What we like about HERO [Archive] - HERO Games Discussion Boards

00Machado

Mar 25th, '05, 08:59 PM

I know I'm preaching to the choir in terms of liking HERO, but I thought I'd throw out some thoughts on why I like it.

Maybe this info, and feedback that others contribute to the thread can be useful is how DoJ positions the HERO tool kit in their advertising and discussions of how fans use the rule set, and, if not, just interesting for all of us to read why HERO "clicks" with others.

For me, I don't think it's the tool kit aspect. I'm not so much a tinker. The draw for me is the creative freedom that I don't feel other games offer.

I want my reliance on a single system for multi genre and anything I make up on my own to be an enabler of my creativity, not a hinderance.
Examples:
HERO - if you can imagine it, you can built it, often multiple ways. Sort of like the way I've heard George Lucas describe the evolution of special effects technology enabling him to put what he imagined on screen, instead of having to compromise due to technical limitations of achieving what he envisions. HERO system enables me to wrap rule mechanics around what's in my imagination, rather than...
GURPS - Nice concept in some cases (i.e point based characters, characters with strongly developed sets of skills for when you want that level of complexity), but if it doesn't already exist with a point cost, you have to make it up. Also, I'm sure plenty of people can make it more cinematic, but it's not something I can do, at least not easily enough that I'm willing to spend time on it. Now, with HERO, I can template on realism with things like killing attacks, etc. or template it off. No hassles. If it weren't for the back catalog of books published that already have new ideas priced out in terms of point cost for you, the system might even be stifling for creativity, as is the case with...
d20 - I like the mechanic of the difficulty class increasing, and requiring a roll high instead of a roll low. This is perhaps my major gripe with hero. Simply put, I like roll high for success, not roll low. In plenty of cases, I even like the idea of sudden and discrete gains in power as provided for by feats, hit points, etc. But that's not my point. My point in bringing up d20 is... if there's not a prestige class for it, a spell that already exists, a core class that fits a role, etc. you have to make it up. Now, depending on my mood and at various points in my gaming experience, I have been more or less comfortable just making stuff up for a game. I realize that a lack of a prestige class doesn't prevent me from making up my own, but will mine be any good? Will it be balanced? And besides, I want to make up ideas really, not rules. So, I could make the Sun Lord prestige class and try and express my ideas in d20 rule mechanic terms, or I could use HERO to just apply in-game effects that I'm very familiar with, and that are already built into the system, to my Sun Lord idea. Whereas d20 doesn't stop me from making stuff up, I know I have a mental barrier that often sends me to look for a rule widget (feat, prestige class, equipment, etc) that has already been made up to fill my need. It's just my personality, and I know I'm not the only one with that particular mental hurdle. Whatever, That's not so important. What is important is that d20 doean't facilitate breaking out of that way of thinking. HERO, at least for me, does. I can go digging through a genre book to see how it's been implemented, and then whenever I want to try to do something similar, I'll remember. And I've progressed beyond learning a rule, to learning how to re-apply that rule to any similar situation. In all honesty, I know I could swipe lightsabers from Star Wars d20, insert them into my fantasy genre game as light swords, mental energy blades, etc, but, what if there was no Star Wars d20. Would I make it up? Would I say it does the same damage as a great sword? The Hand Attack effect in HERO, on the other hand, is always there and ready to grab for my lightsaber, and then my mental sword, and then the next idea that comes along. And any of the power modifiers needed to give it just the right feel are there too.
You might say that HERO is a state of mind that lends itself to me not self editing my ideas to the mechanical components that I've come across.

The down side that I see to HERO.
I've played a fair amount of 4E, but haven't yet run a 5 or 5ER game (you might say I've been returning to the fold lately), and even with my experience, HERO just appears complicated in some ways. Combats using the speed chart and segments seem to take longer than combat in d20 rounds. Even if they don't, I have the impression that they take longer. Also, the roll under your target number mechanic is more difficult for me vs the roll high mechanic which just rests in my brain as being easier, whether or not it really is.

end

Fox1

Mar 26th, '05, 12:03 AM

A most liked/most disliked thread.

It won't help martketing, if this goes for any length all it will show is that what some people like what others hate. One would need to do a real marketing study if they wanted something rational to act on

But it's still fun

Since I came to the game with the original boxed edition, part of my continued use of HERO is simply because it worked for me then and continues to work for me now. It would take a lot to make me move to another system.

Likes:

The split between body/stun, PD & ED split from resistant defenses and each other. Back in the day, this was big- and it was THE road to playing Superheroes. Other games of the time used the traditional damage approach with results of dead and dying characters at the end of each supposed comic book battle.

Love the wargame like combat system. It handles Superheroes wonderfully and it's more than acceptable for heroic action in modern and sci-fi settings as well.

While I do have to use house rules, none of them are major changes to the system. That is frankly amazing.

The construction system allows one to create a vast array of characters tailored to the exact style of game you're going for.

The 5th edition book containing almost all the rules in one place.

Dislikes: These are minor compared to like, but do exist.

HERO does Fantasy extremely poorly. Just as well, I have another fantasy game system I can use.

Most of the additonal books (Ultimate Brick and Ultimate Martial Artist excepted). The rest have been a waste of money and I've stopped buying them.

Most of the 5th edition changes. Ick.

5th Revised STILL not including Piercing in it's power list.

Vehicles. Sorry, vehicles still suck.

The lack of adventures modules.

nexus

Mar 26th, '05, 10:52 AM

Apparently, we like very little. :)

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 26th, '05, 10:56 AM

The lack of adventures modules.
We've been told several times by Darren & Steve that modules don't sell well and aren't a good investment of DOJ's resources.

Fox1

Mar 26th, '05, 11:38 AM

We've been told several times by Darren & Steve that modules don't sell well and aren't a good investment of DOJ's resources.

I know. And they may well be right.

Doesn't mean I have to like it does it?

TheEmerged

Mar 26th, '05, 11:51 AM

For me, the toolkit aspect is the #1 charm. Unlike the original poster I *am* a Class A1 tinker :D And tinker I have, quite a bit and repeatedly. And tinker I shall continue to do... Anytime I see something that doesn't work the way I think it should, you can bet I'm gonna work on it.

