Meta SFX

[AmadanNaBriona]

OK...so theres been a lot of discussion about the problems with Power Defence and Adjustment powers.
There are a host of potential ways to change them, and they provide wonderful board fodder... but for the moment, it seems that the simplest way to aleivaite the worst of the issues is to shift them to being SFX driven.
This presents a problem.
There are as many SFX as there are HERO players, potentially.

So, before (or in addition to) looking at mechanical changes, lets try and start compliling a list of Meta SFX that could be used to encompass the various overarching uses for Adjustment Powers and Power Defence. This could give us a table, eventually, that works similar to the Sense Groups or the Mind Classes to help solve some of the issues.

Meta SFX that I can think of, right off the bat, are:
Magic
Psionics
Technology
Environmental
Biological
Mutant

any others folk can think of?

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Highy Skilled (like batman)
Alien

[zornwil]

I like Highly Skilled. I would shift Alien to be subservient to the others, IMHO.

Why is Mutant not Biological or under other categories, as well? To me, "Mutant" is what one is, the manifestation of the mutation falls into the other categories (including Biological).

Probably might broaden Biological to be Biochemical.

I'm having a hard time following this approach though - ANB, would you please tell me how you see the following SFX fitting into the meta categories:

Acid Attack
Poison (let's say an LSD-like drug)
Heat Vision
Cat's Eyes
Rubbery Skin
Dimensional Energy

Anyway, the idea is interesting, I just wonder if it's practically feasible? I also wonder if it really creates a complexity better left to individual GMs? Anyway, don't let my doubts derail it, just file those away. I don't want to debate the idea, I'm anxious to see it evolve first.

[AmadanNaBriona]

I like Highly Skilled. I would shift Alien to be subservient to the others, IMHO.

Why is Mutant not Biological or under other categories, as well? To me, "Mutant" is what one is, the manifestation of the mutation falls into the other categories (including Biological).
I was looking at Mutant as a distinct SFX category for Meta SFX from an Adjustment power POV because it is SUCH a broad category, not to mention the way that it appears in some of our source materials (aka Comics, in this case)


Probably might broaden Biological to be Biochemical.
quite possibly...I'm not wedded to anything at this point. Another thought might be Organic or just Chemical


I'm having a hard time following this approach though - ANB, would you please tell me how you see the following SFX fitting into the meta categories:

Acid Attack
Poison (let's say an LSD-like drug)
Heat Vision
Cat's Eyes
Rubbery Skin
Dimensional Energy
I'm actually thinking of a tiered system, similar to Sense Groups or Weapon Familiarities, where there would be (hopefully) a half dozen or so Broad categories of Meta SFX with each greater heading having a list of common SFX beneath it... this gives a way of grouping Adjustment powers to match them with appropriate power defence, while at the same time allowing a degree of flexibility.
to use some of your examples...
Heat Vision END Drain (causes fatigue), Ranged. Vs. Environmental Power Def (or possibly with a Limitation, affected by multiple defences, Environmental and Mutant) or a larger limitation (Affected by ED)
Acid Attack Body Drain, Sticky, Gradual Effect. Stopped by Biochemical Power Defence (assuming for the moment that you don't want to do this as a more conventional KA)

I could go on, but the basic idea isn't to set things in stone, but rather to provide a set of categories that powers can be codified into to allow SFX based adjustment powers. Thus decreasing the overall utility of power defence (in the face of the increased frequency of powers that are targeted against Power Def) and shifting adjustment powers to a SFX base rather than Power construct base. Much the same way that, say, Spatial Awareness can be defined as belonging to almost any sense group at construction, but once you've created your character and defined it as Sight group based, it starts being affect by Sight flashes and defended by Sight Flash Defence.
A comic example....
Forge, from the X men, is a mutant who's power is the ability manipulate and invent super tech. Hitting him with a Supress vs. all Mutant powers iisn't going to affect the distribution of his Gadget pool, but it will certainly elminate any other tricks he has based on his mutant inventing ability... say his "Transform broken tech into working tech" power


Anyway, the idea is interesting, I just wonder if it's practically feasible? I also wonder if it really creates a complexity better left to individual GMs? Anyway, don't let my doubts derail it, just file those away. I don't want to debate the idea, I'm anxious to see it evolve first.
There's gonna have to be a ton of individual input from GM's and players of specific campaigns, but I'm pretty certain we can come up with a good working base model.
Like everything else in this system...
its up to GM preference :D

[Black Lotus]

*snip* I was looking at Mutant as a distinct SFX category for Meta SFX from an Adjustment power POV because it is SUCH a broad category, not to mention the way that it appears in some of our source materials (aka Comics, in this case) *snip, snip*

I concur that "Mutant" deserves its own category, if for no other reason than that some mutant Powers are basically inherent to one's being a mutant (whether they are bought as Inherent or not), and may not fit easily, if at all, into any of the other Meta SFX you mention.

I think it's going to be very hard to come up with a good, working list of Meta SFX which covers most or all SFX possibilities, but if you do accomplish it, then you're the man.

[AmadanNaBriona]

I concur that "Mutant" deserves its own category, if for no other reason than that some mutant Powers are basically inherent to one's being a mutant (whether they are bought as Inherent or not), and may not fit easily, if at all, into any of the other Meta SFX you mention.

I think it's going to be very hard to come up with a good, working list of Meta SFX which covers most or all SFX possibilities, but if you do accomplish it, then you're the man.
My friend....
I spent over a year designing the metaphysical system for my world setting before ever even touching game mechanics. I'm capable of amazing acts of intellectual hyperfocus if I'm dumb enough to let something engage my rather deficted attention :D

[Doc Democracy]

I'm up for this kind of thing. It was discussed earlier this year in this (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31212) thread.

