How do you feel about Hero overall?

[nexus]

These questions are generalities. Your opinions doesn't have to fit exactly. This is anonymous poll. I am curious about the numbers, not about anyone's idenity.

1. Its the best! I can't think of another role playing system I like better!
2. Its good, better than most but some other games do something better
3. Its adequate. Hero has flaws but generally more ups and downs.
4. Its poor, I play it out of habit and inertia but I'm looking for something else
5. I do not like it or play it. I feel I have found something better.
6. Other

[RDU Neil]

I voted the best... despite the fact that I pick nits with the system. Doesn't mean it doesn't do it better than anything else.

But "Better" is subjective.

I have a major jones for "balance" in a system. It doesn't have to be perfect (Hero hardly is) but it should provide a context... a core axiom for judging balance, and work to keep MOST rules within a balance context.

Once balance is set (even imperfectly) THAT is what allows me to take my mind off of the mechanics, and focus on the Game Rules and Play Experience. I don't have to crunch numbers and details once the game begins, because I can wing it "within the balance framework" and just let story happen.

Probably why I complain about things like certain Limitation values or Hand Attack or whatever... is because when I'm forced out of play experience to explore the mechanics, I'm not having fun anymore. No other game allows me to avoid "mechanics" as much as Hero... which is the paradox, because it is such a mechanics heavy game. I don't have to worry about arbitrary details, when I can fall back on 1d6 = 5 AP and then make up the rest on the fly.

The beauty of Hero... in some ways approaching the "game physics" I think many of us crave... is that it is NOT physics, and you will be frustrated when it breaks down.

Also... it is really hard to compare Hero to anything else except maybe GURPS... because Hero is a System... not a Game. Other major names (D&D, WoD) are games first. They might attempt to distill a "system" out of it (d20 example) but that is not what D&D is.

Do other GAMES do things that Hero system can't. Sure... but that's ok. Those Games might be better than Turakian Age or whatever... but they can't compete with the Hero System as a whole. (Well, they can, in terms of sales... just not at a quality system level.)

[ghost-angel]

I've yet to find something in HERO that I can't do. unlike every other system I've ever played. From creation to game and character concept.

[Vorsch]

Is that "cant do without bending the rules completely out of shape".

How about kill a normal person with a pistol in one shot (1d6rka)

Or build rogue

Or dead man

[Lord Mhoram]

I've been playing HERO for about 20 years, and I've read through or did a quick play of many of the games and systems that have come out since. I still play HERO. I've never found another game or system that does what I want a game to do any better than HERO.

so put me down for:
1. Its the best! I can't think of another role playing system I like better!

[Captain Obvious]

I think you're going to get a highly skewed poll here.

Signed, a fanboy

[Just Joe]

I regard 1. and 2. both as true statements. I rounded in Hero's favor and voted 1.

[The Horror]

Uhm. Interesting. I didn't vote, but here is what I think:

I like HERO. It is just such a tight and well thought out system, that I can't help but appreciate the beauty of it all. During play it isn't too bad either.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to put in effort designing racial templates and what not. The settings so far published for HERO don't appeal to me at all (though the genre books are absolutely fantastic).

My games of choice include things like Talislanta, Cthulhu, Pendragon and Godlike. All of those games (and the others) have mechanics that are perfectly suited for their settings. There is no need for adjustments or conversions. So in the end I just don't end up playing HERO for anything other than superheroes, and its been a while since I've done that.

So really for me HERO as a system is there as a safety margin. If there is a world I really really want to play in, then I know I can do it with HERO. In all cases however, I have to weight up the effort vs time available. For example, I'd love to play RIFTS with a different system, but I simply don't have the time to do all the conversions over to HERO. Thus it goes unplayed. I use the genre books all the time for my other games, its just the system itself that seems to get no use for me.


The Horror

[ghost-angel]

Is that "cant do without bending the rules completely out of shape".

How about kill a normal person with a pistol in one shot (1d6rka)

Or build rogue

Or dead man

That's any concept, idea, thought, genre, meta-genre, cross over, power I've ever thought up I can do with HERO, without needing extra rules, changed rules or bending the rules.

I never claimed simplicity. You can build Rogue .. it's just not cheap, not mechanically easy or perfect. But you can do it.

I'm not familiar with dead man.

Killing a normal with a pistol in one shot: To the head, they have no rDEF, the dmg is doubled, you can put them to -2BDY, use bleeding rules. Of course .... it's kind of a stupid question to be honest :stupid:

I did mean concept wise as far as the game was concerned... sorry I didn't clarify, but whatever. You can't kill a person with one shot from a pistol in a lot of games, and a lot of times in real life either... :stupid:

[Vondy]

I've modded it until its almost unrecognizable, but even out of the box, I like it pretty well.

[zornwil]

I regard 1. and 2. both as true statements. I rounded in Hero's favor and voted 1.
I did the opposite and rounded "down", only because I thought that Nexus' qualification "some other games do something better" had more implied weight in steering than "can't think of another role playing system I like better". However, it was a tough call. I do like HERO system better than any other game in general, but for certain unique settings and certain mechanics there are other systems I like better in certain respects. Deadlands is a prime example to me, the setting and the rules mesh very, very well, and HERO just can't do it, although one could modify it to do so...but not without direct inspiration from Deadlands, i.e., I don't think you'd get much inspiration from the HERO toolkit (then again, it's not a flavor-oriented system per se, which is okay).

Personally, I'd probably have rated HERO one step higher in this poll if it were more explicitly a toolkit and more clearly crafted to create other systems out of it. Then I'd probably feel that it would be so strong that in effect other systems would be blown away since it would be so easy to do them and do them very often better but with the same flavor. Right now I think we're just a tad too far from that scenario.

But like I said, I really do like HERO in general the best. I don't GM any other systems, aside from tinkering with MnM just a little a while back.

[Bucky]

I like Hero. I've been playing off and on for over a year now, and I like it, alot. I don't like rolling low. Sorry, its a culture thing, I grew up when a 20 was a crit, so its hard to get my mind around rolling low to hit. And when I first got into gaming, all the weird shaped dice just kind of, I don't know, intrigued me for some weird reason. Its a culture thing, and I realize that.

Its a damn good system, and I too have not found anything I can't do yet. I love being able to design a character from scratch, like a wizzard with a .45. I really like the more modern setting than D&D, and have purchased all the Star Hero stuff that is currently out, because Traveller is my other favorite game setting. The plethora of settings, and the use of 'real world' magick systems and cosmologies in Hero is a big plus.

The mechanics, well, except the whole rolling low thing, which I already said is a cultural issue, I can't complain about. It works, does come across as mostly realistic, and does lead to some really nice cinematic stuff that makes the game enjoyable.

[CourtFool]

Why did you make this anonymous? I want to know who voted for anything other than 'Its the best! I can't think of another role playing system I like better!' so I can send my black death ninja robots to their house.

[Hugh Neilson]

Like some others, I waffle between 1 and 2. While I voted 1 (it IS my favourite system), some systems designed to do one thing, and one thing only, can accomplish it in a more streamlined fashion than Hero might.

[For interest, does Horror Hero's older edition deal well with Sanity? I always thought Chaoisium's Call of Cthulhu handled that well.]

[Hugh Neilson]

Whoever voted "5", how about telling us your system of choice (the "something better")?

[nexus]

I'm guessing Mutants and Masterminds. That game won converts when it was released.

[Hugh Neilson]

Could be. OTOH, try playing gritty swords & sorcer fantasy with it...

[Supreme Serpent]

Overall, it's the best system out there. Able to do pretty much anything. Other systems/games can work well for a narrow-focused game.

Still works best IMO for what it was originally designed for: Superheroes. It can do many other things, but not as well as it does Supers. As "Champions" moves further into "HERO", it's getting further away from its core. Nothing against Steve Long personally, but he seems to much prefer Dark Champions/modern action to Champions, guns&tanks to superpowers. When he's the main one adjusting the core rules and doing stats, that's going to have an impact.

[zornwil]

Could be. OTOH, try playing gritty swords & sorcer fantasy with it...
There are a few hardcore MnMers saying it can do "everything" and are using it for other genres. Some even deny that it doesn't function so well on the low and high ends. Of course, to be fair, they've done some fixes to the low end in particular, though personally I think it's still not useful for gritty and granular, just as it breaks down in the higher ranks. Then again, to be fair, I'm making these observations based on my understanding of the rules and what I've read, we only played one session.