Thing is, unlike other systems, HERO gives you a backdrop to balance against. To use an unfair d20 example, under d20 I know spells should do about d6 per level... But why are some area effect spells d4 per level and others not? Is the automatic-hit aspect of magic missile really balanced against its half damage?

I'll be the first to tell you there are some places HERO breaks down -- the lower-point levels and in campaigns in which PC's have normal characteristic maxima by default being the key one. There are solutions to this, some of which are more radical (altering the figured attribute formulas -- or eliminating them) than others (changing the NCM cap to 25 instead of 20), and some require a certain mindset to work right (changing the skill base from 9+attribute/5 to 6+attribute/5)...

...but the toolkit aspect allows me to tinker with a better idea of what I'm doing. That framework gives me something to look at when I try to do radical things like creating a magic system with only skills (no powers or frameworks).

Hyper-Man

Mar 26th, '05, 12:11 PM

Besides all the freeform adaptable construction advantages that HERO has I really like the simplicity of experience awards and character advancement (if used, some posters have had success with essentially 0 xp supers). The players can go whatever direction they wish (within reason and campaign limits) without having to be a prestige rules accountant. Heck, the rules even suggest ways of allowing complete rewrites of super character powers via the radiation accident.

HM

David Blue

Mar 26th, '05, 12:20 PM

Things I like:

a) A minimum number of (good!) resolution mechanics handle everything. It's consistent and thus easy to play and to run in ways that even many otherwise good systems like dungeons and dragons aren’t and can't be. Also, you can play it largely from memory, without tables.

b) It handles superheroes and a lot of modern action really well. Fox1 is right about all that. The difference in "feel" is tremendous, and if you like superheroes (and hex maps) all in Champions' favour.* STUN, what a concept!

c) It's remained pretty much what it is, so that everything I've ever bought is still of some use to me, with no more changes than I routinely make when adjusting villains and other writeups to the heroes and the scenario. I expect Hero will continue to be backwards compatible. That makes Hero products exceptionally good value.

d) I can translate anything into it - often poorly, but I can do it. Whatever I see that inspires me, in any genre or in the news, becomes Hero fodder. And that's just keen.

e) Apart from the art, which can be a turn-off, Hero just puts out good products. The rules are well-written and make sense. The physical product isn't too flimsy. (Fuzion never happened ...) The layout is good. I'm finding it hard to sum it up, but if you look at something like VIPER, this is just so obviously worth my gaming dollar, I'll buy it on the assumption either a use for it will arise or I'll create the opportunity to use it - and it won't fall apart in the meantime.

f) Character sheets can be simple and straightforward to build and understand. Critically, this can be true with bricks. So you can sit a totally new player down, and often what he wants is someone like Ajax (classical Greek) or Orion (DC) or Doc Sampson (Marvel), and with Hero you just go here you are, this is what this means, and this is what this means, and let's play. Beautiful!

g) It scales OK for different-sized playing groups. By comparison, if you get a lot of TORG characters together, just because of all the cards they'll put down, the game is out of harmony. A lot of games have a similar problem. But with Hero you can run one player or as many as will fit in your living room, and yes the combats get tedious, but it works.

h) No "hero points". (Related to the previous point. Also, I find not having to decide when and how many hero points to award makes it easier for me to just let the player characters to take a side turn and do what they want.)

* I learned to roleplay from Superworld, which I still love, but where "hit self, do critical, impale, die" was a very possible way for a superhero to die. When I hooked up with some Champions players, I was amazed and delighted at all the unnecessary and dubious-for-genre rules that they - didn't - have. Cool!! I think Champions has lost some of that highly-desirable rules-lightness, but not too much.

CSgeekHero

Mar 26th, '05, 01:14 PM

First, let me say what I've discovered about other systems and to me there are only three of note: d20, Gurps, and (of course) Hero.

d20. This actually is not one unified system, but three seperate system thinly vailed as one. There is D&D 3/3.5 edition or AD&D lite. Second, there is Star Wars d20. Its decent, but rigid to the license. While, that's understandable, it is almost completely unusable with anything else. Then, there is d20 Modern. The problem is there are supplements out there are based on the D&D rulebooks so you'll have to throw out half of a book if you want to use it with Modern. The Modern direct line produced by WotC is, well, crap. :stupid:
I got an idea...Let's throw all of the d20 rules out :yes:

GURPS. Generic Uni..., well, generic is all you need to know. The game mechanic felt thin 15 years ago and it seems like nothing's changed. It doesn't work very well at high powers. It just makes you feel uncomfortable looking at the obvious weakness of the character attributes. That doesn't include the fact that the basic 3rd ed. book has become the basic 4th ed. books in order to give someone the basic amount of skills and talents needed to play a basic game. :nonp: Let the wind blow it away.

HERO! The best balance when it comes to low powered or high powered adventuring. The system doesn't break down. The core rulebook is "The One to Rule Them All." What I mean is that when I change genres I don't have to throw anything out or modify the rules. Hero does a great job of incorporating everything under one roof and giving a lot , I mean A LOT, of information that has never left me without some idea of how to accomplish something, or create a way to accomplish it. The book includes many sample gadgets and several ways to build ones that aren't there without having to buy other books(although, I do because they're good stuff). All you need is your imagination, because just about any rule you need is there in the book. And if not, the system actually gives guidelines for building special rules. :hail:

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 26th, '05, 01:39 PM

I know. And they may well be right.

Doesn't mean I have to like it does it?
Never said you had to like it; just commenting on why it's not being done, is all. :)

archermoo

Mar 26th, '05, 02:05 PM

I honestly can't think of anything about HERO that I don't like. Which isn't to say that I don't use hose rules. I do. Frequently. Some are to keep things from earlier versions of the rules that I like (I still use the -1 for a 1/2 move rule), and some are just because I like to tinker. But that is part of what the HERO system is all about. When you get down to it, the different genre books are just the official "house rules".

Personally I disagree with Fox1 on how well HERO does Fantasy. But then again, I think it does ALL genre very well. I've played a LOT of different Fantasy RPGs, but the only one that comes close to HERO (IMNSHO) is Rolemaster. But I'd still rather play HERO, especially with the 5th edition rules.