Doc

[Black Lotus]

My friend....
I spent over a year designing the metaphysical system for my world setting before ever even touching game mechanics. I'm capable of amazing acts of intellectual hyperfocus if I'm dumb enough to let something engage my rather deficted attention :D

Well, if you have the SFX types for your own campaign tucked away in memory, it should be a snap to fit them all under Meta categories. ;)

Lessee, Poison is biological, Acid... I guess it counts as environmental. I dunno, I think Environmental may be too much of a catch-all, you may need to subdivide it to decrease its breadth of SFX. Perhaps "Phenomenon" (Light, Fire, Plasma, anything that is not a solid, liquid or gas) and "Physical" (Acid, Magma, etcetera).

[Doc Democracy]

Well, if you have the SFX types for your own campaign tucked away in memory, it should be a snap to fit them all under Meta categories. ;)

Lessee, Poison is biological, Acid... I guess it counts as environmental. I dunno, I think Environmental may be too much of a catch-all, you may need to subdivide it to decrease its breadth of SFX. Perhaps "Phenomenon" (Light, Fire, Plasma, anything that is not a solid, liquid or gas) and "Physical" (Acid, Magma, etcetera).

In the earlier discussion we were thinking that if you had a list of special effects that you'd want to keep it down to 20 maximum. When you create your adjustment power you would choose one SFX that would have full value against the attack and possibly one or two that had half value.

So the poison adjustment that you were talking about could be biological but chemical and mutant might give half protection...


Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

I concur that "Mutant" deserves its own category, if for no other reason than that some mutant Powers are basically inherent to one's being a mutant (whether they are bought as Inherent or not), and may not fit easily, if at all, into any of the other Meta SFX you mention.

So, where does "Alien" fit? An alien's powers are generally inherent to being an alien, and are also biological in nature. What if he's a mutant alien? Can he pick some powers under each sfx? They are all functions of a biology which differs from a baseline human, so there is some logic to placing them all under the same category.

Then again, there's never been a lot of logic to "mutant power suppressors" which impact natural mutants (Cyclops), but not artificial mutants (Human Torch) or aliens who have powers because, like mutants, their biology differs from the human norm (Capt. Mar-Vell).


I think it's going to be very hard to come up with a good, working list of Meta SFX which covers most or all SFX possibilities, but if you do accomplish it, then you're the man.

Agreed. It's more practical if you establish the hard and fast rule that these are the only SFX permitted in Campaign World X.

[zornwil]

I was looking at Mutant as a distinct SFX category for Meta SFX from an Adjustment power POV because it is SUCH a broad category, not to mention the way that it appears in some of our source materials (aka Comics, in this case)


quite possibly...I'm not wedded to anything at this point. Another thought might be Organic or just Chemical


I'm actually thinking of a tiered system, similar to Sense Groups or Weapon Familiarities, where there would be (hopefully) a half dozen or so Broad categories of Meta SFX with each greater heading having a list of common SFX beneath it... this gives a way of grouping Adjustment powers to match them with appropriate power defence, while at the same time allowing a degree of flexibility.
to use some of your examples...
Heat Vision END Drain (causes fatigue), Ranged. Vs. Environmental Power Def (or possibly with a Limitation, affected by multiple defences, Environmental and Mutant) or a larger limitation (Affected by ED)
Acid Attack Body Drain, Sticky, Gradual Effect. Stopped by Biochemical Power Defence (assuming for the moment that you don't want to do this as a more conventional KA)

I could go on, but the basic idea isn't to set things in stone, but rather to provide a set of categories that powers can be codified into to allow SFX based adjustment powers. Thus decreasing the overall utility of power defence (in the face of the increased frequency of powers that are targeted against Power Def) and shifting adjustment powers to a SFX base rather than Power construct base. Much the same way that, say, Spatial Awareness can be defined as belonging to almost any sense group at construction, but once you've created your character and defined it as Sight group based, it starts being affect by Sight flashes and defended by Sight Flash Defence.
A comic example....
Forge, from the X men, is a mutant who's power is the ability manipulate and invent super tech. Hitting him with a Supress vs. all Mutant powers iisn't going to affect the distribution of his Gadget pool, but it will certainly elminate any other tricks he has based on his mutant inventing ability... say his "Transform broken tech into working tech" power

Okay, so then, for clarity, the primary SFX or at least "a" primary SFX "parent class" is the broad SFX which suppresses the origin, not necessarily the manifestation, of the power. Which, btw, in my mind, introduces an interesting - and useful - dichotomy in that we actually have SFX origination and execution to consider.

So I would argue that for Origination we have something like:

Magic
Psionics
Technology
Environmental
Biological/Organic - plus Chemical?
Mutant
Skill

It might be worthwhile, for this purpose only, to group Environmental with Bio/Organic/Chem, calling it all "Natural". So:

Magic
Psionics
Technology
Natural
Mutant
Skill

Now, this has nothing to do with Execution - that's probably a good, even a grand thing. Because now we don't have to worry about heat/cold/etc., for THIS purpose. And I would take it "THIS" purpose is Drain/Suppress/etc., as you introduced this for governing Adjustment Powers and PowDef.

It gets tricky, though, if our character now wants to make his SFX "I Suppress all Heat Attacks - regardless of Origin". This is eminently logical. Mr. Freeze can do this, who cares if it's Magic Heat or Mutant Heat or Natural Heat? I'm getting at a loss where to take this, then, and make it workable. Do we use the same SFX matrix and then indicate that once Origin is over and we're into Execution that a few of these basically fall away - that we wouldn't have Mutant, Technology, or Skill because in Execution we now are talking about a concrete energy form, either Magic, Psionics, or Natural? That might be okay...so my Heat Supress is "Natural SFX Parent Category" because after all Heat is a naturally occurring thing. This means that my true uber-heat suppressing guy who wants to suppress Magical Heat or Psionic Heat has to address those SFX categories as well, but that's not a bad thing, and doesn't even come into play in "realistic" games.