[zornwil]

I had to vote 3 myself. I've played the Hero System for nearly 24 years but I have found myself become more and more disenchanted with the direction the rules have taken with 5E as well as products published for the game over the last 3 years [and more enthralled by product produced by Hero competitors]. I haven't played another game system in nearly 20 years [except for a few convention games], and really have no intention of doing so, but when you have 10 pages of house rules to make Hero fit the idea you have of a game then you really need to ask yourself how much of the game do you really like. The game has flaws but is very playable and generally has more ups than downs. So 3 it is for me.
Re house rules, I always have plenty. If I formalized them in 5ER's detailed fashion, I imagine they would reach 100 pages, although at core they're 20 pages. Bear in mind, though, that 20 pages includes mostly add-ons, such as a formalized Experience and Reputation system. Any actual changes to the rules, removing the definition of which options are in use and any additional Disads I added for flavor and removing powers unique to my approach, probably amounts to 2-5 pages.

But if it weren't HERO, I can guarantee it would be a lot more. I had to amend many of the MnM powers when I rescaled the damage.

[zornwil]

Change M&M to Hero in your post and you'll get the same thing many Hero players say about the Hero System. :)
Sure, but don't you think that it's a much more valid claim about HERO since at least 4th edition, whether it's truly correct?

[zornwil]

My point was that there are Hero players who say Hero is good for any genre, which it really isn't. You can play any genre but you can't really emulate them all as well as dedicated systems can [and there's nothing wrong with that]. There are as many Hero players who say the system only works at low level as there are players who say it only works at mid-level or high level. I don't think the die-hard M&M players are saying anything the die-hard Hero players aren't saying, right or wrong. To me it was just funny to see you saying the same thing about M&M that many people say about Hero. :)
I see what you're saying. I'm not trying to argue the point, either, but I think that MnM is (by design) definitely limited enough that for many genres it's a flat-out mediocre (at best) fit and definitely works best in a relatively narrow power range whereas (IMHO) HERO is at least adequate (i.e., "good") for any genre and works best in a relatively broad power range. Whether I'm right or wrong about HERO, it at least has that claim and works towards such in its system, and history shows us that the claim is at least credible whether true. MnM, OTOH, has never had such a mission and outright lacks many features needed to game at some levels and some genres.

Let me put it to you this way - substitute the word "Champions" (meaning original 1st/2nd edition of what we now call HERO) for MnM in my first post on this matter. I would make the same comparison for Champions 1st/2nd ed. against HERO 4th or 5th as with MnM against HERO 4th or 5th. I was never one of those who believed that Champions, as such, could be applied so broadly, and I think the evolution to 3rd and 4th and 5th each demonstrates that.

[zornwil]

I think gamers get accustomed to a system and then try to make other systems like it. An example of that is how many people come to these forums and post about how they're trying to make Fantasy Hero more like D&D. How many of your M&M house rules would be put into place to try and make the game more like Hero just because you are accustomed to it? I think that's just a natural reaction to having a ingrained system habit.
Yes and no. I don't at all dispute the influence of games I've played and liked. But I would have had to rescale the MnM damage virtually independent of HERO - the dang thing was too one-punch for my taste. I have tried very hard NOT to HEROize MnM, because I feel that isn't really exploring MnM. The problem in this instance was that the system as it stood interfered with how I want to execute my game. (And to be clear HERO has a few things like that in terms of "how I want to execute my game" - although I could play, as a player, either system without any house rules quite happily)

[Fox1]

As far as your gun example, as ghost-angel said, a maximum body headshot will take the character to -2. From their they will bleed to death. That is pretty much the way it works in real life too. Few people die instantly from such wounds. It usually takes 2-3 minutes for the brain to die from lack of oxygen.

Such a wound is easy to treat in HERO. In real life, gunshot injuries to key parts of the body are nearly untreatable, the people are basically dead at the event.

Even the HERO System itself admits that firearms are underpowered with respect to reality.

On the bright side, it's not a fault of the core system- it's a fault of the a given set of constructs within that system. It's something easily fixed.

[Fox1]

I disagree. I think in real life there are very few people who can make the necessary paramedic role in a matter of seconds/turns/minute to treat a 12 body wound, and that's why people die. :)

That isn't the point. Although if it is, one must question the effectiveness of the base Paramedic skill in HERO that commonly allows such life saving measures.

The point is that there are handgun wounds that NO one, no matter how skilled, no matter what equipment is at hand- can currently treat.

PS: You're not just in disagreement with me on this point; you're in disagreement with the rules themselves which openly agree with the criticism. Base Hero System firearms as constructed suck compared to their real world counter points.

[Mentor]

Is that "cant do without bending the rules completely out of shape".

How about kill a normal person with a pistol in one shot (1d6rka)

Or build rogue

Or dead man
Take a normal with no resistant defenses and 8 (not 10) BODY, shoot him in the head or vitals and get a high roll and he dies instantly. Otherwise, get him no assistancein the Critical Hour or in game terms, the Critical Five Minutes and he bleeds out quickly. Obviously, a .45 or .357 Magnum with hollow point or Glazer rounds would do it more quickly and the damage could be adjusted accordingly for ammo type, ("sarcasm" unless that constitutes to some players outrageous "house ruling" that proves that the Hero system is FUBAR "sarcasm off") compared to a .22 lomg rifle or ..25 short.

[nexus]

Hero isn't a realistic system. Its a cinematic system, the damage is an abstraction of what is actually happening. If no one makes the Paramedic roll and the patient dies, then perhaps the gunshot wound was "untreatable". I'm sure there are some system out there that go into greater detail about healing and damage, but its pretty abstract in Hero.

[Fox1]

Take a normal with no resistant defenses and 8 (not 10) BODY, shoot him in the head or vitals and get a high roll and he dies instantly.

This may be old edition point, but value of 8 is an average value- including women, children, old men, overweight unhealthy men, etc.

The typical heathly male in reasonable physical has values of 10.



Otherwise, get him no assistancein the Critical Hour or in game terms, the Critical Five Minutes and he bleeds out quickly.

Not true. Your chance of the bleeding stopping on it's own is excellent. Run the odds.



Again, the rules themselve admit the ineffectiveness of HERO firearms compared to the real world.

[Fox1]

Essentially yes, its hard to kill people in Hero, but I think that is intended a feature not a bug.

Agreed.

However HERO is sold as a multi-genre toolkit, and as such it be possible to make simple change in firearm construction that corrects this problem for more gritty campaigns.

And guess what? It is possible.

[nexus]

This may be old edition point, but value of 8 is an average value- including women, children, old men, overweight unhealthy men, etc.

The typical heathly male in reasonable physical has values of 10.


In Fifth, all "Normals" have a scores of 8. "Heroes" (PCs and Major NPCs) have 10s. In general.



Not true. Your chance of the bleeding stopping on it's own is excellent. Run the odds


You lose a Body pip a turn when you are in the negatives on Body. That doesn't stop without Treatment. Bleeding makes you lose more than a pip. .

[Phil]

Thing is, while as a system it's doubtless my favourite, I've been gradually re-reading it and I find something that irritates me on almost every page. The latest is movement powers and strength. Flight gives you a bonus to lift things. Dont get that with running now, do you. And apparently the weight of a speeding bus isnt relevant when you're trying to slow it down, just it's speed and strength.

There'll be more, I know. Doesnt stop the toolkit being awesome, but I do find some of the actual game rules a bit ropey.

[Fox1]

No, there are just handgun wounds which can't be treated due to the fact that it takes anywhere from 5-25 minutes from initial wound to the point where the patient reaches a competent physician.

You're not really serious are you?

Please tell me you're not so stupid that you think if I shoot you straight in the forhead with a .45 ACP inside a major hospital with the staff already assembled for immediate medical assistance, that you have a 100% chance of survival.

Worse, please tell me you're not so stupid that you think if I shoot you straight in the forhead with a .45 ACP in front of an EMT with common carried field gear that you have a 100% chance of survival.

You're nuts if you believe this.

[Fox1]

Make all characters in gritty games take 2x body from killing attacks. Problem solved. :)

That's the suggest method in the game rules. In reality that greatly overpowers rifles and is a poor solution.