Dragonblade

Mar 26th, '05, 02:48 PM

d20 - I like the mechanic of the difficulty class increasing, and requiring a roll high instead of a roll low. This is perhaps my major gripe with hero. Simply put, I like roll high for success, not roll low. In plenty of cases, I even like the idea of sudden and discrete gains in power as provided for by feats, hit points, etc. But that's not my point. My point in bringing up d20 is... if there's not a prestige class for it, a spell that already exists, a core class that fits a role, etc. you have to make it up.

Now, depending on my mood and at various points in my gaming experience, I have been more or less comfortable just making stuff up for a game. I realize that a lack of a prestige class doesn't prevent me from making up my own, but will mine be any good? Will it be balanced? And besides, I want to make up ideas really, not rules.

So, I could make the Sun Lord prestige class and try and express my ideas in d20 rule mechanic terms, or I could use HERO to just apply in-game effects that I'm very familiar with, and that are already built into the system, to my Sun Lord idea. Whereas d20 doesn't stop me from making stuff up, I know I have a mental barrier that often sends me to look for a rule widget (feat, prestige class, equipment, etc) that has already been made up to fill my need.

It's just my personality, and I know I'm not the only one with that particular mental hurdle. Whatever, That's not so important. What is important is that d20 doean't facilitate breaking out of that way of thinking. HERO, at least for me, does. I can go digging through a genre book to see how it's been implemented, and then whenever I want to try to do something similar, I'll remember. And I've progressed beyond learning a rule, to learning how to re-apply that rule to any similar situation.

In all honesty, I know I could swipe lightsabers from Star Wars d20, insert them into my fantasy genre game as light swords, mental energy blades, etc, but, what if there was no Star Wars d20. Would I make it up? Would I say it does the same damage as a great sword? The Hand Attack effect in HERO, on the other hand, is always there and ready to grab for my lightsaber, and then my mental sword, and then the next idea that comes along. And any of the power modifiers needed to give it just the right feel are there too.
You might say that HERO is a state of mind that lends itself to me not self editing my ideas to the mechanical components that I've come across.

Excellent observations of d20. :) I do enjoy the d20 system and play it more than HERO simply because thats what all my friends play. However, you have hit the nail on the head with exactly why I prefer HERO to d20.

archermoo

Mar 26th, '05, 02:57 PM

Oh, and I guess I'm just a freak, since one of the things I have always liked about HERO is that sometimes it is good to roll high, and sometimes it is good to roll low. I've just never understood why some people seem to have so much problem with it/dislike it so much.

I'll also point out that craps is about the oldest dice game extant, and you automatically lose if you roll the highest possible result on the first roll...

:D

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 26th, '05, 02:58 PM

Which isn't to say that I don't use hose rules. I do.Which page are those on? I can't find them. Or are they one of the things that got added for 5ER? :think:

( ;) )

archermoo

Mar 26th, '05, 03:06 PM

Which page are those on? I can't find them. Or are they one of the things that got added for 5ER? :think:

Ba-dum-BUMP!

You a very bad man!!!

:D

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 26th, '05, 03:12 PM

You a very bad man!!!
So I'm frequently told. ;)

stu2000

Mar 27th, '05, 08:50 AM

My favorite game is Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes. There were several adventures produced with stats for both MSPE and Espionage!. So I checked out Espionage! and thought it was pretty cool, but wondered why they had all those numbers. Eventually, I started running into gamers that wanted to know exactly what happened in every round of HtH combat, and were clearly a little insecure about leaving all those details up to me. So with the devil-may-care gamers, I like MSPE. With the detail-oriented folks, I like Hero.

I like initiativeless combat. I like stun/kill damage. I like the detailed character sheet, with plenty of stats. I like the clearly-defined special effects. I like the scalability. Good stuff.

Lord Mhoram

Mar 27th, '05, 09:22 AM

What I like -

Complete freedom in character creation - when I discovered Champions waaayyy back in '85, no dice rolling in chargen was unheard of.
Combat and damage resolution - I love the roll to hit, roll damage, subtract defences - again something that was unique at the time I played it. Also the split between Stun and Body.
The "generic" powers that you define SFX for. I remember putting characters together for DC heroes and Marvel and if the power wasn't in the list, you couldn't do it (without tinkering). Gurps was the same way. So if you came up with a character concept that the designer never considered you are SOL.

These things are what sold me on HERO way back when. Now other, newer, systems have those things, but I have yet to find any that don't have something I don't like about them.

The Toolkit approach has been a strong thing for me as time goes on. I have a fantasy campaign world I am working on, and, for some unknown reason, I have always loved the flavor of Rolemaster's magic system. So I duplicated it in HERO terms. Keeps the feel, is still HERO.

Add to the fact that I am a superhero junkie - and HEROs biggest line has always been Champions; well you could say I am sold for life.

Things I dislike -
Nothing about the system proper - mostly recent stuff. I find the CU somewhat bland (although as more books come out an fill it in it helps) and I hate the timeline. I dislike the metasetting, enough so that I don't use it in any of my games (although having all the Star Hero settings in one timeline is really cool - you could run a nice extended generational game or a time hopping game with it no sweat - now if we could just get the Galactic Fed and the Solar Exploration sourcebooks out).

NuSoardGraphite

Mar 27th, '05, 10:17 AM

Things I like about HERO:

--The Speed Chart: During my quest to find the One Game to Rule them All, one of the deciding factors I determined was going to be how the game dealt with the speeds of the combatants involved. I didn't want a game where the characters made initiative rolls then everyone got one action in descending order. I wanted there to be a significant difference between those who were Really Fast and those who were Agonizingly Slow. At that point, the only game where I had experienced that in an adequate level was Shadowrun. (and to a lesser degree, Palladium System) However when I finally got the chance to play Hero, the SPD Chart really stood out to me. I finally found a game where an Augmented human could really outshine an untrained normal in the reflexes department. In fact, I love the SPD Chart so much, I will refuse to play in a Hero game where its been abolished. As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have the SPD Chart, it ain't Hero anymore...