Thoughts?


(snip)
Like everything else in this system...
its up to GM preference :D

Sheesh, when can we eliminate that? :D

[zornwil]

Another thought...the more traditional, HERO-steeped among us probably have a hard time with this concept. I do to some degree. The core notion of HERO is to set aside SFX.

But Adjustment Powers necessarily opened that damnable door and to abide by the Primary Meta-Rule of HERO, "we shall simulate heroic fiction", it's a necessary evil.

In fact, it should be pointed out that 5ER even has specifically addressed this with more attention to SFX, including its own rudimentary SFX list - see the sidebar on page 96.

So I suppose ANB is right to take the bull by the horns and raise this most thorny subject. It plays well into Christopher Mullins' concurrent development on reducing Adjustment Powers back to basics and building up again, which I heartily endorse.

Unfortunately, I think we're at least 2 editions away from resolving all this...and many, many more if everyone who runs HERO continues to try to not fundamentally readdress Adjustment Powers and instead cling stubbornly to the idea of sticking with what has been and simply incrementally refining them. Not that I'm not sympathetic to that approach - it's very hard managing a game system from a "people" perspective and one does have to cater to the current user base. But I think all these discussions point out the fundamental need to really address Adjustment Powers from scratch.

Personally, I'm willing to go down this path, but I still have a prejudice towards eliminating PowDef completely as I've noted elsewhere and going down the regular DEF/AVLD/NND path.

[schir1964]

This tiered system seems to be very similar to how Life Support now works.

Here's another way to break things down (just throwing out ideas here):

Source Of Powers/SFX

Internal/Inherent: Source of Powers/SFX come from or are part of the character.


Mutants: Powers/SFX are actually generated by the character's body itself.
Races: Character's race grants certain inherent abilities (ex. Elves).
Technology: Characters that are based on technology. (ex. Androids, AI Programs, etc...)


External/Non-Inherent: Source of Powers/SFX come from outside the character or requires some outside catalyst to manifest.


Magic: Character's Powers/SFX come from type of Magical source.
Technology: Characters that get thier Powers/SFX from technology but don't require them or need them.
Catalyst: Powers/SFX require something external to activate them. (ex. Superman, yes that's right, he falls into this category since all his powers requires the Yellow Sun.)


These are simply sample category lists. They would need to be expanded and refined to something better, but you get the idea.

- Christopher Mullins

[RDU Neil]

I don't think I have anything new to say here I haven't said in other threads... but that doesn't seem to stop most people... :snicker:

1. Core Axioms and Mechanics - Hero has nothing to do with SFX.

Is the purpose of this thread to try and insert SFX of powers into the Mechanic levels? Mutants & Masterminds does this... but then that is not a system... but a game. Or in other words...

2. SFX are critical at the Game Rule and Play Experience level... thus dating back to 1st Edition Champions, SFX have had a large place in the game. BUT, as Hero developed in a system... not a game... many of the Game Rule level issues (like SFX) were incorporated in at the mechanics level... and this generates numerous issues.

I'm assuming (and may be wrong) that this thread is an attempt to discuss SFX as a way to lock them in firmer at the Game Rule level... and perhaps at the mechanic level as well.

(As an example to differentiate between a Mechanic and a Game rule...
1d6 of damage = 5 active points is a mechanic

-1/2 for "Not vs. Fire" is a Game Rule)

I think SFX have extreme use in the areas of Adjustment Powers, Power Defense and what I'll call cantrip powers for lack of a better term.

The core mechanic of Adjustment Powers works fine without SFX. 1d6 of added or subtracted active points to a characteristic or power, cost adjusted based on active point cost of power. (Thus six points of STR drain is only 2 points of DEX drain.)

Power Defense stops Adjustment Power at 1 for 1.

At the mechanics level... very simple in concept... but it begins to get very messy as soon as we try to interpret this into Game Rules and Play.

When we start to break Adjustment Powers down... Drains, Aid, Transfers... we are mostly still in the mechanic level and ok (in theory) but we quickly cross the invisible line with Healing, Regeneration... let alone further defining things as "Soul Sucking!" or "Mental Enfeeblement Ray!"*

Suddenly SFX are crucial to making a generic mechanic fit... but we are actually asking a very difficult thing. We are asking people to layer Game Rules and Mechanics without properly understanding what they are doing.

If we are to define SFX... we have to first state WHERE we are defining them.

Game Rule level: These are the SFX in my game. This is how they work. These are the proper ways to simulate them with mechanics.

Mechanic Level: These are the accepted SFX of the SYSTEM! Defining your power suite by an SFX has the following MECHANICAL application within the game... then list them out. (I still think this is blurring the line between SFX and Mechanics... but I think this is appropriate to build a better GAME... but will be different for each game. Maybe the mechanic level is to show a list of possible SFX... show examples of how a GM must think through a choose the SFX appropriate for the game... examples of mechanics that can be linked to those SFX, also needing defined by the GM... before opening up character creation to player.)

Anyway... that is my initial "BLURRGH" of thought :sick: on this matter.



* What just occurred to me is that we need to realize and spotlight the fact that every time a player makes a character and defines something like Energy Blast as "Flame Strike" or "Drain vs. Body" as "Soul Sucking" they have defacto created a game rule that affects everyone in the game. They have defined part of the shared world... and often this goes unexamined in terms of how that effects Play Experience until problems arise. For another thread...

[zornwil]

Actually that last paragraph is a great point. As you say, for another thread, but it is an overlooked facet of HERO and a profound one.