I have a easy one however, just go to my website and use the stats there :)

[Trebuchet]

That isn't the point. Although if it is, one must question the effectiveness of the base Paramedic skill in HERO that commonly allows such life saving measures.

The point is that there are handgun wounds that NO one, no matter how skilled, no matter what equipment is at hand- can currently treat.

PS: You're not just in disagreement with me on this point; you're in disagreement with the rules themselves which openly agree with the criticism. Base Hero System firearms as constructed suck compared to their real world counter points.I disagree Hero firearms rules "suck." In the real world over 90% of gunshot victims survive; the level for handguns is around 94%. Use Hero's Hit Location table and it's more than possible to kill someone in a single shot. IDHMBIFOM, but isn't the damage multipler for a head shot X4? That means a roll of 3 on a 1d6 RKA does puts a normal into negative BODY and a roll of 4 or higher results in an instant kill on a normal with 8 BODY. I'd say that's plenty lethal enough, and probably represents "real world" results fairly well. As Mossad Ayood, the noted firearms expert once observed, any hit to the head by any caliber gun is likely to stop an assailant, which is why he removed head shots from his study of handgun bullet effectiveness. Even the lowly .22 Long Rifle (a favorite of mob assassins) will kill in one shot to the head.

[nexus]

Agreed.

However HERO is sold as a multi-genre toolkit, and as such it be possible to make simple change in firearm construction that corrects this problem for more gritty campaigns.

And guess what? It is possible.

Yep. I just up the Body Multiplier for Killing Attacks myself. I've been playing the game for awhile and I've run "Gritty" campaigns with it. In general, I've found just using hit locations, bleeding, impairment, etc makes things pretty gritty without the PCs dropping like flies (Like you see in the Cyberpunk version of Interlock where even small guns tended to blow off limbs).

[Fox1]

In Fifth, all "Normals" have a scores of 8. "Heroes" (PCs and Major NPCs) have 10s. In general. .

I'll have to check on it. In in 5E I remember the 'normal' write ups being different if one is speaking of cops, marines, and other 'normals' you'd actually encounter in combat.

[SSJ Archon]

I do indeed love HERO. But it is not perfect, and there are some systems that do things better than HERO, because they are designed specificly for that purpose. (A restatement of what almost everyone has said.)
I wish I could play HERO more. But as it stands, most of the players and GM's I have access to play D20 or Whitewolf. I must say that Whitewolf has done a good job of integrating the setting and system into a cohesive whole, but the mechanics are sloppy and not balanced at all. D20 has become a hollow shell, lots of great pictures, but none of the wonderful information and advise that can be found in the HERO Fantasy. I own the majority of current D20 products, and the Hero Fantasy book has as much usable material and advice as the WHOLE COLLECTION. New books that come out are thinner, more expensive, and less useful. They also contine you break any apparent axioms or prime mechanics. There is little to no mechanical consitancy, and rulings seem to change from month to month, not to mention the fact that offenses are far worse and ineffective to defenses in the system.
Other systems which I think have potential are Chaosiums Ctuthulu and HarnMaster. Both however, suffer from lack of resourses and incompleteness. HarnMaster has very intresting and realistic melee combat for instance, (though it is slightly messy and could be cleaned) and Chaosiums Ctuthulu has a wonderfully simple and elegant skill progress system (though slightly leading to monotome characters and slow progression, both of which Harn suffers from to a slightly greater degree.)
My main problems with Hero seem to arise with small powers and the autofire system, but thats for another thread.
On the point of the one shot kill. I also believe that Hero, and in fact most games tone down firearms. This is because when a player dies, it can be a real hassel. So we normally turn down realism for this convienece. I myself am not happy with it, but I can deal with it.

[Fox1]

I disagree Hero firearms rules "suck." .

The rule book itself disagrees with you.



In the real world over 90% of gunshot victims survive; the level for handguns is around 94%.

Source please




Use Hero's Hit Location table and it's more than possible to kill someone in a single shot. IDHMBIFOM, but isn't the damage multipler for a head shot X4?


Sorry, it's 2x body. 9mm to forehead does 14 body at most. No instant kill is possible. If there's a Paramedic close, the character is almost certain to survive.




That means a roll of 3 on a 1d6 RKA does puts a normal into negative BODY and a roll of 4 or higher results in an instant kill on a normal with 8 BODY.


The 8 body normal is a strawman. The weapons should work on the foes and players actually encountered in the game.

[nexus]

I'll have to check on it. In in 5E I remember the 'normal' write ups being different if one is speaking of cops, marines, and other 'normals' you'd actually encounter in combat.

I beleive experienced cops, soldiers, etc are a bit tougher in some respect, but were talking about a "Normal" human which I assumed meant Joe Genero walking down Hero street. :)

[Fox1]

On the point of the one shot kill. I also believe that Hero, and in fact most games tone down firearms. This is because when a player dies, it can be a real hassel. So we normally turn down realism for this convienece. I myself am not happy with it, but I can deal with it.

Yes it does. The game ITSELF states that it does.

Makes if rather assuming to see people claiming it doesn't...

[Fox1]

I beleive experienced cops, soldiers, etc are a bit tougher in some respect, but were talking about a "Normal" human which I assumed meant Joe Genero walking down Hero street. :)

My character's generally don't fire at the women and children (or even overweight rpger Joe Genero) walking down the street.

They fire at those they have reason to, and such givers of reason typically aren't given 8 body in the bad guy write-up.

[nexus]

The 8 body normal is a strawman. The weapons should work on the foes and players actually encountered in the game.

How is it a Strawman to deal with the original complaint? You want to kill a Normal. A Normal has 8 Body. A "Hero" (notable character) has 10 or more.

The original statement was that it was impossible to kill a "Normal" with a single shot to the head. Its not. Its hard to kill a major character with a single shot to the outside of GM's fiat or a coup de gras rule? Yes it is, but that is true of many systems. :)

And in my "Gritty" games the PCs encounter a great deal of Body 8 normals. Because that is what most people in a "realistic" world are.

[nexus]

My character's generally don't fire at the women and children (or even overweight rpger Joe Genero) walking down the street.

They fire at those they have reason to, and such givers of reason typically aren't given 8 body in the bad guy write-up.

8 Body is the attribute of a Normal Human. The average thug, cop, bank robber, etc. Not woman (Woman wouldn't automatically have lower Body, an overweight person might have a pip or two more) or children (who have 4 or 5 Body).

Major character have more Body and are harder to kill for the same reason high level characters have more "Hit Points" so the battles are actually exciting. Its a cinematic premise that major people last longer in fights.

The original Bitch was that it was impossible (or too hard) to kill a normal person with a head shot in Hero. Complaining that its just too hard to kill peolpe overall is a tangent.

[Fox1]

The original statement was that it was impossible to kill a "Normal" with a single shot to the head.

Normal to me is non-superpowered. A term I believe I share in common with the game system.




Its not. Its hard to kill a major character with a single shot to the outside of GM's fiat or a coup de gras rule? Yes it is, but that is true of many systems. :)

It's impossible to kill even your 8 body normal with a 9mm shot to the head.

Even so, I don't consider cops, marines, mafia hit men, etc to be major characters, and yet they are typcially given 10 body in game write-ups.



And in my "Gritty" games the PCs encounter a great deal of Body 8 normals. Because that is what most people in a "realistic" world are.

I can't help it that combatants in your games have the average physical stats of a office worker.

[Fox1]

The original Bitch was that it was impossible (or too hard) to kill a normal person with a head shot in Hero. Complaining that its just too hard to kill peolpe overall is a tangent.

That complaint still stands.

9mm to head is only 14 body, the 8 body normal takes 16.


And once again...

THE RULEBOOK ITSELF AGREES WITH ME ON THIS SUBJECT suggesting that you double the body damage from firearms for more realism (a poor solution in my mind however).

[nexus]

Normal to me is non-superpowered. A term I believe I share in common with the game system.


Only if you assume the game is totally devoted to Supers.




It's impossible to kill even your 8 body normal with a 9mm shot to the head.

Even so, I don't consider cops, marines, mafia hit men, etc to be major characters, and yet they are typcially given 10 body in game write-ups.


They are notable characters, tough and experienced in combat. They are also meant to be more respectable challenges closer to the level of the player characters. In D and D, the "Town Guard" might be up 3rd levels. The local black smilth is 0 Level. Same difference.



