious scrutiny to other genra. The 1/3 thing for Turakian IS an option in Fantasy HERO and is a good representation of system tinkering for a particular game (not to suggest one must buy it, of course), along with myriad options in FH. I think nothing outside of what is in the core book is really orthodox across genra and all games, and everything else is optional, my standard perspective in RPGs.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I am pining for the fjords' date=' or possibly the past. I think you may have put your finger on it: the 'all-in-one' books seemed to capture more of the genre spirit than the current approach - understandably - and I think that I liked that better. There felt like there were lines of demarcation even if we were in fact using the same rules and buying them multiple times [/quote']

 

First off, rereading my comments, I come off a little strong - not a rant at your epiphiny or anything, and everyone has thier own playstyle and approach, and I'm not bashing yours. This is just a subject I feel strongly about and tend to go into "rant mode" to an extent when it comes up. That being said....

 

 

I'm of the opposite stripe. Back in the days of third ed Champs, we merged Champs, JI, DI, FH and other HERO system games into one big ruleset.. or I should say tried. There were just too many little inconsistencies between the rules for that work.

The advent of 4th fixed that, and 5th went even further in making this a Universal game. And that is exactly what I wanted from it. Perhaps I'm just not a Genre-fiend, or I have no problems mentally handwaving odd things in the rules,for exampe the 6" running 6 speed martial artist running at whatever MPH has never ever bothered me, but the universaility and cross genre standardisation that is in the current system is, in my mind, one of it's biggest strengths.

 

I ran a transworld FH game under 4th, and let everyone pick a different genre source book, and said "10rD max, 20 total, 9 DC max, everyone has NCM" and let them fly. I didn't have to do any kind of rules converting at all. Something virtually impossible in any other system Anything less that that kind of cross genre freedom is something that would seriously hinder the enjoyment and use of the system for me; because that is one of the things that HERO can do that virtually any other game out there can't.

 

I'm all for the rulebooks to have the base rules printed in them (a la sidekick), and merging genre and campaign books- As long as the rules between games are all things that are not "change the rules for this genre" but are options in the main rulebook, and/or just example powers abilities within the main book. And if they are non-standard list them as such (like the whole divide by 3 for spells thing). When I would buy a rulebook under this model, I would want to see every rule, power and ability be able to be "reverse engeneered" to the main rules; for example you want to simplify the game so you kill the speed stat and remove the speed chart and everyone gets 3 actions and a recovery - presented as a rule, it seems new, but with the knowledge of the full rules, it's just making everyone speed 3.

 

I considered 4th to be a huge step forward from "a game in each book, and each one was different" and 5th to be an improvement on that. I almost consider the universal aspect of the HERO system to be as important to the game as points, and reasoning from effect. An EB can be defined visually however you like it using the mechanics of EB. A specific HERO game can be defined however you like it using the mechanics of the HERO system. For me, making each ruleset thier own rules would be like getting rid of EB and having Lightnigh Bolt, and Firebolt, and Bio Energy blast in the rules.

[zornwil]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

And maybe this is why you feel like this - for more than 20 years, Hero system has NOT been a superhero game to me - in fact, 99% of my gaming time has been spent in the total absence of spandex.

 

My problems with 5th have nothing to do with focus (or lack thereof) - as you comment, that hasn't changed to much from 4th. Its the pervasive attitude that every possible permutation can/should be covered. In an attempt to anticipate and discuss all the things you might want to do, it's become harder to find what you want: core rules. Compared to 4th, I feel that we got relatively little extra useful stuff in 5th (apart from durability), in return for the extra mass.

 

I bought it anyway but if/when there's a 6th Ed., I'd prefer to see some tightening up and editing rather than more explication - shunt that off into genre and ultimate books.

 

There's no real dividing line between sacrosanct core mechanics and "other" mechanics anyway - you list the 3d6 "roll low" mechanic as core - but I use a "roll high" mechanic in combat for my games. Any mechanic can be changed and GM's will always change things - the last thing we need to do is encourage them!