[prestidigitator]

I'm sorry, but I find any attempt to categorize or list SFX to be rather repulsive. There are not only as many SFX as there are players, there are as many SFX as there are powers. That is, every power can have SFX that are in some way different from any other power ever built. If you wanted to go into detail, you could even describe the SFX of a plain 3d6 EB in three pages of text without having to add Advantages or Limitations.

The only useful thing I have found to do with different SFX game-wise is to qualitatively determine how close the SFX of different powers or definitions are. In the same fashion, you can decide, for example, how much a particular power fits the broad category of, "magic." It is up to the GM whether the amount of overlap is enough to allow powers to fully or partially interact.

One example I like to use is this: what if a magical spell is defined as temporarily summoning a sword into being, and that sword is used against a foe who has some kind of, "magic resistance" (i.e. some defense or other Power that is, "Only vs. Magic," whether through a Limitation or inherent restriction such as that found in Adjustment Powers). Now, is the attack magical merely because it is defined as a spell, or is it simply an attack by a sword just like one that was not, "summoned?" Should it be determined based on whether the spell is an HKA or a Summon? I don't think so; that is a matter of mechanics, not SFX, and the two are supposed to be independent. It really has to be a judgement call, IMO.

[Black Lotus]

I'm sorry, but I find any attempt to categorize or list SFX to be rather repulsive. There are not only as many SFX as there are players, there are as many SFX as there are powers. That is, every power can have SFX that are in some way different from any other power ever built. If you wanted to go into detail, you could even describe the SFX of a plain 3d6 EB in three pages of text without having to add Advantages or Limitations.

I see nothing "repulsive" about carefully categorizing SFX. Of course, I don't run superhero campaigns: I run martial arts, sci-fi, cyberpunk, and post-apocalyptic games. In my games, I already know what all the SFX categories are going to be, because I have a complete list of items, weapons, and armor for use in the campaign, and I designed all the SFX myself.

In addition, just what exactly is wrong with meta-categorizing SFX? A lot of people hate the idea of "labeling" and "classifying" things, and you seem to be one of those. At the root of that ideaology, though, is a rulebook with nonsense jumble on every page and a character sheet with doodles on it. You HAVE to categorize certain things to be able to measure and control them.

[Grailknight]

I think this issue is being attacked from the wrong side and that's mostly caused by the focus on power defense. IMO, more use of limitations on powers and defenses is necessary than making broad sfx rulings. Most of the defenses have problems with sfx being too broad. For example:

PD-works the same vs falling, being struck by fist, crushing or tension with no arguments over special effect.

ED-fire, electricity, cold, radiation or magic, no difference.

MD- Is the most consistent but only because the sfx of the powers is so tight but an EGO attck defined as a siren's song should be different from a neural disruptor from a mindworm.

PowD-The reason for this discussion. Broad sfx Adjustment powers are usually the province of high-end one trick pony types (Rouge, Parasite) are plot device godlike beings that must be outwitted, not out fought. The more common purchase such as all powers of x sfx or should be balanced by DEF only vs that sfx rather than adjusting the power mechanic.

FD-Just as bad an offender as PowD. Bright light is not the same as pepper spray or a poke in the eyes. Limit the defenses, so it doesn't work against them all, not the attacks which all do the same thing.

[Doc Democracy]

One example I like to use is this: what if a magical spell is defined as temporarily summoning a sword into being, and that sword is used against a foe who has some kind of, "magic resistance" (i.e. some defense or other Power that is, "Only vs. Magic," whether through a Limitation or inherent restriction such as that found in Adjustment Powers). Now, is the attack magical merely because it is defined as a spell, or is it simply an attack by a sword just like one that was not, "summoned?" Should it be determined based on whether the spell is an HKA or a Summon? I don't think so; that is a matter of mechanics, not SFX, and the two are supposed to be independent. It really has to be a judgement call, IMO.

I understand where you are coming from but the problem a lot of people find with the system is the number of judgement calls that are necessary from the GM.

As an experienced HERO player, I'm sure that you are able to do this kind of thing very easily. I know that I am comfortable, in game, in allowing one person's RKA to affect a target and not anothers based simply on SFX.

However you are, in effect, running things from an SFX perspective as is being discussed. You are, in principle, with the people that want to see some role for SFX in the mechanical effects of the game. You simply don't want to produce a broad categorisation of SFX.

I think that this would be very useful to people coming new to the game. It would make the powers more accessible and less open to results against the common sense of the game being played. Like any other part of the game I think that a confident GM could scrap it and use a wider and more fluid interpretation (as you appear to do).


Doc

[Killer Shrike]

Personally I dont have any issue with powers having multiple SFX and simply apply as many as makes sense.

Thus if a character is a mutant fire projector, then Adjustments that affect either mutant or fire powers affect him.

Works fine.

[Killer Shrike]

* What just occurred to me is that we need to realize and spotlight the fact that every time a player makes a character and defines something like Energy Blast as "Flame Strike" or "Drain vs. Body" as "Soul Sucking" they have defacto created a game rule that affects everyone in the game. They have defined part of the shared world... and often this goes unexamined in terms of how that effects Play Experience until problems arise. For another thread...
Yes, that is a key component of the HERO System Powers -- you buy access to mechanics with points, and instantiate a new version with each Power Construct. HERO Characters are unique self-describing expressions of game mechanics. The computer science background of some of the original creators shows thru in many places.

[prestidigitator]

I understand where you are coming from but the problem a lot of people find with the system is the number of judgement calls that are necessary from the GM.

As an experienced HERO player, I'm sure that you are able to do this kind of thing very easily. I know that I am comfortable, in game, in allowing one person's RKA to affect a target and not anothers based simply on SFX.