I can't help it that combatants in your games have the average physical stats of a office worker.

*shrugs*

Throw away thugs and Mooks have 8 Body. Tougher combatants have more. Still doesn't matter.

[nexus]

That complaint still stands.

9mm to head is only 14 body, the 8 body normal takes 16.


And they die in 24 seconds unless there is very skilled medical help RIGHT there and they are quickly successful. "Insta kills" are mainly a product of the movies. Allot of people linger for awhile. 24 seconds isn't exactly an eternity. Even if the Paramedic dashes over he's a -3 at least to save the victim or 7- and probably only gets one roll.

[Fox1]

Yeah, but you are forgetting that the shot person will be dead in 24 seconds. No one instantly dies when shot to the head

Someone shot in the head for the max damage potential of the 9mm handgun is not someone that a simple paramedic roll is going to save if done within 24 seconds. For all practical purposes they should be considered dead.



And the rules suggest is wrong because most people who are shot do not die. If you want gritty double the damage. If you want realism, leave the rules alone.

The rulebook tells me that gritty is the optional damage rules, and that realism is doubling the damage.

Unlike you, it's at least three-quarters right.

[Mentor]

"snip"
Unlike you, it's at least three-quarters right.
What the hell is up with the cheap shots? Mitchells is just responding from a different perspective and has posted nothing deserving of your insults. Theoretically, we are participants in the same hobby discussing various aspects of a game.

[Hugh Neilson]

That isn't the point. Although if it is, one must question the effectiveness of the base Paramedic skill in HERO that commonly allows such life saving measures.

I've seen very few game systems which "realistically" treat life and death injuries. Virtually all make it much easier to survive than it is in real life. Why? Because we want the characters toi have some staying power, and a 50% death rate per session doesn't lend itself well tomlong-term character growth.

[Fox1]

What the hell is up with the cheap shots? Mitchells is just responding from a different perspective and has posted nothing deserving of your insults. Theoretically, we are participants in the same hobby discussing various aspects of a game.

It's not a cheap shot.

Rulebook said X, person said Y. Since they are saying two very different things, one of them must be to some degree right and the other to some degree wrong.

I simply pointed out which given my own research was right and to what degree. I'm sorry if that's too much for the people here.

And I'm still highly amused by people defending a rule system as realistic when that same rulebook states the exact opposite.

[Fox1]

I've seen very few game systems which "realistically" treat life and death injuries. Virtually all make it much easier to survive than it is in real life. Why? Because we want the characters toi have some staying power, and a 50% death rate per session doesn't lend itself well tomlong-term character growth.

I can (and do) go with the same viewpoint.

However I consider the manner in which HERO handles it to be one of it's failures, if only a slight one. Thus I do it in a different way (by adjusting a few rules and construction methods) and end up not only closer to genre, but closer to reality at the same time.

[nexus]

I can (and do) go with the same viewpoint.

However I consider the manner in which HERO handles it to be one of it's failures, if only a slight one. Thus I do it in a different way (by adjusting a few rules and construction methods) and end up not only closer to genre, but closer to reality at the same time.

Which genre?

[Hugh Neilson]

The 8 body normal is a strawman. The weapons should work on the foes and players actually encountered in the game.

So change your games using the IN-RULES suggestion that you double the BOD done. Instant death from a head shot is now much more likely. It sounds like you are railing against the game for including an option to meet your desires. How many games include sidebars saying "Hey, this is how we wanted the game to work, but if you want it to work like this instead, here's the tweaks you should make"?

For me, I'll stick to games where instant death is unlikely. I prefer not to have player characters dropping like flies, and that means their opposition needs some survivability as well.

By the way, what genre do you role play that you feel is "realistic" in its source material? I can't think of any RPG's that, when one cuts through the crap, meet both "realistic" and "playable" litmus tests.

[Fox1]

Which genre?

Oddly enough, all of them that I use HERO to play.

I changes I made work fine in Marvel style superheroes, Shadowrun style cyberpunk, Morrow Project post-apoc, among others.

I wouldn't use the system if I couldn't use the exact same rules from one genre to the other.

Fantasy is the one exception. HERO doesn't work for me there unless I construct everything to different standards. So I use another system instead.

[Fox1]

So change your games using the IN-RULES suggestion that you double the BOD done. .

No.

As I said before, the suggested rule given by the HERO System does not suit. It greatly overpowers rifles.




By the way, what genre do you role play that you feel is "realistic" in its source material? I can't think of any RPG's that, when one cuts through the crap, meet both "realistic" and "playable" litmus tests.

Realism isn't an on or off switch. It's a continuum. All I've done is move firearms a little closer to reality then they are in the base game.

At the same time I've moved it closer to genre. As a number of you have pointed out in this thread, insta-kill is VERY hollywood action movie (except for heroes of course). It is in comics too (again, vs. normals).

[RDU Neil]

I This is because when a player dies, it can be a real hassel. So we normally turn down realism for this convienece. I myself am not happy with it, but I can deal with it.

Yah... finding new players does suck. That is why I've taken to shooting them in the leg, not the head, when they piss me off! :) :nonp:

[Supreme Serpent]

Yah... finding new players does suck. That is why I've taken to shooting them in the leg, not the head, when they piss me off! :) :nonp:


See? I shot him in the leg. Now we can ask him questions. I'm happy.

[nexus]

Yah... finding new players does suck. That is why I've taken to shooting them in the leg, not the head, when they piss me off! :) :nonp:

Indeed. The double tap to the back of the head is perhaps the most potent tool in the GM's selection but best used sparringly. It is often more effective as a threat than an actuality.

[Glupii]

My point was that there are Hero players who say Hero is good for any genre, which it really isn't. You can play any genre but you can't really emulate them all as well as dedicated systems can [and there's nothing wrong with that]. There are as many Hero players who say the system only works at low level as there are players who say it only works at mid-level or high level. I don't think the die-hard M&M players are saying anything the die-hard Hero players aren't saying, right or wrong. To me it was just funny to see you saying the same thing about M&M that many people say about Hero. :)

I didn't get very far in this thread before I felt I wanted to add something. How well you can use Hero for a specifc Genre is incredibly situational and depends on what you consider successful for a game. For me and my group, it is all about the fun we walk away from the game with at the end of the night. So far, the Hero system has done admirably in several off the wall genres for us including a post apocolyptic and a Star Hero game.

I was a firm believer in D&D and became more so with the advent of d20. The system seemed pretty balanced and it really worked for us. That is until 5th edition Hero. I have discovered a trust in the hero system and its balance that I have not had a problem trying to do just about anything I want to try in it giving me more flexibility to make a game fun for my players. The only problem I ever had with Hero was the lack of materials available for it. That is no longer the case.

So I have to vote a solid 2 and likely very fast closing a 1.

[Trebuchet]

The rule book itself disagrees with you.No, it doesn't. Please provide the cite where 5ER or FREd say "our firearms rules suck" or the equivalent. Given that real world experts on firearms cannot agree precisely on what makes a specific firearm round lethal even when they agree on which rounds are more lethal, to expect a deliberately abstracted game system's designers to produce an (impossible) level of veracity is patently absurd. No such system is possible, much less in a cinematic role playing game. If you want anything approaching that level of (impossible) accuracy, I suggest you try a simulation rather than an RPG. (Your own posted "fix" was worse than what it purported to improve upon.)


Sorry, it's 2x body. 9mm to forehead does 14 body at most. No instant kill is possible. If there's a Paramedic close, the character is almost certain to survive.I stand corrected. And of course, assuming that a Paramedic just happens to be standing next to the gunshot victim to begin rendering first aid instantly, and makes his Paramedics roll despite built-in penalties (IIRC -1 per 2 negative BODY) for the severity of the injury, stretches the imagination far more than the normal victim surviving in the first place. Most gunfights do not take place between paramedics and trauma surgeons.


The 8 body normal is a strawman. The weapons should work on the foes and players actually encountered in the game.You were the one who brought up "normals." And heroes and other significant NPCs have a higher probability of survival by design The system's non-lethality is not a weakness, it's a feature. There are plenty of other more fatal games out there if dying characters is what floats your boat.

[Fox1]

No, it doesn't. Please provide the cite where 5ER or FREd say "our firearms rules suck" or the equivalent..

I'll look up the quote when I have access to the books. It's from either Dark Champions or 5E.



