Fantasy Immersion and the Things that Ruin it.

[GDShore]

I had a simple solution ti this issue, the 'monsters' just kept coming. The team(s) learned that disscussing things before you stepped in the "cow patty" was a good idea. I only had to do it once and it carried weight.

[Doc Democracy]

9 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Like I mentioned in another thread, having monsters attack and then a player wants to have at least a five minute discussion on tactics on how to approach the fight. Especially because we weren’t a “team” yet.Now if our backstory was that we were a team before hand ok. If we discuss as a group in non-combat time how we should approach a fight ok. But not in the first battle ever.

 

I have a bit of sympathy.  These characters will have all kinds of experience of fighting and fighting with others.   They would make better decisions than us tabletop warriors.  I think it is fine for there to be more time to talk tactics than the characters would have.

[Spence]

On 7/18/2024 at 2:16 PM, GDShore said:

I suppose you could do so, Spence, but that would eliminate one of the game aspects I loved when playing as a character. Research, creating a spell that nobody else was using or could use unless I taught it to them. I have never thought that Hero's magic system was clunky or interfered with the mystic of the play, or was inferior to the imbecilic, arbitrary and just plain dumb D&D system. I played D&D from it's inception, actualy from before it was, I played chainmail. I was never happy with it, and jumped ship to Hero system as soon as it appeared. I have never regretted it.

 

You don't have to. 

This is the major failing of Hero as a system and why literally no one plays it compared to other game.  Not the game, but the "fans" of the game have no compromise. 

You want the almost painful complete individual customization of the the game.  Cool.  I love that aspect too.  But I started the game in 1982. 

Any world you run has "world rules' or "setting guideline" if you prefer.  The way things work in that world. 

Designing a prebuilt set of spells/powers/thingies that follow those guidelines that people can just pick from does not mean that no one can customize anything. 

What it does mean is that people who have never played a hero game may actually make a character and give it a try. 

But Like I have said before, Hero System (4th, 5th or 6th) is not a Roleplaying Game.  It is a SRD/Tool Kit that you can use to make an RPG. 

I get it that people are done with D&D.  Original D&D was my first RPG and brought me away from wargames to RPGs.  It isn't that I don't like D&D as much as I can no longer take Class/Level games at all. 

But class/level is easy for people to build a quick PC in an hour or so and play today.  And "here is a 300+ page tome to assimilate with minimum setting guidance and create a character" is not easy.

Hence, even though Hero in actual play is IMO opinion far simpler and easier than D&D or PF's rules/option by the pound approach.  Few people ever really get to the "play" part. 

If D&D's spells are arbitrary and stupid, make your version to not be stupid and arbitrary.  But make it SIMPLE enough so that Bob who only has time to walk in sit down and play and most definitely does NOT have time to spend studying like he is in school, can actually join in and play. 

As to "I have never thought that Hero's magic system was clunky or.....", well Hero does not have a magic system to have an issue with. Even "Fantasy Hero" does not have a magic system.  It discusses a wide range of ideas that could be a magic system.  Even the various grimoires were just very large lists of power sets that have been given "spell names".  But there is no "magic system".  Even the setting books The Turakian Age and The Valdorian Age didn't establish playable magic systems.  Or even playable worlds. 

 

But YMMV

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

For the sake of clarity, Spence, I'll just point out that the magic spells written up in the Fifth Edition Fantasy Hero Grimoire(s), as well as much of the Sixth Edition Hero System Grimoire, is the magic system for The Turakian Age. The various "arcana" of magic mentioned in TA are all fully written up in the Grimoires.

 

As for your assertion that those spells, and the magic system included in The Valdorian Age, are not "playable," I would be inclined to characterize that as subjective, based on my own experience.

Edited July 20 by Lord Liaden

[Ninja-Bear]

Oh and to add to LL point Fantasy Hero for 4th had a sample system which iirc was the defacto system of the Western Shores which was also a sample but playable game right from the start.

 

In the Champion’s BBB, there is a under the sample campaigns was a campaign guideline for the Red Moon a S&S game.

 

wanted to add though that Spence’s statement is overall true. When I just jumped into DnD 5th, I took advantage of their quick build suggestions just to be able to get characters ready to play.