--The Powers: Again, during my quest to find the One True Game, originally I wanted a system that could handle Psionic powers very well. But I also wanted a game with an excellent Magic system. At that point the only game I could think of that had both systems in place to my satisfaction was Rolemaster/Spacemaster (where the psionic and Magic systems were simply variations on the same theme) Most games either had a lackluster Psionics system or their Magic System was unworkable, or worse still, Powers were glossed over altogether. Hero solved this problem completely by allowing me to design a characters Powers and Abilities from scratch using a Tool-kit type system, which allowed me to excersize my imagination to its fullest. I also experimented with GURPS during this period, which had a good Psionics system and an O.K. magic system, but the system for superpowers in general was lacking in comparison to HERO. This (and the Speed thing) was essentially the determining factor on choosing HERO over GURPS.

--The Combat: The combat rules in Hero are the most diverse in all of RPGdom. It allows you to fight as cinematically as you want and encourages the use of flashy and unrealistic maneuvers, which is the kind of combat I like to portray in my games. With Hero, I can easily mimick the combat scenes from any one of hundreds of Anime tittles that I've seen with near-perfect precision, and this is probably my #1 reason that I've stayed with HERO for as long as I have. Only a few other RPG's on the market can compete with Hero on this level and they were specifically designed with this type of combat in mind (Feng Shui, Exalted etc) with Hero, you can scale the combat to the desired level. Gritty, realistic Fantasy? Doable (Hit locations, Impairing and Disabling and bleeding rules, critical hits) Superpowered Martial Arts? Doable (Knockback rules, Stunning and wounding rules) 4-color Superheros? Very Doable! Hero can handle it all at any power level (no matter what you naysayers like to believe)

--The Martial Arts: What I considered the second most important aspect of my Master RPG was going to be how it handled Martial Arts. Being a huge Martial Arts/Kung Fu movie/Anime fanboy, how my RPG handles martial combat is of great concern to me. Of all the games on the market (that I personally tested...which was most of them at the time) only HERO, GURPS and Palladium (using the Ninjas and Superspies supplement) handled Martial arts to my satisfaction. And of course, Hero handled them the best, because of how well it handled Combat in general. The Ninja Hero and Ultimate Martial Artist books are some of the best supplements available for HERO. Yet another reason why Hero remains a favorite and I find it difficult to move to other RPG systems. (note: Storyteller isn't bad at Martial Arts either, though its not as good as HERO. The COMBAT! supplement for Storyteller also happened to be written by our own Steve Long, so it makes sense)

--The Vehicles: What made me debate between Hero and GURPS for so long was that I'm a big fan of Mecha and Sci/Fi role playing. Vehicles are very important in the Sci-Fi genre and even moreso in the Mecha sub-genre. GURPS has quite possibly the best vehicles supplement on the market. It was very tough to choose based on that alone. However, once I began to wrap my mind around creating vehicles in Hero, I discovered that because of Hero's toolkit approach, I could design vehicles more accurately in Hero than in GURPS Vehicles. Now with the release of the 5th edition and the availability of the Ultimate Vehicle, that fact has been reinforced. With Hero, I'm in Mecha designing heaven and find that I can more accurately portray whatever mecha I'm trying to simulate, rather sticking to the incredibly complexe but still ultimately limited vehicle design system in GURPS. (yes, I'm aware of GURPS Mecha, but I found it slightly dissapointing. You can pretty much simulate whatever kind of mecha you want with it, but there are some things that are difficult to achieve with that system. I've found I have fewer problems with The Ultimate Vehicle)

hmm...is that it? Actually, there are a lot of other things I like about Hero such as the Damage Scale, how OCV and DCV determine chance to hit. The Block and Dodge mechanics are just about perfect (but all of that falls into the category of Hero Combat, which I mentioned)

What I dislike?

The only thing I can think of is that HERO isn't as popular as DnD and it should be...it should be MORE popular. Thats the only "negative" aspect that I can find about Hero. No, really. I like it that much.

Lord Mhoram

Mar 27th, '05, 12:02 PM

Things I like about HERO:

--The Speed Chart:

I forgot to mention that one. Yeah, that is one of the great beauties of the system, and in the tactical side of combat, and it helps really differentiate different character types. :)

DreadDomain

Mar 27th, '05, 12:22 PM

Not that I do it conciously but generally I judge a RPG according to three main factors :

Completedness/Adaptability
Consistency
Realism of genre

Completedness/Adaptability : Like it is discussed in another thread, completedness is in my opinion a huge asset. If the rules cover it all in one single book, that's great. In order to do that, a RPG *has* to be a toolkit otherwise it would be impossible to cram everything in a book. I couldn't imagine a book including a complete super power list, a complete spell list, complete gear lists from different epoch, etc... Good examples of the Completedness approach are Hero, Gurps and to lesser degrees Tri-Stat and Action!. Hero is in my opinion the most complete game on the market. Gurps 4 comes close but falls definitely short on the powers aspect. Hero is still the king of the hill in this aspect mainly because of its yet unmatched construction system.

A game could be incomplete (not covering everything you could come up with every genre) but be so adaptable that you can easily tweak it to make it work. While the "complete" games are generally rule heavy, the "adaptable" games are generally narrativist. The best examp,e I can think of is HeroQuest by Issaries. This game was created for Glorantha but it screams "try me with anything you want". Games like Rolemaster or d20 are just not flexible/intuitive enough to easily adapt to everything. The key word here is *easily*. Sure I can take d20 and play in a super game but I will have basically to create rules are the basics to make it work. Look at M&M. It is a good super game loosely based on d20 but you can barely recognize d20 behind it.

Consistency : There is not much I hate more in a game that inconsistency of the rules. I like it when very simple concepts are applied along the rules to keep the system solidly rooted. An example of this is the famous +5 active points doubles the effect. While quite simple, it helps making the game works at any level. In Hero, any kind of effect is handled the same way may it be Flashes, Drains, Physical Damage, Mental Attacks. You roll a number of dice according to your effect, you substract the defense if any, you tally up against a resisting stat (Body, Ego, etc...). A game like HeroQuest is very consistent in its resolution system as well. Gurps is mainly consistent but sometime the resolution works like in Hero, sometime you have to figure out the outcome using a contest of skills/stats. This kind of dual system doesn't help keeping balance along the power levels of play.