However you are, in effect, running things from an SFX perspective as is being discussed. You are, in principle, with the people that want to see some role for SFX in the mechanical effects of the game. You simply don't want to produce a broad categorisation of SFX.

I think that this would be very useful to people coming new to the game. It would make the powers more accessible and less open to results against the common sense of the game being played. Like any other part of the game I think that a confident GM could scrap it and use a wider and more fluid interpretation (as you appear to do).
Sure. If people want to do this kind of thing themselves, I don't see a tremendous problem with it as an optional game simplification. However, I myself would straight abandon the system entirely if it turned into the roleplaying equivalent of Magic the Gathering, so to speak.

[zornwil]

Well, the system already discusses SFX extensively and has in fact changed its fundamental premise by (understandably and necessarily) beginning the inclusion directly into the rules with Adjustment Powers. There's already an SFX chart in the system. So I think exploring whether/how we'd want to deal with SFX more directly is a necessary subsequent conversation, even if I agree as to trying to keep that at arms length. Anyway, point is, it's a far cry in determining SFX approach in the system (which requires discussing and classifying SFX) to becoming Magic: The Gathering!

[RDU Neil]

Yes, that is a key component of the HERO System Powers -- you buy access to mechanics with points, and instantiate a new version with each Power Construct. HERO Characters are unique self-describing expressions of game mechanics. The computer science background of some of the original creators shows thru in many places.

Then what seems to me to be the major issue is that no on is really openly admitting that this is a huge potential problem for Hero.

Continuing with the programming metaphor (and understand, I'm not a computer guy and have a general loathing for these things equal to my fascination) if Hero is the language, and the character are the programs... then 99% of the time when individuals build individual programs, those programs are incompatible and can "crash" the systme.

i.e. - two characters with differing concepts and interpretations crash the game when they are played together.

Sometimes it is easy to see the incompatibility. A 300 pt. Super and a 300 pt. Heroic Fantasy character are clearly incompatible with a slightly knowledgable glance.

Oftent he crash comes after a great deal of successful gaming... because a small piece of innocuous code (an unused power construct, say) suddenly comes into play and the whole Play Experience goes to hell.

My biggest concern is that with such a focus on SYSTEM in Hero (rather than Game) the likelyhood of game crashes and the difficultly of creating compatible programs (characters and game worlds) increases.

[casualplayer]

This approach would allow you to recost (and reconstruct) Life Support into less of a platypus type of power (love this simile, who deserves credit?). People could buy Power Defense and regular old DEF into conditional only versus Environmental effects or, at a certain level, characters could just be tough enough in general to ignore them. All environmental effects are either damage or Drains. We could ditch the arbitrary sub-rules of Life Support and if you wanted to be able to survive the damaging effects of space or hot lava we could stay within the core rules.

[zornwil]

That's very well stated and a good reason to consider it even more deeply, "casual"player.

[prestidigitator]

Perhaps I have been stating things a bit strongly. I like the vast separation between mechanics and SFX. A little bit of mixing of the two I find decent and helpful. More starts to deteriorate the possibilities for creative and original game authoring. If we still want Hero to be able to, "handle anything," then I believe the degree to which the mechanics interfere with the SFX cannot increase beyond the state of the current system.

[zornwil]

I think the point of this thread could well improve on how things are without embedding SFX into the system any more than they are informally already are. I think we're a little blind to the extent they've been pushed into the system - casualplayers' point on LS makes this loud and clear, I wasn't really thinking so much of the positive consequenes of streamlining how SFX play with the system, and I think this effort speaks to that.

[Doc Democracy]

Perhaps I have been stating things a bit strongly. I like the vast separation between mechanics and SFX. A little bit of mixing of the two I find decent and helpful. More starts to deteriorate the possibilities for creative and original game authoring. If we still want Hero to be able to, "handle anything," then I believe the degree to which the mechanics interfere with the SFX cannot increase beyond the state of the current system.

Oh come now Presdigitator! How are we supposed to argue when you behave so reasonably! :)


Doc

[prestidigitator]

Oh come now Presdigitator! How are we supposed to argue when you behave so reasonably! :)
You aren't. :D

[prestidigitator]

I think the point of this thread could well improve on how things are without embedding SFX into the system any more than they are informally already are. I think we're a little blind to the extent they've been pushed into the system - casualplayers' point on LS makes this loud and clear, I wasn't really thinking so much of the positive consequenes of streamlining how SFX play with the system, and I think this effort speaks to that.
I suppose Life Support is an interesting example. I find the breathing portion of it to be quite separate from SFX, since Expanded Breathing, for example, simply defines some environment in which you can breathe (or exist without suffocating, anyway). The Safe Environments and Immunities, on the other hand, list out a specific set of SFX, which could be done without. We could simply have values for 1.) "uncommon," environments--vacuum costs 1 IIRC; 2.) "common," environments--intense heat, costs 2; 3.) "all," environments--the equivalent of buying everything on their current list, and inclusive of a wide variety of things that are not (how about a highly electrically charged environment such as might be found within certain astronomical phenomena or in an electrical, "plane," or dimension?).

This is a little different from how casualplayer presented it; I believe his approach was more from the direction of system, rather than SFX. I consider that a wholly different question; a very valid one, but one that can be considered independently.

BTW, what do you do once things have been categorized and something comes along and doesn't fit into the scheme? Re-work everything? If you have nice rows 1, 2, 3 and columns A, B, C, and I bring in something that fits into 1A, 2C, and has a component that hasn't been addressed at all, shall we refactor our categorization, or must my idea be a bastardized collection of your definitions? Categorizing SFX is like categorizing every single Advantage and Limitation that you could ever apply to a Power. Doing so is not only impossible, but the attempt may wind up directly or indirectly (perception, number of custom rules required or standard rules ignored) limiting those things left out.