Edited July 20 by Ninja-Bear

[Lord Liaden]

Personally I'm very fond of the 4E FH "spell colleges." They were all given an underlying philosophy, and descriptions of their unique spell-casting styles, that made them quite distinctive and flavorful.

[GDShore]

If we are to do as Spence suggests, and make everything for the player's we rob them. We steal from them creativity, we give them pablum, we do not allow them to create a souffle, or borsht or even a simple stew, we give them pablum. now if we are talking about setting up a 4 hour session at a 'CON.' then yes pablum is what they are going to get. There is simply no time for anything else, so if Tom, Dick or Harry wants to try it at a Con. pablum works. As a GM setting up a campaign you book your first session as character building only, you must meticulously set up the framework ofyour world, what makes it tick, what makes it work and .... WHY. I ran campaigns in Calgary and Red Deer on alternate weekwends, 2 sessions each week average of 6 to 8 hours each. (sometime longer never shorter) over an 18 month span (average) that's 220 to 300 hours of time. It gave the players/characters time to create a feast for mind and soul. There was no defined leader amongst the group and during that time I conducted 8 specific sub-campaigns designed to push a character to stretch themselves. This doesn't happen with the play in D&D because the "modules" are designed around a formulae, go from point 'A' to 'B' bashing beasties on the way, enter dungeon, smash your way through it, looting along the way not leaving so much as a bent copper farthing behind return to point 'A' or maybe point 'C' divide up loot ,,, Ende.

[Lord Liaden]

GD, I applaud you for your efforts in creating great campaigns. That sounds like it made for awesome gaming.

 

But I suspect Spence would point out that many, perhaps most gamers don't have the time and resources to devote to that kind of GMing, especially if they're also dealing with work and family; and the majority of players today aren't prepared to lavish so much attention on character creation before they get around to adventuring.

 

If we want to broaden Hero's appeal, we need to make room for both what Spence wants, and what you want.

[Spence]

59 minutes ago, GDShore said:

If we are to do as Spence suggests, and make everything for the player's

You sadden me.  You remind me of the modern "news".  To read what someone says and then completely ignore it and go on a diatribe in an entirely different direction.

 

But in an attempt at basic understanding.  Providing players with a basic start so they can progress and actually play enough to learn the game so they can then build their own is not robbing them. 

 

But then we all cannot be omnipotent beings so I will retire and leave this field to your most epic magnificence

[Ninja-Bear]

M hat off to @GDShore. Now my experience of late (as in the last several years perhaps a decade). Is that the people I play with have, including myself, hectic lives and schedules. So when the stars are aligned, we game roughly 4hrs and I did so many one shots it ain’t funny. We don’t have time to create specially crafted characters. We’re here to game!  Of course YMMV. 

[Duke Bushido]

That was quite possibly a new record for me.

 

I just started easing back, and I am pretty sure I am now done, as in I love you guys; have a nice life.

 

As to pomposity, it's really not a stretch to assume that, by-and-large, players do not all want to spwnd untold hours digesting a thousand pages just to make a character and grasp the rules.

 

It also isnt terribly difficult to understand that, especially for those who _are_ familiar with the system, once you see the powers building system and the scaling and the systems of advantages, disadvantages, and limitations, it is not possible to slap a "Hi! My name is Magic" sticker on it and then not see it as any other super power.

 

Perhaps pomposity has put blinders on some folks.

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

FWIW, Shadowdark is an OSR game that was independently produced and raise over one million dollars on kickstarter. I’m sure that there are several reasons for this and one is to “give it to the man”. -that is WotC. However the current vibe is simpler rules (mainly fantasy). I don’t think GDShore appreciates that fact.  And if he does, my apologies. 

[DShomshak]

17 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

It also isnt terribly difficult to understand that, especially for those who _are_ familiar with the system, once you see the powers building system and the scaling and the systems of advantages, disadvantages, and limitations, it is not possible to slap a "Hi! My name is Magic" sticker on it and then not see it as any other super power.

 

Not without a bit of work on presentation, certainly. It is, after all, the whole point of Hero: One set of mechanics for everything, precisely (and perhaps even concisely) describing what a character can do.

