Scott Ruggels

All very good ideas. I like the various disciplines that those social skills are broken out. Sure it needs play testing , but the initial framework seems good.

In the earliest days in our Champions games (1e) the PCs were all 250 points to start, so there was not very much point diversity, and our teams very much followed the X-Men/Avengers paradigm. Our group at the time was very much Marvel heads, and kind of curled our lip at Superman, as a Deus Ex Machina in a red cape The disparities arose when that first generation of Champions characters, after two games a week, 2-3’experiejce points per game, over the course of two year, became 400 point veterans. Someone cycling in a new character had the benefit of player experience to build a much more efficient, and rules savvy character, but it was lacking the mileage, of the veterans. After buying back some disads, adding flash defense goggles, getting encrypted coms with the other team members, and a few more strength and con points, and a few levels, the veterans were polished by experience and became quite capable. Our GMs never even thought of allowing a new character being built for anything other than 250 points, for the first year, and when it was allowed, the resulting builds had more offensive and defensive capability then some of the vets, but also glaring gaps in their builds, sometimes resulting in “glass cannons”. However the new 250 pointers, were a bit under powered for their first few months, but because they were lower points than the veterans and knew it, were played more cautiously, working on tighter teamwork to compensate for any short comings. There are few things as satisfying as good, right, teamwork. Our teams would become expert set up artists, and were very effective (when we could assembles the band together) at convention games, bamboozling unfamiliar GMs with held moves, perfectly timed hay makers and fastball specials. As anti- social as some of my characters were, I was always a team player.

yeah it used to be 1 in was 10 feet. and most Dungeon Master maps were notebooked on quarter inch square graph paper.

the original Artist, C.C. Beck lived a long life, outlasting his drawing ability, sadly, but ended his days as a columnist for "the Comics Journal", giving a curmudgeonly end cap to that magazine, each issue, until his death in 1989. I used to read his sharp observations as a subscriber to The Comics Journal, and Amazing Heroes, back when I worked as a comic book inker in the late 80's and early 90's. I think that The tone, observed in the trailer for Shazam matches the somewhat goofy tone of the Golden Age Captain Marvel stories from Fawcett publications, with the idea of a 10 year old suddenly achieving super powers and an adult body.

Couldn't hurt.

Delta Heavy Launch Yesterday. SpaceX launches have spoiled me, on their superior showmanship. This is a National Reconnaissance Office launch, and so their camera work isn't the greatest, but the launch was successful and there were some nice highlights:

Did someone say artist?

Errr, since all my books to hand are 4th Ed, I kinda sorta have to use the 5th Ed, options on Hero Designer, but Yes!, I can definitely use this! Thank you!

Well for Dr. Unpleasant, following his numerous Comic Book appearances, if he was solo, I would usually build his LMD as an automaton, without stun, high defenses, and a lot of body (and acting skill), so the brick can toss and throw him around. The mentalist will discover he's a robot at some point quickly, though, but they can't just leave this running around free, now can they?

Damage reduction as a GM was always a stop sign for me, as the only rationale for it were questions of scale. Kaiju have DR. Dr Unpleasant doesn’t. Speeds were also an issue with speeds of both Heroes and villains clustered at SPD6 and for heroic level around SPD 3-4. But at the end of the day, I do not like Grundy, giant punching bag fights with no tactical flavor. I much prefer fights where the good guys may be overwhelmed by numbers, and/ or have to defuse the reactor before Dr. Unpleasant runs the timer out.

Then one needs to figure out how the rifle was built. The Germans had semi automatic pistols. Sgt. Bertolo had a semi automatic rifle. The rifle holds 8 rounds. He stands (half move) and fires. There was a thread in the Dark Champions board about how guns are too slow in HERO and made a few good points. Now the rifle should have a couple/three levels applied to range mods, because it is a rifle, where as the pistols do not. Now looking at the Germans, when under fire, the first instinct is to get to cover, so assay the first phase Sgt. Bertolo acted, included a presence attack, the Germans, then lose that phase. Subsequent phases, the Germans are NOT returning fire, but are trying to extend the range, or otherwise increase their DCVs. Also how many of those 6 pistols had been emptied into the Sergeant’s late comrades, and were useless in this engagement? The timing of ARL events may not compare to the speed chart, and noted shooter, Jerry Michelle (sic) fired a Garand into 5 targets in 3 seconds, hitting them all.

Well, if the stealth rolls are successful, then the rogue could initiate an attack against a 0-3 DCV, Unsuspecting victim, with all hit locations available. But it's dependent on that stealth roll succeeding. Any other "powers" that a Rogue would have after that initial first strike, don't map to HERO combat, so that may be the extent of it.

I can see why people have been reacting poorly to your comments recently, when you are taking down analogies for imprecision, rather that understanding the intent of the comment, as a whole. In the future, I know I will have to cite specific incidents, then. On to the comment, then. The difference is that in HERO, all of the tools to build the Boss, are available to the players within the rules. The Boss would need the same sorts of considerations that one would use to construct a player character. There are no special rules, there are no "Villain Only Abilities", the Boss, and the players have the same options available, with the only difference being points. Now there are probably GMs that "make up shit" like off book abilities and powers, so their precious story or favorite Big bad is preserved from a beat down by the team. I would prefer not playing with those GMs, and Myself, as a GM I prefer to be fair, play by the rules, and let thedice fall where they may. It's also why I tend to play "heroic level games" where you don't see a lot of Boss fights, and where clever planning can rout, or avoid the opposition as they choose.