 

cheers, Mark

Before my above messages confuse the matter, essentially that's what I would see for a core book - shunt the stuff off that's getting detailed and into too-specific a territory beyond particular games or is different across genra. That's where I think some of the more esoteric powers, such as Desolid or Transform, can be treated only briefly (relatively, I mean) in the core book and given the appropriate length in each genre book.

 

I guess it's not so much that we don't have all the possible information now, it's a matter as Sean started out with saying of organization, basically. I think it's making tougher choices and defining harder boundaries (or reestablishing them) across Core, Genre, Setting, and Ultimate books.

 

Core = ONLY material applicable to 3 big genra or more (for example), and nuances across genra given only brief treatment, again RELATIVELY speaking; mechanics should only include what is essential and not cover each situation

 

Genre = maybe pretty much as it is now, but some clearer organization as to what is considered "essential" for the genre at least per HERO's take (it's not as if people can't and won't change these things, just as they do now with core rules)

 

Setting = a complete game, maybe some better way of organizing which core book stuff is in use and which is altered, maybe it's already there as I barely use these, but generally anyway try to make these more clearly complete games, even if "Requires core book" is stamped - to me the tricky part is that I'm not sure how you either don't get to "Requires core book and genre book" or "Requires core book and duplicates some material from genre book" - but the latter could work well, if all you do is duplicate the options/rules from the genre book and say "if you are interested in whys and wherefores to the rules mods from the core, see the genre book"

 

Ultimate = pretty much as is, I think

 

But maybe the simplest issue is this - understandably, Steve doesn't want to discuss philosophy in rules question, and that's fine as an ongoing board policy, but I think the HERO rules books have to revise their approach, giving more of the philosophy and less nuance. That will allow people to make a better decison on the nuanced situations. Even if the page count ends up the same, I think the content gets much more useful - and more coherent.

[zornwil]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

As strongly as I support DoJ' date=' and as actively as I both buy and promote their products, I prefer the old school approach of rules, setting, and sample NPCs all in one book. Failing that, I like a Rules book and a Genre & Setting or Setting & NPCs book ([i']The Algernon Files[/i] and Fires of War being good examples of the third). Genre books separated from setting books I could do without entirely. I understand the business model built in to the DoJ's current approach, but it isn't what I want as a consumer.

 

All of that said, I'm still not clear on what specifically Sean is asking for that's different from what we're already getting.

When you say "old school approach," which exactly do you mean - the 3rd edition era approach?

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

 

Core = ONLY material applicable to 3 big genra or more (for example), and nuances across genra given only brief treatment, again RELATIVELY speaking; mechanics should only include what is essential and not cover each situation

 

I generally like that breakdown, with one addition. The HERO Xth Rulebook - the big hardcover, has everything in it. So you never have to go searching from one book or another to find that one little power, or fiddly rule to make what you need. There needs to be one main core book that can be everything, rules wise, if you don't want to go searching through books.

Or perhaps the core rulebook is what you say - halfway between sidekick and 5er, and we also have the "Game reference book" that have everything. Or perhaps two refernces - one for character creation and one for combat.

[OddHat]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

When you say "old school approach' date='" which exactly do you mean - the 3rd edition era approach?[/quote']

 

Rules, setting, sample NPCs all in one book, with the rules already adjusted to fit the intended feel of the setting. A core book of rules with more details and examples; Genre by Genre discussions can go here as well. Additional books expanding this or that aspect of the game, including NPC books, Spell books, Power books, etc. Pretty close to what we had in 3rd, with the best of 4th and 5th.

[zornwil]

Re: Putting my finger on it

 

I generally like that breakdown, with one addition. The HERO Xth Rulebook - the big hardcover, has everything in it. So you never have to go searching from one book or another to find that one little power, or fiddly rule to make what you need. There needs to be one main core book that can be everything, rules wise, if you don't want to go searching through books.

Or perhaps the core rulebook is what you say - halfway between sidekick and 5er, and we also have the "Game reference book" that have everything. Or perhaps two refernces - one for character creation and one for combat.

I don't disagree, but the ongoing problem I see is that HERO (like pretty much every system) produces optional rules in each Ultimate and Genre book, so we're always out of sync. I don't have a good solution (until we get to virtual books that are auto-updated....)