 

But that's not a problem unique to Hero. Mage: the Ascension and Mage: the Awakening IMO had similar issues, in that while the systems were specificially for magic, they were still systems, and it was easy to get hung up on fiddling with the nechanics. (Which were, if possible, even fiddlier than Hero.)

 

There was another thread on this in which I proposed some thoughts on making magic magical:

 

 

 

Dean Shomshak

[Lord Liaden]

19 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

It also isnt terribly difficult to understand that, especially for those who _are_ familiar with the system, once you see the powers building system and the scaling and the systems of advantages, disadvantages, and limitations, it is not possible to slap a "Hi! My name is Magic" sticker on it and then not see it as any other super power.

 

 

From the description of the Demonology Spell College for 4E Fantasy Hero, the spell called "Dispel," which is that simple Power: "The caster summons a small anti-magic demon, which he then hurls at the target. When the demon hits it explodes in a small, stinking green cloud which dispels magic. If the caster fails his roll the demon goes off in his hand, dispelling magic on himself."

 

That ain't super powers. It's just one example from the many spell colleges, albeit one of the most striking. So I would contend that yes, it is possible.

 

 

Edited July 23 by Lord Liaden

[Duke Bushido]

Given that the build is Dispel with a side effect, it's like any super power Dispel with a side effect.

 

The rest is SFX.  I can build a Superman pastiche whose heat vision is "a demon pops into being on each shoulder and breaths a furious torrent of hellfire precisely at whatever he is focusing on," and that's that.

 

It's like the newer retro-styled Camaros.  If you look at the body lines too closely, you see the Malibu hiding amongst the super-chubby fenders, and once you see it, you can't ever not see it.

 

The drawback to the whole "here is the build; toss on whatever semantics you'd like for SFX means, ultimately, no matter what you call it, you see the build and are instantly aware of how you can fit it into a half-dozen other genres-- 

 

All the upshot of this being "there is no reason whatsover to not accept that a player who does _not_ want to see that is not playing wrong or somehow 'less genuine.'"  He might be avoiding reading an encyclopedia of rules to build a character the fan base-correct way, or he equally might be trying to preserve his own immersion.

 

None of it is wrong or some sort of screwy dishonorable than any other.  If everyone is having a good time, you are doing it the most correct way you possibly can, even if you are rolling 3d12 for skills checks.

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

I agree, none of that is wrong. But colorful SFX have been integral to Hero since the earliest Champions days. We even have Advantages and Complications specifically built around SFX. Anyone has a right to not see them if they don't want to. But to say it doesn't make a difference if they see them or not is to ignore over four decades of Hero System history.

[Chris Goodwin]

For some reason FH 1e never seemed like super powers to me.  But every version of Fantasy Hero since then has.  And I've been trying for decades to figure out why. 

 

FH 1e had a set of assumptions baked into magic.  FH for 5th and 6th gives the GM enough leeway to effectively replicate the 1e assumptions, but I'm not even sure that would make it feel to me like the 1e system. 

 

I wish I could figure it out.  It's been bugging me all this time, and I think I've played Fantasy Hero all of four times in the intervening years.  I wrote up an entire framework for attempting to recreate it, and while I think the rules and guidelines should in theory do it, they don't. 

 

Conversely, I ran a short Robot Warriors campaign about five years ago, using the Robot Warriors mecha rules with 6th edition, and it was just like 1986 again.  I don't get it.  🤔

[Duke Bushido]

8 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

I agree, none of that is wrong. But colorful SFX have been integral to Hero since the earliest Champions days. 

 

 

Agreed, and frankly, part of the problem for getting the feel.  Most id us, I (quite possibly erroneously) believe, played Champions when it was Champions.  There was no "HERO System" (the term wouldn't even exist in advertising until halfway through the 3e run); for many of us, there wasn't even Espionage.  Just Champions.

 

As Chris Goodwin notes after you (and excerpted below), 1e FH (or 3e, depending on how you count or if you retcon "HERO System" onto games before that was a stand-alone thing) , _did_ have a more distinctive feel- something slightly different from Champions.  In part, it might have been simply changing the names of the "powers" or calling them "elements" instead of powers, or possibly it was the inclusion of a few "elements" _outside_ of what was available in Champions that made it feel unique and different, or possibly it was those very few shared elements that in the FH version, worked slightly differently that helped sell them as "not another super power build," or possibly it was the hardwired assumptions about how magic would work in this genre specifically....