Given that real world experts on firearms cannot agree precisely on what makes a specific firearm round lethal even when they agree on which rounds are more lethal

There's heavy agreement actually on what makes a round lethal, that's actually very easy. What there is not agreement on is why people generally stop fighting immediately when hit.

For our purposes the second question doesn't need to be answered.





, to expect a deliberately abstracted game system's designers to produce an (impossible) level of veracity is patently absurd.

I can most certainly expect it to do better than it does.

Once again, realism is an continuum and not a on/off switch. For my goals, Hero isn't on the right point of the continuum.




(Your own posted "fix" was worse than what it purported to improve upon.)


I suppose you have more than just wishful thinking to back that up?




And of course, assuming that a Paramedic just happens to be standing next to the gunshot victim to begin rendering first aid instantly

If it was instantly I might not have a problem. But it's not. In the case of the 8 body normal it's 6 turns, likely 24 phases for our players and 12 even for a SPD NPC EMT. Typically 3 times longer than the entire battle lasts.

I should also note the Paramedic skill does not mean you have a professional EMT at hand. Paramedic is a everyman skill in HERO, and without the addition of other abilities is assume to be mostly first aid. Note that the roll to save a person requires no drugs or other specialized gear.




You were the one who brought up "normals."

I seriously doubt that most people here put Body 8 on the character sheets of their cops, marines, swat team members, etc.

And if that actually was the standard, I'd be remarking that the high base body ratings for PCs are unjustified in the same way I'm remarking that firearms in HERO are poorly represented.




And heroes and other significant NPCs have a higher probability of survival by design The system's non-lethality is not a weakness, it's a feature.

It's a feature to it's designer, not to me. To me it's a serious problem that needs correction.

And what per chance is the subject of this thread?


Ah yes, it's "How do you feel about Hero overall?".

I feel rather good about it after I correct a few silly problems like the poor firearm constructions.

[nexus]

As for the Average Person. 8s in all Primary Characteristics as Fifth Edition. That would be the bulk of people in many worlds. A Noteworthy Normal has 10s in all Primary Charateristics. Pg 223-224 of the Fifth Edition Rulebook if you dont' believe me.

[tesuji]

I seriously doubt that most people here put Body 8 on the character sheets of their cops, marines, swat team members, etc.


Maybe not but they are often, IMX with 5e, on the value for passerby's and bystanders who not too infrequently get caught in such conflicts. Matter of fact, most of the "gun to the head" situations have actually been with grabbed bystanders and not with heroes, at least in my games.

however, to me this is a rather pointless gripe. HERo 5er etc is a toolkit not a game and the firearms values are examples not some rule set in stone. They seem to set guns at a good feel for a supers game, which still remains the base flavor IMO, where if you use their standard supers puts the guns at "less effective than powers."

Obviously, if one want to use the toolkit to make more prominent and threatening guns, one could take their suggestions or simply spec guns to fit the game you were running.

HERO is not written as a one way to do things game but rather as a toolkit to do what you need/want.

you might as well be arguing that HERO having a TIME TRAVEL power is wrong because for your ALIAS campaign no one should have time travel.

[Trebuchet]

If it was instantly I might not have a problem. But it's not. In the case of the 8 body normal it's 6 turns, likely 24 phases for our players and 12 even for a SPD NPC EMT. Typically 3 times longer than the entire battle lasts.

I should also note the Paramedic skill does not mean you have a professional EMT at hand. Paramedic is a everyman skill in HERO, and without the addition of other abilities is assume to be mostly first aid. Note that the roll to save a person requires no drugs or other specialized gear.You complain about Hero's lack of realism, and then base a complaint about excessive survival probabilities from gunshots on getting a person with Paramedic roll to the injured party within 72 seconds? (Never mind that the odds of a character with only "everyman" Paramedics 8- successfully making a roll on a mortally injured character approaches nil.) What Emergency Medical Services has a response time under two minutes?

Not to mention, of course, that in cinema and adventure fiction survival by major characters is virtually assured if someone slaps a bandage on his wound. It is only the "NPC" who is typically in actual danger of death.

[Fox1]

Maybe not but they are often, IMX with 5e, on the value for passerby's and bystanders who not too infrequently get caught in such conflicts.

We have rather difficult types of campaigns. I don't have a significant number of bystanders taking gunfire in my games.

As a note, I also don't used different body values for characters that are NPCs instead of PCs no matter how important they are for the story. Mook rules do not work for everyone. I've seen entire threads where people attempt to explain why such rules don't work for them.

Instead I base Body only upon size and fittness (while making a small adjustment for 'strong will to live' and larger adjustments for a paranormal creature).




however, to me this is a rather pointless gripe. HERo 5er etc is a toolkit not a game and the firearms values are examples not some rule set in stone.


I know, I've changed the rules remember?

I also know that I had to put in the work on changing the rules, that alone allows me to make a statement about "How do you feel about Hero overall?". I like it, but wish it hadn't put me through the extra work I need to do on firearms.




They seem to set guns at a good feel for a supers game, which still remains the base flavor IMO, where if you use their standard supers puts the guns at "less effective than powers."


Mine also give a good feel for a supers game (i.e. "less effective than powers"), and does so without the problems.

Again, I would have rather not done the work. The fact that I had to is something that I list as a "dislike" in HERO. People however seem to be forgetting that I still play the game and that my 'likes' must therefore outweigh my 'dislikes'.

[zornwil]

Yes it does. The game ITSELF states that it does.

Makes if rather assuming to see people claiming it doesn't...
Where does the game state this?

[Fox1]

You complain about Hero's lack of realism, and then base a complaint about excessive survival probabilities from gunshots on getting a person with Paramedic roll to the injured party within 72 seconds?

You know as well as I that HERO compresses a huge amount of times into its time span. Where's the lingering death that takes days found in reality or fiction in HERO? Gone. Where are the firefights that last hours? Gone.

Once again, realism is a continuum. I can accept problems in some areas and not others.

I want one shot kills on non-paranormal characters. It's a requirement for me.

The time thing, not so much. I cut it the same amount of slack as you seem to. People can die in 72 seconds, computers can be hacked, lives saved, re-enforcements can arrive, etc. In HERO, 72 seconds IS a LONG time. It's six whole turns. That's fine for me.






(Never mind that the odds of a character with only "everyman" Paramedics 8- successfully making a roll on a mortally injured character approaches nil.) What Emergency Medical Services has a response time under two minutes?



I don't need a EMT team to arrive to save lives. A large number of characters have the full Paramedic skill, it's only first aid. Many package deals for I've seen published for Police and/or Fire fighters (and even Soldiers) include it for example. Nearly every PC in my games have the full 3 point skill at least.

EMT teams come with higher skill rolls, comp skills, and bonuses from equipment. Sometimes they are directly on the spot. Like say, the medic in a special ops team- a not uncommon event in my games.





Not to mention, of course, that in cinema and adventure fiction survival by major characters is virtually assured if someone slaps a bandage on his wound. It is only the "NPC" who is typically in actual danger of death.

I'm doing adventures based upon adventure fiction. It's not adventure fiction.

The chance of death is quite real in most of my games as a result.



I noticed that you didn't attempt to back up your claim that my fix was worse than the original for my goals. Wise decision.

[Fox1]

Where does the game state this?

Dark Champions or 5E main book I think. Maybe even UMA.

I'll look up the exact quote when get to my books later.

[zornwil]

It's not a cheap shot.

Rulebook said X, person said Y. Since they are saying two very different things, one of them must be to some degree right and the other to some degree wrong.

I simply pointed out which given my own research was right and to what degree. I'm sorry if that's too much for the people here.

And I'm still highly amused by people defending a rule system as realistic when that same rulebook states the exact opposite.
"I'm sorry if that's too much"

comment such as "3/4 more right than you"

And all the like. This is what Mentor and MitchellS are referring to. I don't know anything about you, of course, but I would suggest that at the very least you are applying a level of casualness that might work face to face but comes across as rude in writing.

What if I said to you, "You're wrong, stop being stupid." - is that REALLY acceptable? Or does that start ratcheting up the blood pressure bit by bit - even if in fact you were being stupid for some reason?