Realism of genre : What I call "Realism of genre" is the ability of a game to reproduce the specific feel of a genre. Some games are very effective in a very specific niche but are not very good at anything else. D&D and Warhammer come to mind. Obviously, the wider the range of a game, the better. While it is very difficult to cover it all, if not impossible, some games have a very wide repertoire. Some people believe Hero is very poor in the low, gritty end (to which I disagree) and excellent in the medium to high power range (to which I agree) but nevertheless, I cannot see a game with a wider range than Hero. For example, Gurps is excellent in the low to medium range of power but generally becomes much predictable in the high range. That is understandable because Gurps was built with "realism" in mind. In contrast, Hero was built with "effect" in mind.

Where am I going with that? Well, I mostly like broad concepts in games not specific little things. I love Hero because it scores very well in all three aspects described above and because I don't think another game succeeds better than Hero on all three account. In short, I love Hero because it is the most complete game around, built consistently all around and capable of reproducing the genre of a very broad category of style.

In contrast, what I do not like in games are often the little things.

I don't like that Gurps has only 4 stats. I don't like how throwing distances are calculated in Gurps, etc...

There is honestly not much I don't like about Hero. I would prefer better balanced and better defined primary chracteristics. I mean what the heck is Comeliness all about? Why noy replace it by a fourth, useful mental stats?

I don't like how the throwing distance is calculated in Hero (hmmm is there a trend there?). Or, to be more precise, I don't like that throwing distances, as claculated in the rulebooks are losing fast any sense of realism once we get in the high end of Strength. I mean, I understand why it is done like this but I just cannot bring myselk to like it. At least there is the realistic throwing rules in The Ultimate Brick.

While I like the Bleeding or the Endurance and the LTE rules, I find them a little bit to tenuous to bookeep.

I like pretty much everything else but speaking of little things, I really, really love the speed chart and the languages chart. I admire the power system (well ok, it is not such a *little* thing). I love the freedom players have to design there characters. I love the stun concept, I love that there is not automatism in Hero (you know, like in Gurps every warrior type have Combat Reflexes). On the whole though, what I really love about Hero are the broad concepts.

Make no mistake, I do love Gurps has well but Hero is still on top from my point of view.

Southern Cross

Mar 27th, '05, 01:40 PM

Same here.While I prefer the color artwork in GURPS 4e to the black & white art of the Hero System,GURPS 4e is lacking in the powers constuction department.
(My bugbear is the Alternative Attacks rule that was published in GURPS Characters.Essentially,it's an ultra Multipower that only consists of attacks.
Why did they have to wait until GURPS Powers to publish the Alternative Ability rules?)

tesuji

Mar 27th, '05, 02:34 PM

For me the biggest thing currently is the nostalgic feel.

While many of the games i played way back when are still around, most of them have significantly and even fundamentally changed. DnD certainly isn't the AD&D i played, nor is Traveller D20 the black book traveller i played so much.

But HERO, despite all its ownership woes and issues, remains fundamentally unchanged. A little polish and some new paint on the trim, but I gotta say i wouldn't be surprised is whole sections weren't pratically verbatim or very close to the BBB from what... 21 years ago?

The WW RPG revolution came and went and the wax/wane of mechanics/stuff vs story/style seemed to affect most every RPg on the market, but HERO remains as it was before any of that happened.

Of course, all things old become new again, or so they say.

I did buy last year reprints of the classic black book travellers (happy happy joy joy) and some have said the hackmaster or castle and crusades are like unto reprints of the classic AD&D, so maybe old is new again and what "was" is becoming the new what's "in."

Who knows?

HewhoisMatt

Mar 27th, '05, 03:12 PM

I like how cool all the books look sitting in a row on my shelves.

I also like how heavy the books are. They work very well for pressing flowers.

Susano

Mar 27th, '05, 03:22 PM

The fact I can build anything I can think of. And then some.

lemming

Mar 27th, '05, 04:24 PM

The fact I can build anything I can think of. And then some.
And he's just talking about using the books for construction. :D

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 27th, '05, 06:34 PM

And he's just talking about using the books for construction. :DSo now we need a video of how you can create an emergancy shelter using just a copy of 5ER as building material? :think:

teh bunneh

Mar 28th, '05, 06:49 AM

My biggest like: I can play any genre, any power level, without having to learn (or teach my players) new rules.

High powered, four-color, world-changing superheroes? Yup.
Low powered, gritty, iron-age superheroes? Yup.
High powered, lots of magic, high fantasy? Yup.
Low powered, gritty fantasy? Yup.
Modern special ops, Navy SEALs? Yup.
Dr. Who? Yup.
Star Wars? Yup.
Shadowrun? Yup.

I've played games where the PCs started with 750 points and games where they started with 25 points. I've played dozens of genres, and Hero works for them all -- without having to relearn the rules every time. It does cyberpunk as well as CP2020 (and better than Shadowrun); it does fantasy better than D&D and Rolemaster, and it does licensed properties better than just about any "official" licensed game I've played.

When someone in my group says, "Hey, I've got this great idea for a game set in the ice age, where you're all the defenders of your tribes and you've got magical powers, but technology is still at the stone age level," the only question we ask these days is, "How many points are we starting at?" :yes:

Bill.

Silbeg

Mar 28th, '05, 06:51 AM

5th Revised STILL not including Piercing in it's power list.

It appears in Dark Champions.

Vehicles. Sorry, vehicles still suck.

Then make your own. Remember, it is a toolkit, so if you don't like an implementation, reimplement!

The lack of adventures modules.
Again, the toolkit advantage can ring clear here. Buy an adventure module from any system that fits your genre. Then, as any good GM should be doing anyways, update it to your playing style, and system. Likely, this argument would be mostly a concern for a fantasy-style game, as competing (D20) systems have lots of modules! I am sure someone has done a D20 => HERO conversion chart (at least for levels, etc), and there are tons of creatures you can replace the D&D monsters, etc., with in the various source materials.

So, while HERO isn't selling many modules (though there are some... Champions Battlegrounds was very good, and I liked reading Sharper than a Serpent's Tooth, though I am not planning on running it. Villainy Amok looks to be a good source for Champions adventure ideas...