 

More likely, it was a combination of the three- building and using a spell was slightly different from building and using a super power, and it acted slightly differently as well.  Again, not much differently.  But it didn't take much difference to make that game feel different.

 

Once it was generally acknowledged that "those differences could be removed and reinstalled as power modifiers so let's blend it all together and make the HERO System for 4e, and provide all the options for making magic systems" (and like LL, I liked several things about the College system, just not a lot of it)-- 

 

It did not  take a lot of difference to gain a feel of "this is magic" versus "this is super Powers."  And removing those differences removed that feel.

 

And yes: a robust description of SFX has been a part of the game since the playtesting of Champions began way back when--

 

Which is why, in the spell example you offered, one could replace "demon" with "miniature robot" and poof!  Magic gone; super powers back in place.  Except that it is the exact same build, doing the exact same thing, and feels exactly the same.  Of course, that is understandable: it _is_ the exact same thing.

 

I think the folks who stumble over the idea of "it doesn't feel like magic" are misunderstanding the discussion:  no one is saying that you can't call it magic or that you can't build a perfectly acceptable way to _use_ that magic;  most of us here have done that very thing, I am sure.

 

But it doesn't _feel_ different coming from a modern HERO System mage than it does coming from a modern HERO System cyborg.  And it shouldn't, because the minor, almost inconsequential differences between 1e FH and 3e Champions were removed to blend it all together.  It isn't even a tiny bit different anymore (though as an aside, I resolved one annoyance with Spell Colleges by simply creating a list of specialties for each college, and a list of what each college could _not_ do.  They still didn't feel all that different, but at least there was now that bit of difference between them).

 

 

6 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

For some reason FH 1e never seemed like super powers to me.  But every version of Fantasy Hero since then has.  And I've been trying for decades to figure out why. 

 

 

 

I have no authority or knowledge of what made 1e FH feel different _for you_ than does the modern "build it and call it magic" system in place for every edition after that first one, but I _suspect_ it is because, like me, you learned to play Champions first, and everything you see today resonates internally as "Champions powers" rather than "they took magic elements and genericized them."

 

And I suspect it was okay with Robot Warriors because superheroes and ultra-tech have always gone hand in hand.  Using Powers to build high tech machinery feels right because you first did it in Champions.

 

Just a guess, mind you. 

Edited July 24 by Duke Bushido

[Lord Liaden]

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

But it doesn't _feel_ different coming from a modern HERO System mage than it does coming from a modern HERO System cyborg.  And it shouldn't, because the minor, almost inconsequential differences between 1e FH and 3e Champions were removed to blend it all together.  It isnt even a tiny bit different anymore (though as an aside, I resolved one annoyance with Spell Colleges by simply cretaing a list of specialties for each college, and a liat of what each college could _not_ do.  They still didn't feel all that different, but at least there was now that bit of difference between them).

 

 

To me those very different SFX do make them "feel" very different. To you they don't. I don't think either of us can say that the other is objectively wrong. Or that Chris's edition perceptions are wrong. I guess we're in one of those areas where subjectivity plays a major role.

[Doc Democracy]

I reckon the difference in "feels" comes from the basic approach.

 

When your game at the table specifically references a rulebook that is grounded in the genre, then ALL of the references and examples relate to the genre at hand.  Everything works to reinforce and enhance the genre.

 

Does not matter if that is fantasy, giant robots, superheroes or 1950's B movies.

 

Once your head is in the immersion space, your brain looks at everything within that context.

 

If you are constantly coming out of the immersion space, referencing a generic ruleset with applications to other genres, you lose some of that.

 

FH complete is possibly better than FH with the core rules. A Valdorian Age gamebook, with no need to reference core books, and all the design switches built in, would probably be better for having the magic feel magic.

 

I am with Duke in the naming of things too, small changes that do not make your brain hark back to the generic rules probably help too.

 

Doc

[Chris Goodwin]

12 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

I have no authority or knowledge of what made 1e FH feel different _for you_ than does the modern "build it and call it magic" system in place for every edition after that first one, but I _suspect_ it is because, like me, you learned to play Champions first, and everything you see today resonates internally as "Champions powers" rather than "they took magic elements and genericized them."