[zornwil]

Yah... finding new players does suck. That is why I've taken to shooting them in the leg, not the head, when they piss me off! :) :nonp:
Eh, I shoot 'em in the head, they won't die anyway, and I have Paramedics (well, it's 8 or less Everyman, but I use Preparation and Extra Time, and get the other guys to do Complementary Rolls...)

[ParitySoul]

A delightful and good game system. Pity I can't find open minded players who will give it a go. I'm thinking the shooting them in the head option might work for me. Give them little extra cirulation.

[zornwil]

Dark Champions or 5E main book I think. Maybe even UMA.

I'll look up the exact quote when get to my books later.
Yup, sorry, saw that Treb asked and you answered already with that.

[Fox1]

might[/I] work face to face but comes across as rude in writing.

My first suggestion? Don't enter into a debate if you can't accept someone saying you're wrong. That's the whole point of having a debate in the first place.

My second suggestion? Don't take everything personally. We don't know each other- it CAN'T be personal.

We live in a world where people take offense at the drop of a hat. That element of this world is not a good thing. We need to grow up.

[zornwil]

My first suggestion? Don't enter into a debate if you can't accept someone saying you're wrong. That's the whole point of having a debate in the first place.

My second suggestion? Don't take everything personally. We don't know each other- it CAN'T be personal.

We live in a world where people take offense at the drop of a hat. That element of this world is not a good thing. We need to grow up.
While not disagreeing with any of the three individual sentences, I don't think that addresses the original statement. You need to get a clue.

Now, see, since you don't take things personally and I don't, I can just say that to you - though I don't see how that provides for a tolerant and open exchange of ideas. Personally, I'm interested in that as well as arguments, and I won't bow to name-calling and jerky comment such as "wise decision" in trying to put down someone's point.

Then again, I suppose it was simply wise of you to sidestep my point since you clearly have no valid response for it. (See what I mean? That was an example of gratuitous insults. I know you don't care, and since you don't care I suppose I should just create more examples to help you along. Good luck. I hope you find a better home here than RPG.net or other such places, but unfortunately you probably will not since the standard of conduct is slightly higher, not lower, here.)

[Fox1]

While not disagreeing with any of the three individual sentences, I don't think that addresses the original statement. You need to get a clue.

Help with getting a clue. Given that I hold the three points post you just responsed to a true, who should I address the original statement you refer to?

[Trebuchet]

You know as well as I that HERO compresses a huge amount of times into its time span. Where's the lingering death that takes days found in reality or fiction in HERO? Gone. Where are the firefights that last hours? Gone.And these are important to role playing because...? And why can't this type of thing be handled by GM fiat (as it is handled by a writer or director in fiction and film)? You want Aunt May to die in Spider-Man's arms after being shot so we get a nice tear-jerker, or is it more important that she die instantly so it's somehow more "realistic"? There are lots of slow miserable ways to die in the real world that the system essentially ignores (deliberately), such as cancer or ebola. Do we need rules for staph infections and gangrene too?


Once again, realism is a continuum. I can accept problems in some areas and not others.

I want one shot kills on non-paranormal characters. It's a requirement for me.But for some reason you seem to feel firearms deserve a level of realism above and beyond that of the rest of the Hero system. What makes firearms so special to you?


The time thing, not so much. I cut it the same amount of slack as you seem to. People can die in 72 seconds, computers can be hacked, lives saved, re-enforcements can arrive, etc. In HERO, 72 seconds IS a LONG time. It's six whole turns. That's fine for me.

I don't need a EMT team to arrive to save lives. A large number of characters have the full Paramedic skill, it's only first aid. Many package deals for I've seen published for Police and/or Fire fighters (and even Soldiers) include it for example. Nearly every PC in my games have the full 3 point skill at least.

EMT teams come with higher skill rolls, comp skills, and bonuses from equipment. Sometimes they are directly on the spot. Like say, the medic in a special ops team- a not uncommon event in my games.

I'm doing adventures based upon adventure fiction. It's not adventure fiction.

The chance of death is quite real in most of my games as a result.We have an actual trauma surgeon on our superhero team, plus a guy who can Heal people. We still don't assume we'll be able to save everyone; nor do we. Normals can and do die; heroes can die if things go disastrously wrong. I fail to see why you think that's a problem.


I noticed that you didn't attempt to back up your claim that my fix was worse than the original for my goals. Wise decision.Your humble demeanor is really heart warming.

Your "fix" spoke for itself quite eloquently when you posted it, as was evidenced by the general negative reactions to it. There's nothing I could possibly say that would make it look worse than it is. I don't see any reason to debate the Flat Earthers either over their nutty ideas. Is it the worst "correction" I've ever seen suggested for an aspect of Hero? No.

[Storn]

I'm tough. I voted "adequate".

I've played Hero a long time, ever since Danger Internat'l. It is also a major client of mine and dearly love working for DOJ.... But I do have several problems as a gamer. I play the system despite that.

I don't think it emulates a lot of Superhero comics well. I think M&M does it better. I think M&M's hero points are great and capture what happens in superhero combat that I interpert in comics. I don't like that there is no mechanic to do power stunts on the fly besides the shoe-horned in Power Skill recently. The M&M hero point is the core of the system. But M&M falls down at superagent, cool martial arts and wuxia level... I know, because I ran it with M&M.

I think Stun and End are great game GOVENORS, but are not great Superhero emulations. Stun, I should say, makes perfect sense....but it is the bookeeping of Stun, End, Body, RECs and the speedchart... that is nelegant.

I love HtH combat in Fantasy using Hero. But Magic leaves me cold. Too much definition. 5d6 blast always does 5d6. The system doesn't handle wild magic... I think VPPs are a total pain. esn't handle what ARs Magica does with on the fly spells.... Magic in Hero is cold, mechanical and so-not what I look for in magic. Gurps, with its spell requisites, despite the similar mechanics, "feels" like I've got a mage down on the page than Hero. I'm nitpicking here... but this is my feeling... nothing concrete.

I think Strength is too cheap and it colors genres across the board. I don't think there is enough range at Heroic level although Valdorian Age's suggestion of starting at 8s makes a lot of sense to me. It forces ECs and Multis to make up for the offbalance that brick characters bring to the game.

I have a problem with some of the costs. Acrobatics, which often garners DCV bonuses and implies an amazing ability, is 3 pts and comes in usually at 12- to 14-. Shadowing, which is much easier to learn, comes in at 11-, also is 3 pts. Stealth should be 5 pts and include Concealment. Acrobatics should be 5 pts. It is basically a DCV level, plus getting the ability to reduce Knockback dmg.

I think the speedchart values high speed way too much. Our group dumped it and I'm much happier for it.

I think Hero handles gun and martial arts pretty well. I think the 3d6 bell curve is excellent in its balance of predictibility and randomness. I think CharGen is A-, almost any concept can be made if you know how to massage the system. I know how to massage the system. I think building Powers is almost amazing. There are a few holes, but only a few.

Just for comparison, I would give:

Gurps: Adequate (great skill system, but overwrought, combat is waay too complex),

d20: InAdequate: (shoehorns us into character archtypes). Overly complicated and too many redundant skills w/ many missing. Hit Points at their worst.

Unisystem: Adequate (simpler than hero, but damage resolution has lots of computations, esp with armor).

Silver Age Sentinels: Adequate, decent CharGen, but terrible dmg resolution.

M&M: Good (but not as adaptable as Hero).

Savage Worlds: My preference. I'm curious to see how it handles Supers in Necessary Evil. I haven't seen it yet. But unusual stats are not every one's cuppa. Combat can seem a bit random. But a breeze to run.

[Fox1]

And these are important to role playing because...?

Since I don't see house rules for them on my webpage, I would have to assume that I don't think they are important to the games I'm currently running.





But for some reason you seem to feel firearms deserve a level of realism above and beyond that of the rest of the Hero system. What makes firearms so special to you?

Why are superheroes (assuming that's a use to which you put HERO to) important to you?

Isn't it enough to know that I (and anyone else citing this area as a problem with HERO) consider it important?

And wouldn't it be enough for you to simply state that you don't consider it important and then move on? Have I at any point stated that wasn't a valid stance to take on this subject.

Instead you attack the very idea itself, denying first that it exists and now denying it's importance not just to yourself- but to others.



Your "fix" spoke for itself quite eloquently when you posted it, as was evidenced by the general negative reactions to it. There's nothing I could possibly say that would make it look worse than it is.