I'm all for categorization, but only for those things it makes sense to categorize. System effects are natural, and give us a basis for game balance and the gamer's love of semi-random story determination. Without categorizing things in terms of Characteristics, Skills, Powers, Modifiers, Disadvantages, etc., we wouldn't have much of a system. On the other hand, does it make sense to categorize works of fiction, for example? The Lord of the Rings obviously fits quite well (i.e. has a high level of correlation with those axioms without needing to, "fit within them," the way I handle matters) the notions of, "epic," and, "fantasy," but what about the, "Incarnations of Fate," series by Piers Anthony? Are you going to force it into, "fantasy," or "sci-fi?" Are you going to create a new label for it merely because it contains elements of both and things that may appear in neither, or are you simply going to allow it to be what it is? Only by broad themes can you really apply such labels, and even then there are examples that will break any such systematic approach to what is truly and rightly an infinite spectrum of creativity.

[casualplayer]

Nah, really what I am saying is that everything that LS does could easily been done with rDEF and Power Defense. Want immunity to snake venom? 10 pts rDEF, 10 pts Power Defense Only vs. snake venom (probably worth much more than +2 Limitation.)

[Killer Shrike]

Then what seems to me to be the major issue is that no on is really openly admitting that this is a huge potential problem for Hero.

Continuing with the programming metaphor (and understand, I'm not a computer guy and have a general loathing for these things equal to my fascination) if Hero is the language, and the character are the programs... then 99% of the time when individuals build individual programs, those programs are incompatible and can "crash" the systme.

i.e. - two characters with differing concepts and interpretations crash the game when they are played together.

Sometimes it is easy to see the incompatibility. A 300 pt. Super and a 300 pt. Heroic Fantasy character are clearly incompatible with a slightly knowledgable glance.

Oftent he crash comes after a great deal of successful gaming... because a small piece of innocuous code (an unused power construct, say) suddenly comes into play and the whole Play Experience goes to hell.

My biggest concern is that with such a focus on SYSTEM in Hero (rather than Game) the likelyhood of game crashes and the difficultly of creating compatible programs (characters and game worlds) increases.

Well, not to go to far into the coding analogy, but there are a number of things here.

A) Any careless or bad coder can f it up for people that have to follow along behind them. The real problem in this case isnt the fact that the code is flexible enough to allow a bad coder, so much as the problem is that not all coders are equally proficient. Another subproblem is that a coder might be good at one sort of coding and not good at another. In character-building terms there are some people that are good at making balanced heroic level characters but suck at making supers, and vice versa for instance. And unfortunately there is little one can do about bad character designers except opt not to use their badly designed characters.

B) Code/Characters are not always designed to be broadly compatible, and that's not really a problem. The problem is that if you expect code/characters to have a high degree of compatibility with other code/characters then the two codebases/characters need to agree on some kind of interface to make that happen. That requires forethought and compliance to some kind of standard. It can be done. In character building context, certain underlying assumptions between characters of different genres must be evaluated, such as Hit Location usage, END costs, damage levels, Equipment for points or cash, etc.

C) Different platforms have different tolerance levels and available resources. You can write code that runs fine on one platform but completely blows up on another. It's not bad code; it's just platform-specific code. In the context of character building you can have a character that runs fine under one GM, but causes another GM issues. Is that a fault of the character?

D) You can have managed code or unmanaged code; with managed code you let the framework or runtime handle the gritty low level stuff. Or you can opt to override that behavior and explicitly manage things yourself. Going unmanaged can give you more power to get things done in unusual situations, but it's also taking away the safety net of the system. In character building context, you can stay pretty mainstream with your character design, or get funky with it and go for something a little more outre but prone to unforseen ramifications.

E) Actual build errors and syntax flaws are generally caught at compile time; these are glaring major problems that prevent the app from even building. If the compiler is lax, then a large number of critical issues that should be weeded out are allowed into the build, but a good compiler is going to weed all of that out before it becomes an issue. In character building context that's where the GM comes in -- he's the compiler that checks the character's build before the character enters play. If the GM is not good at this, then the opportunity for in-play (runtime) problems/bugs is much much higher.


So basically many of the same processes that apply to programming to identify and prevent bugs apply to character building in the HERO System. How they are applied is purely in the hands of the character designer and their GM.

[Kristopher]

Then what seems to me to be the major issue is that no on is really openly admitting that this is a huge potential problem for Hero.

Continuing with the programming metaphor (and understand, I'm not a computer guy and have a general loathing for these things equal to my fascination) if Hero is the language, and the character are the programs... then 99% of the time when individuals build individual programs, those programs are incompatible and can "crash" the systme.

i.e. - two characters with differing concepts and interpretations crash the game when they are played together.

Sometimes it is easy to see the incompatibility. A 300 pt. Super and a 300 pt. Heroic Fantasy character are clearly incompatible with a slightly knowledgable glance.

Oftent he crash comes after a great deal of successful gaming... because a small piece of innocuous code (an unused power construct, say) suddenly comes into play and the whole Play Experience goes to hell.

My biggest concern is that with such a focus on SYSTEM in Hero (rather than Game) the likelyhood of game crashes and the difficultly of creating compatible programs (characters and game worlds) increases.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to RDU Neil again.

For the thoughtful analysis.