 

I'm pretty sure this is it.  I have a recollection that when I first opened Fantasy Hero, once I realized that it was the same system I started looking for the differences.  And I was probably thinking to myself something like "Oh hey, I like this.  I like this too.  I'm not a hundred percent sure I like this but I'll wait and see." 

 

And that "looking for the differences" bit seems to have haunted me ever since, because I can rattle off half a dozen differences in the deep details between any two Hero System edition/rulesets without cracking the books. 

 

If you were playing FH 1E, you were starting with that book and its default assumptions for how to build spells.  If you wanted to import Champions powers to build spells with you could have, but it was definitely a GM permission call.  Magic items, monster abilities, or character special abilities used the same system, which meant that you could use the system to mimic powers, but it felt like you were dancing the Limbo to do it.  Point costs were balanced against spellcasters though, which is probably most important.  And the Spell Book supplement did add a few Champions powers reskinned as Fantasy Hero spell effects.

 

12 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

And I suspect it was okay with Robot Warriors because superheroes and ultra-tech have always gone hand in hand.  Using Powers to build high tech machinery feels right because you first did it in Champions.

 

One of the things I absolutely loved about the Robot Warriors mecha build rules was that you don't use Powers to build them!  At least not "Hardware" (weapons, armor, movement, and one or two other pieces).  Steve Perrin wrote Robot Warriors, and I've always assumed it was he who designed the Hardware subsystem, and it was freaking genius!  It generates Hero System stats, uses Advantages and Limitations, but uses "Hero System doubling" to come up with mass values without any reference at all to Character Points.  Different, but fully compatible, and (to me at least) they feel... heavy?  Like massive pieces of equipment.    "Systems" are closer to Powers, and use points rather than mass, but even the ones with the same or similar functionality to powers have different names.  (If building them with Powers had felt right enough to me, I wouldn't have been nursing that conversion document along for nearly four decades.  😅)

 

Similarly with Justice Inc. psychic talents.  Some of them are named the same as their Hero System counterparts, but they work differently while generating results that map to a Hero System character build.  (Sometime after 4e came out I tried to build those with Powers, and it was somehow even less satisfying than building Fantasy Hero spells with powers.)

 

Interestingly: Justice Inc., Danger International, and Robot Warriors all included "gadgets" rules that sent you to your Champions books in case you wanted to use them.  I don't know of anyone who did though.  (Duke, if anyone did I'd guess it was you!)  DI described the gadgets it came with (comms devices, drugs and poisons, gas masks, and so on -- the sorts of things you'd see in a modern military or James Bond adventure) in terms of plain language rather than build code. 

 

The 3e Star Hero book, the very final product released before 4e, used more or less the powers rules for alien abilities and technological devices, but it used those names to describe the subset of powers for each of them.  I honestly never played anything using that book, and I've never even heard of anyone who did, but it's possible that someone out there did. 

 

So.... there's something unknowable yet definite among all of these that -- in my own fully subjective opinion -- really make things feel different. 

Edited July 24 by Chris Goodwin

[DShomshak]

Of marginal relevance, for a lark I once tried using Mage: the Ascension to build superheroes, with powers ranging from energy blasts to running in high heels. I found... yeah, not too difficult. Other aspects of the ruleset also mapped easily onto superhero tropes and comic-book melodrama, from Secret Identities to "My entire life is a lie!" The game was specifically designed for magic, and tried to make the magic feel magical, but I think it could capture the superhero "feel" with less bending than I expected.

 

I'm not sure what that proves, but I suspect it proves something.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

 

[Chris Goodwin]

4 hours ago, DShomshak said:

Of marginal relevance, for a lark I once tried using Mage: the Ascension to build superheroes, with powers ranging from energy blasts to running in high heels. I found... yeah, not too difficult. Other aspects of the ruleset also mapped easily onto superhero tropes and comic-book melodrama, from Secret Identities to "My entire life is a lie!" The game was specifically designed for magic, and tried to make the magic feel magical, but I think it could capture the superhero "feel" with less bending than I expected.