The reaction seems to be to the idea of making firearms more deadly itself, not that I have in fact reduced how deadly they are.

The general viewpoint here is negative to the goal, I saw no one but you suggest that I haven't achieved it- and worst, made firearms less dangerous.

Please, what do you base this on?

[Trebuchet]

Since I don't see house rules for them on my webpage, I would have to assume that I don't think they are important to the games I'm currently running.It was you complaining that Hero has no mechanism for long protracted deaths, not I. Whether your webpage has rules for such things is irrelevant to my observation that you seem to think them important or you wouldn't be complaining about their absence. Whether you feel a Phase is X seconds of time or an individual frame of a comic book is irrelevant. This is a system for telling a story, and I as a GM am not going to allow mere dice rolls to tell me how to tell my story. If the scene requires a long drawn out death scene, then there will be a long drawn out death scene regardless of what the dice may or may not roll. I use randomness when it fits; I don't when it doesn't.

Worrying about objective realism in a game system specifically designed to represent comic book superheroes and action in fiction and cinema is a complete waste of time. There is NO aspect of this or any other game system which could not be made more accurate and representative of reality. This is a game, not a simulation. If you want to increase the lethality of firearms in your campaign, go right ahead. I don't care if you do it by rewriting the stats of thousands of gun calibers, making normals take 2X Effect from Killing Attacks, or simply reducing the BODY of normals by 50%. All of these methods, and countless others, could produce that result. But don't come in here and pretend you've come up with an idea which magically transforms Hero into a "better" game system. Better means different things to different people.

[Fox1]

It was you complaining that Hero has no mechanism for long protracted deaths, not I.

You missed my point.

I was pointing out AGAIN that realism is a continuum in response to the objection that I was being illogical in wanting more realistic firearms while not worrying about the limits of 72 seconds in combat turns.

Firearms is one area of possible interest, long protracted deaths is another area of possible interest.

I care about the first, and not the last.

This in no way reflects upon the validity of my decisions or desires. Being more realistic in one area does NOT require me to be more realistic in other areas.

Thus I was not complaing about their absence, I was pointing out my acceptance of their absence.




Worrying about objective realism in a game system specifically designed to represent comic book superheroes and action in fiction and cinema is a complete waste of time.

Why do you wish to define my time as a waste? What possible seat can you sit in that allows you to make such a final and seemly objective judgement?

It would seem to me that I should be the one to determine if the result I achieved wasted my time, or if it allow me to run my games in the manner I desired to run them.




If you want to increase the lethality of firearms in your campaign, go right ahead. I don't care if you do it by rewriting the stats of thousands of gun calibers, making normals take 2X Effect from Killing Attacks, or simply reducing the BODY of normals by 50%. All of these methods, and countless others, could produce that result.

I don't know about countless others because you haven't detail them, but to repeat yet once more...

Neither X2 Effect nor 1/2 Body achieves my goals. They overpower rifles. Why can't anyone remember this requirement?




But don't come in here and pretend you've come up with an idea which magically transforms Hero into a "better" game system. Better means different things to different people.

I don't believe I ever did that.

I simply pointed out that I agree with another poster that weapons are poorly done. I also simply pointed out that it's easy to correct that problem and suggest that one method may be to check out my website for new stats.

Beyond that, I've made no claims to making HERO a better system for everyone.


And once again I notice that you refuse to show how my changes failed to meet my own stated desires. Yet it seems you insist on not retracting the charge.

[mudpyr8]

I am going to attempt to derail this thread somewhat by diverting the debate with fox1 to http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=683892#post683892.

We now return you to our regularly titled thread.
....
I agree with Storn's assessment of the systems he mentions. I find that Hero however blends cinematic action with a richly detailed ability system. Magic was always a challenge for me, but with my work on Narosia I feel I have a magic system that feels the way I want it to, allowing me to enjoy the strengths of the Hero system in my fantasy play.

For me, right now, Savage Worlds are my systems of choice depending on what I'm looking to do. GURPS is great, but I no longer want detailed realism in my games - just detailed "cinematic-ism".

I will make one departure from Storn's assessment however. I think GURPS combat and Hero combat aren't really more or less complex than the other. I find Hero's maneuver options/effects to be more consistent in terms of mechanical resolution, and certainly more scalable, but I've never had a GURPS combat I didn't enjoy 100% (although I may have lost of course). The tactical options are wonderful, and the gunplay rules are among the best (if not best when weighted with playability), and very realistic. I would suggest that Fox1 take a look at GURPS as many of your thoughts on firearms jive well with how GURPS handles them.

[Trebuchet]

And once again I notice that you refuse to show how my changes failed to meet my own stated desires. Yet it seems you insist on not retracting the charge.Your method changes the system to your liking. That does not automatically make it an objective improvement to the system as a whole; it proves only that you like it better. Considering that you designed it in the first place, that's not really much of an accomplishment. Firearms are more lethal. Whoopee. :rolleyes:

[Just Joe]

I regard 1. and 2. both as true statements. I rounded in Hero's favor and voted 1.
I did the opposite and rounded "down"Nice, we averaged out to 1.5, just where we wanted to be.

[Fox1]

Your method changes the system to your liking. That does not automatically make it an objective improvement to the system as a whole; it proves only that you like it better. Considering that you designed it in the first place, that's not really much of an accomplishment. Firearms are more lethal. Whoopee. :rolleyes:

Before I'm off to the other thread to leave this one in peace...

Here's your quote that I strongly objected to:

"(Your own posted "fix" was worse than what it purported to improve upon.)"

Since I always consider the "improved upon" was to be one-shot stops and instant killls (I NEVER claim it made the game 'better' for anyone who didn't want such an outcome), your quote looked to be a flat statement that I in facted alter the rules such that it was less likely to instant-kill or remove someone from the battle in a single shot.

Your statement above indicated that what you actually intended was a counter to a statement I never made- that it doesn't improve the game for everyone.

You've been very bitterly fighting a point that I've agreed with you on from the beginning. I'm sorry for wasting your time.


Edit:

Almost forgot the quote from the rulebook I promised.

It's on page 186, Dark Champions.

"Some HERO System GMs are concerned that the Killing Damage weapons don't put victims down with even the spotty regularity of real-world weapons."

It goes on to suggest using Impairing/Disabling rules get around this, but in point of fact torso/head hit that would Impair or Disable would put the 10 body average target down from stun always (disable) or half the time (Impair, 7 body to chest from a 9mm). Thus they are of little help, and still don't allow a instant kill on a max damage 9mm hit to the head.

The next suggestion is to change the DC for all the weapons (my choice, I don't mind the work).

The last suggestion is to double the Bodyx Column of the Hit Location (something that I found unacceptable in its effect on rifle damage).

Other suggestion are found in that and other sections. They are generally the type of mook rules that I object to on play style reasons. Things like counting any impair as down/dying, any hit as dead, etc.

[tesuji]

[/QUOTE]



We have rather difficult types of campaigns. I don't have a significant number of bystanders taking gunfire in my games.

I will go out on a limb and guess that you meant "different" and not "difficult."

And i concur.

As alreadfy stated, my most frequent (by far) "gun up to the head" kind of situations involve quickie hostages and bystanders. The more capable people rarely find themselves in such a helpless situation that allows head shots.

furthermore, the bystanders are often pivotal in my combat scenes, and definitely influential as things like area attacks and autofire in crowded situations bring "do they have 8 body or 10? 6 for kids and old folks?" directly to the forefront of everyone's worry.

One of the kost hated villains, the one who got the most PC/Player ire up and they were the most intent on bringing down was a fire guy who, in a fight at the mall, was clearly targetting his fireballs to catch a hero or two and also the most bystanders. At least half the team was running the best interference, defense, and healing they could while the fight was going on trying to save people.

8-10d6 AOE blasts and 2d6 RKA XP or AOE grenades and such make the body scores of bystanders very relevent in my games and add a major dimension to the fight scenes and after math.

Maybe your mileage is different.



As a note, I also don't used different body values for characters that are NPCs instead of PCs no matter how important they are for the story. Mook rules do not work for everyone. I've seen entire threads where people attempt to explain why such rules don't work for them.

and i have seen many games or sessions where they did capture the genre and style sought very well.

Tho truthfully, i wouldn't call "bystanders have 8 body base but can buy more while heros have 10 body base but can sell it back" to be a mook rule of any sort. its just a baseline starting point.