[zornwil]

I suppose Life Support is an interesting example. I find the breathing portion of it to be quite separate from SFX, since Expanded Breathing, for example, simply defines some environment in which you can breathe (or exist without suffocating, anyway). The Safe Environments and Immunities, on the other hand, list out a specific set of SFX, which could be done without. We could simply have values for 1.) "uncommon," environments--vacuum costs 1 IIRC; 2.) "common," environments--intense heat, costs 2; 3.) "all," environments--the equivalent of buying everything on their current list, and inclusive of a wide variety of things that are not (how about a highly electrically charged environment such as might be found within certain astronomical phenomena or in an electrical, "plane," or dimension?).

This is a little different from how casualplayer presented it; I believe his approach was more from the direction of system, rather than SFX. I consider that a wholly different question; a very valid one, but one that can be considered independently.

BTW, what do you do once things have been categorized and something comes along and doesn't fit into the scheme? Re-work everything? If you have nice rows 1, 2, 3 and columns A, B, C, and I bring in something that fits into 1A, 2C, and has a component that hasn't been addressed at all, shall we refactor our categorization, or must my idea be a bastardized collection of your definitions? Categorizing SFX is like categorizing every single Advantage and Limitation that you could ever apply to a Power. Doing so is not only impossible, but the attempt may wind up directly or indirectly (perception, number of custom rules required or standard rules ignored) limiting those things left out.

I'm all for categorization, but only for those things it makes sense to categorize. System effects are natural, and give us a basis for game balance and the gamer's love of semi-random story determination. Without categorizing things in terms of Characteristics, Skills, Powers, Modifiers, Disadvantages, etc., we wouldn't have much of a system. On the other hand, does it make sense to categorize works of fiction, for example? The Lord of the Rings obviously fits quite well (i.e. has a high level of correlation with those axioms without needing to, "fit within them," the way I handle matters) the notions of, "epic," and, "fantasy," but what about the, "Incarnations of Fate," series by Piers Anthony? Are you going to force it into, "fantasy," or "sci-fi?" Are you going to create a new label for it merely because it contains elements of both and things that may appear in neither, or are you simply going to allow it to be what it is? Only by broad themes can you really apply such labels, and even then there are examples that will break any such systematic approach to what is truly and rightly an infinite spectrum of creativity.
Well, I think we can look to the HERO system itself for the first layer of SFX because...lo and behold, in fact, there is a STRONG system precedent - PD, ED, and MD. It is, at the least, interesting that PD and ED were split out instead of just being DEF. Some believe these should be folded in together, even. But anyway, the system has a core mechanic around "type of defense" with (very) broad SFX as the differentiator. There's a lesson here somewhere, at the least that we don't want characters to have all-encompassing defense and there's a core SFX used to defeat that.

Then the system goes on to include that further limiting SFX is worth a Limitation. And that some powers require SFX definition, even, and expanding SFX is an Advantage.

So I think the message here is that in order for the system to work well we need solid guidelines as to what constitutes broad SFX and what constitutes narrow SFX in a given campaign. Much of that is implicit in the current book and some of it is even explicit. I don't think anyone is suggesting one list will fit all campaigns, but at least that there could be a system to govern the relationships among the non-SFX fundamentals and the SFX layer already present on the system, with hierarchal schema building if needed and matrixing of effects. At least that's how I would view this endeavor. Out of it there may be a "standard" or multiple genre standards but that's not really relevant compared to the methodology of how one derives or rewrites that standard for one's campaign.

[prestidigitator]

Well, I think we can look to the HERO system itself for the first layer of SFX because...lo and behold, in fact, there is a STRONG system precedent - PD, ED, and MD. It is, at the least, interesting that PD and ED were split out instead of just being DEF. Some believe these should be folded in together, even. But anyway, the system has a core mechanic around "type of defense" with (very) broad SFX as the differentiator. There's a lesson here somewhere, at the least that we don't want characters to have all-encompassing defense and there's a core SFX used to defeat that.

Then the system goes on to include that further limiting SFX is worth a Limitation. And that some powers require SFX definition, even, and expanding SFX is an Advantage.

So I think the message here is that in order for the system to work well we need solid guidelines as to what constitutes broad SFX and what constitutes narrow SFX in a given campaign. Much of that is implicit in the current book and some of it is even explicit. I don't think anyone is suggesting one list will fit all campaigns, but at least that there could be a system to govern the relationships among the non-SFX fundamentals and the SFX layer already present on the system, with hierarchal schema building if needed and matrixing of effects. At least that's how I would view this endeavor. Out of it there may be a "standard" or multiple genre standards but that's not really relevant compared to the methodology of how one derives or rewrites that standard for one's campaign.
Hmm. I suppose, though I have always thought of those as a mechanical differentiator rather than a descriptive one. It's really the gamist balancing factor, as you say, of, "we don't want characters to have all-encompassing defense." Even though defenses are in general, "less expensive," than attacks, there has to be some way of getting around that, or the game wouldn't be much fun. The PD/ED split is one of the first methods of doing this. It introduces a little necessary tactical planning.

Myself, I am not above making similar SFX (different acid attacks, for example) work against different defenses (one PD, one ED, one NND, one split into both physical and energy attacks, etc.), but perhaps there is an aspect of this that is a bit limiting on SFX: there is nothing in the core system that allows me to make one attack work against both PD and ED; I can split it so some works against PD and some works against ED, but then the attack is no longer a single cumulative attack; there is no room for making an attack work against 3/4 of your PD plus 1/4 of your ED (or some other affine combination of the two). Of course, there is also really nothing in the system that explicitly disallows this....

Anyway, there are definite things in the system (especially now) that allow for any combination or totally alternate defenses: NND, AVLD, Multi-Power Attacks, etc. It is like a, "A, B, or whatever you'd like to call it," choice.