 

I'm not sure what that proves, but I suspect it proves something.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

 

 

The Cabal of Flamboyant Justice!  That's perhaps one of my favorite things ever written for Mage: the Ascension.  Back around the time I realized the World of Darkness wasn't a single line but several largely incompatible and completely irreconcilable ones. 

 

If I could've found anyone willing to run a campaign in this style that might have saved it for me, but alas.

[Old Man]

On 7/23/2024 at 6:06 PM, Chris Goodwin said:

For some reason FH 1e never seemed like super powers to me.  But every version of Fantasy Hero since then has.  And I've been trying for decades to figure out why. 

 

FH 1e had a set of assumptions baked into magic.  FH for 5th and 6th gives the GM enough leeway to effectively replicate the 1e assumptions, but I'm not even sure that would make it feel to me like the 1e system. 

 

I wish I could figure it out.  It's been bugging me all this time, and I think I've played Fantasy Hero all of four times in the intervening years.  I wrote up an entire framework for attempting to recreate it, and while I think the rules and guidelines should in theory do it, they don't.

 

I feel the same way, though I can pin down at least some of the things FH 1e did to magic-ify powers:

 

- Terminology.  Energy Blast was "Blast".  Force Wall was "Ward".  Flight was "Levitation".  It seems like a meaningless chrome change, but IMO it goes a long way toward conveying the right feel for the game.

 

- Actual rules changes.  Levitation was half DCV by default.  Force Field/Armor costed 3/2 and not 1/1, and I think it still cost END.  These had the effect of partially correcting the power costs for genre, among other things.

 

- Additional options.   FH 1e magic had an extensive list of magic-specific limitations, especially around foci (e.g. consumable foci that cost money).  And players were encouraged to stack zillions of limitations on spells, because your magic Blast feels a lot more magical if it can only be cast under the light of a full moon while wielding a silver dagger that has been soaked in the blood of a direwolf.

 

FH 1e magic still had some issues but to this day it is my favorite magic system.  4e lost a lot in its misguided quest to be a 'universal' rules system.

[Duke Bushido]

To be fair, 4e wasn't "misguided."  There was obviously a market for it-- frankly, _we_ were the market for it!

 

But look what was going on at the time: GURPS was a thing /about to be a thing.  Rolemaster had already instituted what was essentially the same system from Rolemaster to Spacemaster (you know: charts, and lots of 'em!  ).  Was it..,,  was it Runequest?  Starting to  crack out the "basic role-playing" engine? GDW was putting the diniahing touches on their own house system that powered everything from Twilight:2000 to Traveller to Cadilacs and Dinosaurs.

 

Talisorian had the Fusion System underpinning several games (and half of it would eventually underpin Champions: The New Millennium, almost).

 

Even Classic Traveller had it's guts ripped out a few years later and became the Cephus Engine-

 

For some _bizarre_ reason, a significant portion of us really thought we wanted this: one rules set that would let us run DnD, Traveller, Champions, Call of C'Thulhu, and whatever else, all without new rules to buy, new time to learn them, and new players willing to dedicate the tine to learn it with you.

 

(Wierd how this finally did come around,but too late to save Worlds of Wonder.  Oh well.  Innovators have the hardest time,I suppose).

 

Seeing as how Champiins and HERO still continues to exist (no; "thrive" is a bit of a stretch) in this form, GURPS still exists in this form, and until T4, GDW's Traveller publications worked at hold onto that House System....

 

There was definitely a market.  Definitely still is.

 

It just takes some time to really root through, to play so much that at-the-table conversations contain more mechanics than they do flavor text--

 

Before it starts to really sink in what you miss from the things before, what thirty years of homogenization have taken, and what you _still_ haven't figured out how to replace without going back to something built from the ground up with that missing thing already installed.

 

Yeah, we can change the names, and for some people, that's enough but each check of the rules or reference to build sections will remind you that you are puahing yourself to feel it, because the rules don't care, and all-too-often go out of their way to avoid feeling like anything.

 

It's akin to the five-liter in my new (to me) truck.  Sure; it's a five-oh.  It's even a Coyote!.  But no matter how many times I remind myself that it is a Coyote, or how many times I tell people it'a a Coyote,it isn't _that_ Coyote.  It isn't even _that_ Coyote.  But it is, technically, a Coyote.

 

Same kind of thing.