Instead I base Body only upon size and fittness (while making a small adjustment for 'strong will to live' and larger adjustments for a paranormal creature).

ok


I know, I've changed the rules remember?

yes but at the same time you seem to be complaining about having to change the examples to meet your own campaign notion more precisely.

that puzzles me.

here's why.

if i decide i want a pastrami sandwhich and go to the store and buy rye bread, pastrami, muenster, spicy brown mustard and bring them home, it would strike people as strange if i then started complaining about having to put my sandwhich together.

if you had bought AEG's Spycraft, a GAME designed to play the spies genre. took it home and had to redo their weapons, that i might understand as a complaint.

But, here you bought a toolkit, not a game. You bought the parts and tools for constructing a game, just like i would have bought the parts for making my sandwhich but then seem dismayed that you have to use the toolkit to build a game to your liking.

Did you somehow expect the HERo designers to have read your mind and used "fox1's preferred results" as a core for their "universal toolkit"?

if i buy a toolkit, i expect to use it to build the game i want, not for it to come preassembled for me already salted and peppered to suit my exact taste.

heck, i don't even expect that from GAMES that are specific to a genre/story, though i do expect them to be closer than toolkits.




I also know that I had to put in the work on changing the rules, that alone allows me to make a statement about "How do you feel about Hero overall?". I like it, but wish it hadn't put me through the extra work I need to do on firearms.

Again, her is a toolkit, intended to provide you with lots of ways to build a game, so that you can build the one you want.

if you buy a kit and then don't expect to have to work with it to get the thing you want, i think one of us has a whole different notion as to the difference between "gamer's toolkit" and "themed game", between what you expect from a "kit" as opposed to expecting from a "product".



Again, I would have rather not done the work. The fact that I had to is something that I list as a "dislike" in HERO. People however seem to be forgetting that I still play the game and that my 'likes' must therefore outweigh my 'dislikes'.


i doubt they are forgetting, and in my case, just wondering what led you to expect a "not have to do the work" result when buying a "Gamer's toolkit" as opposed to a GAME.

if I wanted a game to run out of the box without needing to do the work, i would never consider anything called a "toolkit" and would be scouring the RPGs that are GAMES like AEG Spycraft, D20 Modern, or whatever "games" seemed to be in the genre. (of course, as stated, i never expect them to git just right either, since no designer knows the game i am running, the story i want, the players i have and their preferences, etc... and so no one can build a precise fit for me anyway.)

anyway, maybe next time, if you don't want the hands on build-yer-own toolkit approach, perhaps trying a game and not a toolkit would serve you better.

[Trebuchet]

You commented rather early in this thread that the Hero firearms rules "sucked," and made reference to your own altered weapons effects tables as an improvement. Nothing about "I think Hero's firearms sections are poor because they can't produce one shot kills on normals, and this is what I did to make it better in my campaign." (Never mind that Hero even themselves acknowledged that their rules are perhaps not as lethal as they might be; and that your private definition of a normal is hardly consistent with what the system considers a baseline normal.) No, you claimed your method was better. Not just better at producing the results you desired, but better period.

Edit: If I misunderstood your original purpose for your revisions, then that's my bad and I apologize for misrepresenting your system. But I saw the chart in a previous thread, and I do not recall that you had presented it at the time as a "more lethal to normals" change but as a general purpose improvement to the entire Hero firearms system. And taken as a general purpose improvement, it is not better than the current official system. From the point of getting one shot stops/kills on non-PCs and mooks it's clearly superior if you consider instant kills an improvement. But as a general system IMO it has far too much compression between a small caliber pistol and a high powered rifle (IIRC every pistol and almost 95% of rifles in your chart were 2d6 +/-).

We seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot here, and if you're willing to forgive my hot temper then I'll consider this debate closed.

[Fox1]

Maybe your mileage is different.

Very much so.

Such events in the comics of my era were rare. They happened once in maybe a few dozen issues if then.

So they don't happen any more often in my games.




Tho truthfully, i wouldn't call "bystanders have 8 body base but can buy more while heros have 10 body base but can sell it back" to be a mook rule of any sort. its just a baseline starting point.

It's a Mook rule. A rule that sets 'important characters' apart from others. One created in order to open up the range of acceptable stats for PCs more than any other reason I think.

In actual practice, I don't personally know of any GM who assigns DEX 8, STR 8, Body 8 to any NPC with an expected (by profession) combat role. Heck, they couldn't use many common weapons effectively due to STR Min requirements if they did. Perhaps I'm the only person to whom it seems odd to have their Police not have the STR necessary to use their service revolvers or shotguns.




But, here you bought a toolkit, not a game. You bought the parts and tools for constructing a game, just like i would have bought the parts for making my sandwhich but then seem dismayed that you have to use the toolkit to build a game to your liking.

You make a good point. However you overstate my level of dismay.

It is a dislike I have for the game, nothing more. If asked about my dislikes, I state them.

However on your same point, why should anyone be upset with me for making the change? If no one had attacked my use of the toolkit in the first place, we wouldn't have had this exchange.

[zornwil]

Help with getting a clue. Given that I hold the three points post you just responsed to a true, who should I address the original statement you refer to?
Cute, but not enough for points. :)

Truly, though, I imagine you'll start to fit in as you find the level of discourse here and a place for yourself to fit into it.

Or not...either way, good luck and happy gaming.

[zornwil]

I'm tough. I voted "adequate".

I've played Hero a long time, ever since Danger Internat'l. It is also a major client of mine and dearly love working for DOJ.... But I do have several problems as a gamer. I play the system despite that.

I don't think it emulates a lot of Superhero comics well. I think M&M does it better. ...

Hey there, broken record #1, it's broken record #2 here! :D

(Sorry, had to post that as we just did that dance in a couple places already, and the "broken record" comment was very much a self-reference - FWIW, I think you state your case well)

[zornwil]

Nice, we averaged out to 1.5, just where we wanted to be.
Ha, great point! I guess it did work out, sort of like Senators pairing their votes.

[Fox1]

You commented rather early in this thread that the Hero firearms rules "sucked," and made reference to your own altered weapons effects tables as an improvement.

Look at the posts I was replying to.

There were one of three kinds.

1. What don't you like about HERO? "I don't like how they do firearms"

2. Others that thought the same as I. "Yes, I agree handguns need some changes. Want to see my modifications that solved the problem for me"

3. Posts that claimed my changes were based on unfounded premise to which I respond "I think HERO's firearms construction suck and heres why...". I assumed that anyone reading would rightfully think I'm saying "they suck for me...", typing those extra words on every single post gets old.

I didn't open this exchange with a post saying HERO sucks. It must be changed now.




Edit: If I misunderstood your original purpose for your revisions, then that's my bad and I apologize for misrepresenting your system.

Accepted.



But as a general system IMO it has far too much compression between a small caliber pistol and a high powered rifle (IIRC every pistol and almost 95% of rifles in your chart were 2d6 +/-).

Heavy compression is a 'feature' of HERO. A requirement due to the doubling effect.

However you do my changes disservice here. While the base killing damage for many weapons is 2d6 +/-, the combination of stun modifier, armor effect and piercing additions produces a visible game difference between the weapons that exceeds those of the standard list.




We seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot here, and if you're willing to forgive my hot temper then I'll consider this debate closed.

Agreed.

And I hope you forgive my excesses as well.

[Captain Obvious]

It's just like an After School Special. :)

[Just Joe]

It's just like an After School Special. :)Or two superheroes meeting for the same time, mistaking one another for villains, and having a fight before they realize they're on the same side, maybe?

[Trebuchet]

Or two superheroes meeting for the same time, mistaking one another for villains, and having a fight before they realize they're on the same side, maybe?Well, that is a staple of the genre. :)

Of course, I have a much cooler superhero name than Fox1. :eg:

[Fox1]

Well, that is a staple of the genre. :)

Of course, I have a much cooler superhero name than Fox1. :eg:

Hmm.

Old rock tosser vs. Radar homing missile launch...

Rats, I'm only a air-to-air weapon. Sigh.

[Trebuchet]

Hmm.

Old rock tosser vs. Radar homing missile launch...

Rats, I'm only a air-to-air weapon. Sigh.On the other hand, you could be a character with Duplication and hence bring along Fox2 thru Fox12 as backup. :)