So, I think I disagree with this being a problem.

Fox1

Mar 28th, '05, 07:02 AM

It appears in Dark Champions.

Yes I know. But I want it to appear in the core rulebook.

Then make your own. Remember, it is a toolkit, so if you don't like an implementation, reimplement!

Again, the toolkit advantage can ring clear here. Buy an adventure module from any system that fits your genre. Then, as any good GM should be doing anyways, update it to your playing style, and system.

I thought the question wasn't what I could or could not do. I thought it was want I like or didn't like about published HERO.

archermoo

Mar 28th, '05, 03:07 PM

I thought the question wasn't what I could or could not do. I thought it was want I like or didn't like about published HERO.

Ah. My take on the question was that it was "What do you like/not like about the HERO system." In fact, one of the things that the OP put in the "like" column for HERO was "if you can imagine it, you can built it, often multiple ways". Doesn't sound like he was just talking about things that have been written up in either the core book. Or for that matter just talking about what was in the published material.

A.J.Gibson

Mar 28th, '05, 04:01 PM

What I like: you can do almost anything with it.

What I don't like: mostly stupid little things. Skills don't impact ability and are roll-under, disadvantages use negative reinforcement, hit points, derived stats bug the hell out of me, and a lot of the game is superhero-centric (with things causing knockback and costing end by default). My only real gripe is that the whole effect-instead-of-cause idea makes powers defined only in game terms, so when you try to be creative with your abilities there is no in-game support. Didn't stop me from buy two Hero books this weekend, though.

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 28th, '05, 05:02 PM

...and a lot of the game is superhero-centric (with things causing knockback and costing end by default).Knockback's an optional rule.
My only real gripe is that the whole effect-instead-of-cause idea makes powers defined only in game terms, so when you try to be creative with your abilities there is no in-game support.Huh? :think: Ya lost me.

Nyrath

Mar 28th, '05, 05:19 PM

I love the elegance of the toolkit. It handles anything. It scales nicely. If you can simulate a superpower by two different routes, chances are it costs exactly the same. There are little or no accursed "ad hoc" rules. And powers can be written in a remarkably concise form.

This all came together for me when I read the original Fantasy Hero. The Dungeons and Dragons's Monster Manual was a clunky crude piece of work by my standards. All the monsters had several paragraphs of ad hoc rules that were unique to them. You were lucky to fit four monster descriptions on a page.

I leafed through the Fantasy Hero book, and came across the monster table. Ohmygod! Each monster had a full description, with a complete listing of any bizzare powers and abilities it had and all of this was in a single line!!!. The equivalent of the entire D&D monster manual in two pages. :jawdrop:

I was in love. I jettisoned D&D for Hero and never looked back.

archermoo

Mar 28th, '05, 05:26 PM

Huh? :think: Ya lost me.

I think what he is saying is that since you buy the effects of the powers rather than the cause of the power (i.e. 10d6 Energy Blast rather than the ability to throw bolts of flame) you are more limited in what you can do with the power than otherwise. That is at least a similar argument I've heard.

I'd say that's what power stunts are for. And for that matter, I for the most part like the idea that you need to purchase all of the things that you do with your powers. Or at least all of the ones that you use on a regular basis.

A.J.Gibson

Mar 28th, '05, 06:55 PM

Knockback's an optional rule.

That's not the point. If you are using knockback, then some powers have it built in, and some don't, rather than having it as an adder that can be applied to anything. Range is similarly variable from power to power, some are based on AP and others are LOS.

Huh? :think: Ya lost me.
Say my character can create large amounts of water as their power. They might have all sorts of weird attacks, defences, and so forth reflecting what they can do with their water. Then say they get trapped down a well. They could create enough water to fill the well and then float to the top, right? Except they have no power that represents this ability, even though it is an obvious use of their abilities. Now, the GM can always just say it works, or water guy can have a big 'water powers' VPP (and every other character the same thing for their powers), but then the system isn't really supporting it, is it? If my character can do 4d6 damage with a water blast, how much land can he irrigate in a day? Can electro-girl recharge the batteries in my flashlight? Can I use my sword focus to chop down a door?

One thing I enjoy while playing is creative problem solving and I find that a little more difficult when my powers are defined by what they do in the game world rather than what they are in my imagination. Still, it's not an insurmountable problem, and SFX helps, but I hate relying on GM fiat.

nexus

Mar 28th, '05, 07:04 PM

That's not the point. If you are using knockback, then some powers have it built in, and some don't, rather than having it as an adder that can be applied to anything. Range is similarly variable from power to power, some are based on AP and others are LOS.

IIRC, almost all ranged powers have range based on active points and the same formula Mental powers are line of sight. Powers that don't innately do Body, don't have Knockback.

Say my character can create large amounts of water as their power. They might have all sorts of weird attacks, defences, and so forth reflecting what they can do with their water. Then say they get trapped down a well. They could create enough water to fill the well and then float to the top, right? Except they have no power that represents this ability, even though it is an obvious use of their abilities. Now, the GM can always just say it works, or water guy can have a big 'water powers' VPP (and every other character the same thing for their powers), but then the system isn't really supporting it, is it? If my character can do 4d6 damage with a water blast, how much land can he irrigate in a day? Can electro-girl recharge the batteries in my flashlight? Can I use my sword focus to chop down a door?

Of course you can use your sword to chop down a door. There's even rules for damaging walls and objection. Doors have Defense and Body. Assuming your "sword" does a Attack of some sort. Go for it.

One thing I enjoy while playing is creative problem solving and I find that a little more difficult when my powers are defined by what they do in the game world rather than what they are in my imagination. Still, it's not an insurmountable problem, and SFX helps, but I hate relying on GM fiat.