Changing the Starting value, one again molds, or shapes the Race, to certain strengths or weaknesses, and yes, it may be cribbing points, but it keeps the costs near Zero. One can make some fairly radical changes for certain conceptions, which I don't see a problem with. Everything is a trade off.

I did do them on occasion. However, it wasn't for me so much that the boss battled occurred, but that they get special rules/ actions that , to me, completely mess up the flow of the battle. Hero doesn't do that, you just shovel more points into them to match the opposition. Extra actions, and dropping special powers at peculiar points on the initiative order was mostly what I was complaining about. seems , well unfair. it's like in chess if the opposing King developed Laser weapons, or something.

This is all very cool. Since I am coming most recently from an FH background, do I just build vehicles as characters in HD? I have no familiarity with vehicle rules. (The initial plan was that all space flight for the PCs would be by commercial carrier, but some discussions with the players, that they want a ship. One of the characters wants to be the captain, already. So I have to modify a few things.)

What about reducing the defaults? Instead of tens across the board, the package starts with one or more stats at say, six, and then has an NCM at 16? Would that work?

Not familiar with it. I assume it is available in the store?

I have always had a problem with the "Boss Monster" concept anyway. The "Boss Monster", is not "The Big bad", but the "Boss Monster is a left over concept from early video games. For HERO, it's for me always been the climactic battles have been about composition and numbers of opposing teams, rather than one big, laughing, roaring punching bag at the end of an adventure. In 5e, and Pathfinder is this concept of "Legendary actions" which give them an extra slot on the Initiative list, which being the victim of it, feels like the GM is cheating. Not a fan. I really don't see the attraction of this as a GM, and even less as a player.

Cute example, yes that works well.

This was the concept i was going for for The Lupines project, though trying to use Hero designer has been ... difficult. However as much as I want to create a 0 Point Package, it looks like it will cost some, because of all the enhanced senses, and extra ground movement at 1/5 end, even if they have a STR maxima of 15. (They tend to be light and weedy, but can take a punch).

Yes, be up front with things. In Bob Simpson's champions campaign we learneed that sometimes we would rup up against foes to powerful to take down, and we learned that once we figured that out, we should probably leave, lest one of us gets captured. Getting captured by certain foes was really bad. So, we would rather flee a fight in good order, than get captured, and then figure out a way to use what we learned the next time we ran across them. Bob was up front about it. so we took him seriously.

This may be an artifact of the old Simulationist/Narative dichotomy on Rec.games.frp.advocacy. I am back from, the Holiday break. So I can answer some of this. [EDIT] I mean no disrespect, and I am not looking to denigrate other play styles. I am just trying to convey my supreme disappointment, turning to hostility to the minimalist/ narrative focused systems. True, this is put forth among the participants, and is agreed upon at, or before start. Oh but here's the rub. You bring in "Genre conventions". Sure, we pick things based on Genre, but then how closely does one hold to that? I would agree to the set up, but I would not stay with a tight genre as I feel too constricted. I have already discussed my walking away from games I felt to restricted with. Oh I definitely do have my preferences. On another thread, Zslane said, "Just because PCs can die--fairly easily if players are not smart and cautious--doesn't mean they are disposable characters that should be treated like nameless figures on a mass battlefield. It just means the campaign is more of a sandbox simulation of a world in the given genre, rather than a story-driven collaborative experience where every PC is a precious snowflake that must not die unless it serves a satisfying dramatic purpose." I enthusiastically agreed. What I wan't is not a "story", but a journey. I want to experience someone else's world through the eyes of my character. I want that sandbox, rather than a path. I viewed the old Fantasy hero games as a travelogue, with a bit of fighting here and there. But the people, the cultures, the environment were what sent my imagination sailing along seas of wonder. As for the Space Ship issue, it's like the "Sniper problem"., and i will concede the sniper problem, as it pisses off players, like few other things. The Sniper problem is that if the opposition to the player characters hires a competent sniper, then it may be likely at some point that one of the P.C's head explodes. This, again, pisses off the players. So as one of my concessions away from the fairly tight realism I prefer, as a gm, I would have that first shot miss, or hit someone the PC's were talking to, and then put them on the speed chart, as they now knew someone was trying to kill them. At that point, the PCs knew the stakes and were cautious in their actions. For the ship, this may be watching two other ships battle to the death, and realizing what happens when one gets themselves involved in ship to ship combat. The "Hero Does it Better" thread gave me some new tools to handle ships and other complex systems, with the use of Causual Influence Diagrams. These allow a player to make informed and meaningful decisions, above and beyond just the combat. It's a little more work, but I think it makes things less hand wavey, which i do like to do. So there are these, and probably tools I haven't run across yet that will add, for me, the right sort of complexity i desire. The Solar System campaign is a go, so I will now have a chance to put things into practice.

an interesting idea for solar system surveys. https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a25907376/honeybee-prototype-steam-spacecraft/

if I remember, Shang Chi was pretty good, but it's good run started about the end of where I started looking at Superheroes. Soon after the Chris Claremont run of the X-Men started.