[zornwil]

I agree, and I think that's another reason to take stock of the SFX and compare to the tools we have. And don't forget, Adjustment Powers essentially demand not only an SFX declaration (as normal) but then a very specialized adjudication of those SFX against defenses. Currently it allows for this Power Defense construct. Some like it just fine, and I understand the argument that it's ultimately no less abstract than "Energy Defense" and simply addresses a particular class of attack. Others don't like it as we've discussed. I think reviewing SFX against these tools becomes at least a useful analysis even if, in the worst case, a dead end - at least we'll know (or rather have better-informed opinions as to) why it's a dead end when done.

I tend to think of it two ways:

as said, each attack and defense type is defined as abstract classes which are dependent upon the object of an attack, and the object of an attack is either Energy Damage, Physical Damage, Mental Damage, Power Damage, Sensory (Flash) Damage, and whatever else I'm forgetting. But basically it's grouped by the target, strictly. If we perform this method, I tend to think we should combine ED and PD into DEF, but of course that's entirely another argument. Anyway, in this school, we have a choice, then, when SFX matrixed on this stop making sense - one method is we construct the SFX to suit this method, basically, indicating that the class of defense "must" by definition catch the broad category and SFX be thusly derived, and if they are not in line, then there must be a Limitation or such on the class of defense. So in other words, if we purchase Power Defense, it is either very broad/abstract - "My Amulet of Thargon protects my vitality!" or "I'm really lucky!" or "My tough skin acts as a resistant against the types of drains that would hit my powers because they are all under my skin/bio-based" - or then we must pay a Limitation if the PowDef is indeed "only versus biochemical attacks" or the like. Where the SFX comes into play as Lims and Advs, we are into the traditional issue of selecting appropriate values. The other possibility, though, is that SFX is simply considered equally and unless particularly restrictive (whatever that means, again requiring definition) then we simply review the intersection of results and the GM rules accordingly, so the PowDef is described in some specific detail as is any incoming attack and judged accordingly. And, of course, one can certainly do this somewhere in-between, I'm not suggesting it's black and white.

The other way is to view that attacks come in certain broad SFX flavors, Energy, Physical, or Mental. We can then give guidelines (maybe only in a compendium, maybe not a core book thing) to how to broaden or narrow that (to address if people want only "DEF" for Phys/Ener or (more likely) they want to broaden to, as Fantasy HERO suggests, Arcane, which basically I already had in my supers game as Supernatural). If this is true, I would posit we only need to define things as Limited further by SFX if more restrictive (again guidelines are helpful) and we need also then only AVLD and NND to help us much of the time. Reviewing Flash Defense and the like becomes an exercise in utility and comparison to these values, whether we keep that explicitly or not. There certainly remains reasons to keep the other Defense types, for pragmatic purposes, but they then need to be viewed in light of "attack SFX" reasoning as opposed to "target object" reasoning.

The real condundrum is that it is not at all clear which is the "correct" (in this context meaning as it relates to original intention as neither is right nor wrong) way from the HERO core. In fact, there probably isn't a correct way, it's likely that the authors didn't think this through all the way to this level of detail, particularly given the way the system evolved. I'm not sure which is better even if I tend to lean towards basing the dynamics on broad attack type rather than target type - there are certainly strengths to both approaches. I think in the end the system would be streamlined and clarified by choosing one approach and then ensuring the rules revolve around that method very clearly, and the gaps are filled in with that approach in mind. Especially if you then consider how this factors into other related issues such as Life Support.

[prestidigitator]

Perhaps it would help to use the method of another thread to talk about this. I view the separation of defenses (and thus attack types) from a 80% gamist/15% simulationist/5% narrativist perspective. In that light, I believe a defense should not be all encompassing (i.e. there should be more than one defense/attack type), but that all defenses, when considered as a whole, should completely cover all attack types (the union of defenses should be a superset of the union of attack types). There are rare and expensive exceptions to this, such as those introduced by NND. All good.

As for Special Effects, I view them from a 75% narrativist/20% simlulationist/5% gamist perspective. Thus, I don't want there to be any restrictions to my SFX; they should be as freeform as possible, and not have to conform to any categories, system rules, or meta-rules. No Powers, Advantages, Limitations, or Frameworks should form stereotypes about or discriminate against any particular SFX. That doesn't mean they shouldn't have some ties to the system, or allow the GM/campaign setting itself to discriminate (very common, common, uncommon) between them. It means all system rules and mechanics should be, "SFX neutral."

With those things in mind, I think the physical/energy/power/flash/mental distinction is about right. Some of those (e.g. flash) are in fact mechanical distinctions, which is fine, and the rest are so ridiculously broad that I can pretty much fit any SFX into at least a combination of them. When I can't (decently rare cases), I do have other options (NND, AVLD, etc.).

I'm probably not saying anything particularly new in this post, but maybe it is a slightly clarified or different perspective.

[zornwil]

I don't think I'm suggesting anything in violation of that. Nor am I saying you said that. Just to be clear, I'm suggesting that since SFX are a topic, and one already enmeshed in the system, that clarifying and treating them properly is not in any way contradictory to remaining free in employing them.

[Nadrakas]

Might I suggest an all New Category and Sub-Category?

Category: Mentally Unbalanced
Sub-Category: Foxbat

Just a thought...


Nadrakas..."Who is most definately having a Foxbat Day. Right Zornwil?"

[zornwil]

Indeed, super-being. The General Council is eager to greet you. We will be bearing arms to give you a 21-gun salute...

:D

[zornwil]

I just made a connection of Classes of Minds to Classes of SFX notion. Perhaps a truly systemic approach would justify both, if carefully deployed and explained as to how a GM would NEED to tweak it (it should not/cannot be presented as "this is a useful standard for everyone" as CoM currently is). Please see post http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=758058&postcount=80 .

Interested in comments. I was going to write something on a potential Classes of SFX approach, but just don't have the time to think that through to the extent it needs.