You're doing that in most games. In Marvel for example, you didn't get an exact amout of water that Amazing Water Blast produced. You got column to roll on to determine what the chance of doing something. Gm fiat was the difficulty. You can do that Power Skill and SFX. No system could cover every single option and possibility, at least without being 10 times thicker than the dread Tome already is.

tesuji

Mar 28th, '05, 07:39 PM

You're doing that in most games. In Marvel for example, you didn't get an exact amout of water that Amazing Water Blast produced. You got column to roll on to determine what the chance of doing something. Gm fiat was the difficulty. You can do that Power Skill and SFX. No system could cover every single option and possibility, at least without being 10 times thicker than the dread Tome already is.

a means of reflecting the ability for "off the cuff" powers that is common in genre used in some other system is to allow "reasonable powers" that dont exist on the character sheet at a cost of fatigue/hero pt expenditure for each such use.

So for example, you could use the water thing as a version of "flight" or levitation" etc to get out of the well, the sfx being "filling the well with water" and certainly you could recharge the batteries and so forth.

HERO has started along this path with the POWER SKILL, which seems a bit underused, but it seems from all the mechanics i have seen in HERO 5 and the USPDB that the current rules intend it to only add very small Ap effects, not something potent for just a moment. This seems odd, especially given the current editions seeming feel that AP isn't a good benchmark anyway.

But, obviously, a creative GM can allow these things by fiat or by house rules allowing xp expenditure in a game. i wouldn't, for instance, be inclined to say no if a player wanted to buy a new MP slot that fit well his multipower SFX off the cuff during play, if it was reasonable. however, from other threads, i know some Gms do, preferring to say no because the power isn't bought yet.

Dr. Anomaly

Mar 28th, '05, 10:24 PM

Say my character can create large amounts of water as their power. They might have all sorts of weird attacks, defences, and so forth reflecting what they can do with their water. Then say they get trapped down a well. They could create enough water to fill the well and then float to the top, right? Except they have no power that represents this ability, even though it is an obvious use of their abilities. Now, the GM can always just say it works, or water guy can have a big 'water powers' VPP (and every other character the same thing for their powers), but then the system isn't really supporting it, is it? If my character can do 4d6 damage with a water blast, how much land can he irrigate in a day? Can electro-girl recharge the batteries in my flashlight? Can I use my sword focus to chop down a door?

One thing I enjoy while playing is creative problem solving and I find that a little more difficult when my powers are defined by what they do in the game world rather than what they are in my imagination. Still, it's not an insurmountable problem, and SFX helps, but I hate relying on GM fiat.
Ah. I see. Thank you for the explaination.

I'm not sure I see the point about your "creative problem solving / GM fiat"....being able to do all those things in another game system is either by GM fiat (the GM says "sure, why not"), or is something like Marvel's Power Stunt. It's all up to the whim of the GM. And, as has been pointed out, there is the "Power Skill" in HERO.

To each their own, though.

A.J.Gibson

Mar 29th, '05, 05:44 AM

IIRC, almost all ranged powers have range based on active points and the same formula Mental powers are line of sight. Powers that don't innately do Body, don't have Knockback.

And this makes perfect sense in a Champions style campaign, but when those powers are being to construct other, weirder powers it doesn't make so much sense. Should my acid thrower (that does body) do knockback? Of course not, but it's easily fixed under the Hero rules (disadvantage: does not do knock back). The point I'm making, though, is that the DEFAULT is assumed to be a Champions style campaign, and advantages and disadvantages are available to make powers more generic, rather than starting with generic powers to begin with. It's not a big deal, I just hate having to look up whether I need to take certain advantages or if it's already included when I'm creating a power. Thank God for Hero Designer.

Of course you can use your sword to chop down a door. There's even rules for damaging walls and objection. Doors have Defense and Body. Assuming your "sword" does a Attack of some sort. Go for it.

Two character's have +3d6HKA OAF. For one, it's a sword. For the other it's a magical amulet that glows whenever a punch is thrown. Who can cut down a rope bridge faster?

You're doing that in most games. In Marvel for example, you didn't get an exact amout of water that Amazing Water Blast produced. You got column to roll on to determine what the chance of doing something. Gm fiat was the difficulty. You can do that Power Skill and SFX. No system could cover every single option and possibility, at least without being 10 times thicker than the dread Tome already is.

I never said other games did it better. I still think Hero is the best system out there. People were discussing dislikes in the system, I merely mentioned one thing I found mildly annoying. I hate relying on GM fiat, mostly because of some of the bad GM's I've had who had bizarre ideas of how the laws of physics work.

Hyper-Man

Mar 29th, '05, 10:21 AM

nexus

Mar 29th, '05, 10:28 AM

And this makes perfect sense in a Champions style campaign, but when those powers are being to construct other, weirder powers it doesn't make so much sense. Should my acid thrower (that does body) do knockback? Of course not, but it's easily fixed under the Hero rules (disadvantage: does not do knock back). The point I'm making, though, is that the DEFAULT is assumed to be a Champions style campaign, and advantages and disadvantages are available to make powers more generic, rather than starting with generic powers to begin with. It's not a big deal, I just hate having to look up whether I need to take certain advantages or if it's already included when I'm creating a power. Thank God for Hero Designer.

I still don't think I'm getting what you're trying to say here. You want the powers to be be more generic? Knockback is a campaign rule. You can decide that you're not using it and no power does knockback unless you get the advantage. Most Heroic games don't use Knockback. Mental Powers always have LOS range unless you the as GM decide otherwise, Heroic or Superheroic.

Two character's have +3d6HKA OAF. For one, it's a sword. For the other it's a magical amulet that glows whenever a punch is thrown. Who can cut down a rope bridge faster?

Whoever rolls the most damage when they "attack" the bridge. The SFX of the Killing Attack doesn't matter in that case, unless you want to make it matter.

I never said other games did it better. I still think Hero is the best system out there. People were discussing dislikes in the system, I merely mentioned one thing I found mildly annoying. I hate relying on GM fiat, mostly because of some of the bad GM's I've had who had bizarre ideas of how the laws of physics work.

That's a perfectly understandable reaction. I didn't mean to sound like I was jumping on you.

A.J.Gibson

Mar 29th, '05, 11:19 AM

I still don't think I'm getting what you're trying to say here. You want the powers to be be more generic? Knockback is a campaign rule. You can decide that you're not using it and no power does knockback unless you get the advantage. Most Heroic games don't use Knockback. Mental Powers always have LOS range unless you the as GM decide otherwise, Heroic or Superheroic.

All right, everyone forget I mentioned knockback. It was an example.

My original comment was: the base statistics for most powers are designed with a champions style campaign in mind. If it were up to me, all powers would be designed so that they have the same base statistics. In other words, all powers would have the same base range, all either do knockback or not do knockback, and so forth. Obviously, whether a power was instant or continuous would stay the same.

That's a pretty weak complaint because the alternative solution of making a default attack (HA or Energy Blast) not do Knockback (or at least Knockdown) without an advantage then throws off the entire 5 point elegance of the system with regard to STR damage. I would hazard a guess the ratio of damaging effects that Do Knockback vs. those that Do No Knockback is very high.

Yes, it is a weak complaint, I stated that at the outset. I think it says something about Hero that the most negative thing I can say is a weak complaint. Now my complaints about Rifts, *those* are strong complaints. :)

As for the '5 point elegance', isn't that also thrown off by invoking the no knockback campaign rule? What I suggest is no different than keeping the no knockback rule, but then allowing the 'does knockback' advantage for any power.

Ki-rin

Mar 29th, '05, 11:21 AM

My biggest like is the by-and-large fundamental Game Balance Equation of
+5 Ap= +(1d6)= +1 Body= 2x the effect on the same amount of mass= the same effect on 2x the mass.

This is an energy balance equation, and it allows _anything_ to be constructed or done in a game balanced way over a very wide range of AP without "breaking" the game or resorting to "special case rules" if it is used cleverly enough.

BTW, A.J.Gibson, the above is exactly how I'd deal with your "off the cuff" natural uses of a PC's powers. Using your chracter sheet and the above equation I can tell you just how difficult it is and/or how long it takes and even what extra you'd need if you can't already do "it". No matter what you want to do.

So yes, I can tell your water SFX based character exactly what they have to do to get out of a well, or fertilize a field, or ... etc. ...And I can tell your electrical SFX based character how long it would take for them to recharge a battery- or how much it would help their abilities to "drain" any specific power source, or ...etc.

My biggest <b>gripe</b> with HERO is the flawed movement system in general, the unbalanced impulse chart in specific, and the resultant high cost of SPD in specific. Because of the flawed movment system, SPD is a "special case": It costs _far_ more than any other characteristic and it can't be rounded. These are blemishes on an otherwise superior system.

We have tried a trick learned from Star Fleet Battles to help fix this and it seems to work better than HERO "as written":
A) We use a SPD chart whose maximum number of phases is equal to that of the fastest character in the tactical situation.
B) We use what seems under playtest to be more balanced phase chart(s):
1 x x x x x x 1 1 1 1 1
2 x x x 1 1 1 x x 2 2 2
3 x x 1 x x x 2 2 x 3 3
4 x 1 x x 2 2 x 3 3 x 4
5 x x x 2 x x 3 x 4 4 5
6 x x x x x 3 4 4 5 5 6
7 1 x 2 x 3 x x 5 x 6 x
8 x x x 3 x 4 5 x 6 7 7
9 x 2 x x 4 x x 6 7 x 8
A x x x x x 5 6 7 8 8 9
B x x 3 4 x x 7 x x 9 A
C x x x x 5 6 x 8 9 A B

1 x x x 1 1
2 x 1 1 x 2
3 x x x 2 3
4 1 x 2 3 x
5 x 2 x x 4
6 x x 3 4 5

Are the House impulse charts with a maximum SPD of 12 and 6 respectively. These impulse charts being more "balanced" allowed us to experiment with lowering the cost for SPD to +5 CP= +1 SPD.

We've also experimented both with allowing the rounding of SPD and in different ways of treating am "x.3" SPD as being different from a "x.4" SPD.

But overall, HERO is a great system that needs just a few tweaks to outgrow it genre-specifc 4CC roots.

nexus

Mar 29th, '05, 11:23 AM

All right, everyone forget I mentioned knockback. It was an example.

My original comment was: the base statistics for most powers are designed with a champions style campaign in mind. If it were up to me, all powers would be designed so that they have the same base statistics. In other words, all powers would have the same base range, all either do knockback or not do knockback, and so forth. Obviously, whether a power was instant or continuous would stay the same.

Ah, ok. I see what you're saying. Thanks.

prestidigitator

Mar 29th, '05, 01:17 PM

I see a few people saying one of the things they don't like about Hero is the low-rolling aspect of skills/characteristics/attacks. If you haven't, please check out the simple method I describe in my "Flipped Die Rolls" thread:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29611

As for what I like about Hero (in comparison to other systems), in no particular order:

A truly universal system that succeeds where (I feel) others fail.
The toolkit aspect.
The focus on game mechanics that support, rather than define, special effects.
All rules in one book, with suppliments providing guidelines, source material, and a few minor rules modification suggestions.
The smoothness between revisions. Now I'm not sure how far this reaches back, because I jumped on board in 4ed., but the changes between 4ed. and 5ed. feel very managable, and I would feel comfortable owning the only 5ed. rulebook among players who have only 4ed.
The very scalable optional rules and combat system. If I want simple, I can easily cut back from even the basic combat rules. For example, I can ignore End and ignore Stun except when it exceeds someone's Stun total or Con. On the flip side, I can use any combination of optional rules to make things as complex, realistic, etc. as I want.
The "Limited Power" Limitation. :D
The simplicity and consistency of the system. I believe Hero really is simple; incredibly so. The problem is that it has the masquerade of a very complex system, and tends to put people off. I currently spend most of my energy trying to combat this.
The approach that I feel to be a good attempt at modeling real world physics. Others seem to disagree a great deal, but as a scientist, I feel very at home with rules that attempt to make objects roughly "four times" as hard to hit if they are twice as far away or half the size in all dimensions, and that match mass to volume, scale strength to the order of magnitude of body mass, etc.
The bell-shaped 3d6 probability distrubution, and how it naturally places such significance on small differences in ability.
The double damage limit on weapons, and the affects on attack and damage of dexterity, strength, skill (or lack thereof), etc. In comparison, let me mention a system in which a character could very easily do 1d8+26 damage with a sword and 1d2+26 damage with a spoon!
Okay. I'll stop. There are innumerable other things.