New Limitations to Old Powers in New Books

[Agent X]

I was confused when Monolith pointed out to me on a sample construction that I hadn't bought an adder for my change environment. No mention was made of the need for an adder to have more than one effect for change environment in FRED. After re-reading the Change Environment Rules I was not under the impression that it was called for. I finally bought USPD and a friend who I had discussed this with found the adder... in the margins! He found two more adders. All these adders interpreted powers in FRED to be more limiting than a reading of the powers in FRED led either of us to believe.

I cry foul!

If you want to add new rules to the game, it's one thing to add adders, limitations, and advantages that expand on the basic concept of a power that is presented in the main rulebook. When you take a left turn and basically provide an "Oh, by the way, that power isn't as good as you thought it was and you need to spend more points" modification that's just annoying. Not everyone who plays is going to pick up every supplement and changing the basic rules of the game in a supplement just seems vey wrong to me.

Now, if those powers were meant to be limited in the ways that the adders from USPD indicated, that should have been clearly stated in FRED. As it is, our group is simply going to disregard these modifications to the rulebook given that it can only provide confusion for those who don't read the boards or buy every supplement Hero puts out.

I really think this was bad form.:mad:

[tesuji]

perhaps if you posted a specific example or two, perhaps using your case or an example that specifically uses and explains what was in the margins of USPD or such, this would be clearer or more readily disucssed.

[Vondy]

Can you give the specific construct and adder in question?

[Blue Angel]

I think he is refering to USPD page 251.

There is a +5 adder to include two affects simultaneously or a +10 adder to be able to switch to any combination of affects within the special effect.

The +10 adder is a new expansion but the +5 adder reduces the affectiveness for those who had already combined affects in a CE.

[Vondy]

Based on that I would have to agree.

New Adders that reduce the effectiveness of a power as written would (and do) chap my hide. "Oh, by the way..."

New Adders that expand a powers effectiveness are another matter altogether.

[Agent X]

Yep, page 251 is what I am referring to but I believe there are a couple more "transgressions" in the USPD. I will have to look up the page numbers. I can't understand why DOJ would go down this road.

[Lord Liaden]

I sympathize with your position, Agent X. I must admit that I was a little perturbed to see in the FAQ that Steve states you need the +10 Adder from Ultimate Mentalist, "Affects Porous", for Telekinesis to affect water or other liquids, when not only is that adder not in the description of Telekinesis, but one of the sample powers for TK in the sidebar on FREd p. 147 is Water Manipulation, built without that Adder. And it's not changed in the Errata.

I don't have a problem with clearly labelled optional rules, or even changes to the rules in later books that supercede the earlier ones; but this was an Adder from an earlier book which Steve Long wrote himself, and if he had wanted it to be the default rule for Telekinesis it was a definite oversight to not have included it in the main rulebook.

(Perhaps I'll bring that to his attention when he returns from Origins. After winning that award he's probably too happy anyway.) ;)

[Monolith]

You were always supposed to only be able to buy one Combat Effect per Change Enviroment. That is the reason that the villain Stormfront has an Elemental with multiple Change Enviroment powers (each one having a different Combat Effect - IIRC one is for Perception, one is for DEX rolls, and a third is for Temperature). I think it was the rethinking of Stormfront which eventually led Steve to create the Multiple Combat Effects Adder in the first place.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
Yep, page 251 is what I am referring to but I believe there are a couple more "transgressions" in the USPD. I will have to look up the page numbers. I can't understand why DOJ would go down this road.
They are going "down this road" because after 18 months they realized they made some mistakes and left out some important information for certain powers. I have no problem with this. The rules FAQ is full of hundreds of new additions and clarifications. Why should published books be any different?

[Klytus]

Originally posted by Monolith
They are going "down this road" because after 18 months they realized they made some mistakes and left out some important information for certain powers. I have no problem with this. The rules FAQ is full of hundreds of new additions and clarifications. Why should published books be any different?

I think the problem is that it makes it appear that if you want the "right" rules you need to go out and buy more than just the 5th Ed rulesbook - which sort of violates the idea behind hero. The extra books were supposed to be "nice but not necessary." Now it appears that you need to buy them anyway for rules errata - which looks a lot like a cynical trick to sell more books.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Klytus
I think the problem is that it makes it appear that if you want the "right" rules you need to go out and buy more than just the 5th Ed rulesbook - which sort of violates the idea behind hero. The extra books were supposed to be "nice but not necessary." Now it appears that you need to buy them anyway for rules errata - which looks a lot like a cynical trick to sell more books.
I certainly do not think that adding 3-4 new Adders in a book is a "cynical trick" to do anything. The point is to get the new rules out to people. FREd is not perfect. It was put together in a hurry and that fact shows in some places. Heck, it is missing an entire chapter which Steve put on the webpage as a pdf. :)

The fact of the matter is that the game will evolve over time. Some of that evolution takes place in the Ultimate books, for example. I do not hear anyone complaining that a villain who has a Passing Strike maneuver, but because that maneuver is not in FREd, should not be allowed. All the additional books add some new rules; and it is the message boards place to point that out to people who have not gotten around to buying the new books. :)

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
I certainly do not think that adding 3-4 new Adders in a book is a "cynical trick" to do anything. The point is to get the new rules out to people. FREd is not perfect. It was put together in a hurry and that fact shows in some places. Heck, it is missing an entire chapter which Steve put on the webpage as a pdf. :)

The fact of the matter is that the game will evolve over time. Some of that evolution takes place in the Ultimate books, for example. I do not hear anyone complaining that a villain who has a Passing Strike maneuver, but because that maneuver is not in FREd, should not be allowed. All the additional books add some new rules; and it is the message boards place to point that out to people who have not gotten around to buying the new books. :) I wouldn't call it a cynical trick. I wouldn't even call it wrong-headed in every case but adders for affects porous for telekinesis and multiple combat effects on change environment are not of earth-shattering importance to "correct" game balance. I am still wondering what the adder on change environment is supposed to accomplish considering that a 5 point adder isn't going to matter a hill of beans for balancing min/maxer purposes and the affects porous adder to telekinesis is just annoying. How many teeks in comics can't affect porous anyway? It seems needlessly complicated.

These changes aren't needed. The game is not demonstrably out of balance without these new restrictions, and a requirement to pay for an adder on something you didn't have to pay for originally is a restriction. If some catastrophe was averted because a restriction on a power was accidentally ommited, well that would be one thing, but this is patently unnecessary.

Let's weigh the cost and benefits:
Benefit: dubious benefit if any that I can see (I actually think the likely proposed benefit has no merit and is more of a harm)
Cost: Confusion between players who didn't notice the rules change (in the margin of an ancillary book) and confusion caused because some didn't pick up the book with the rules change to begin with - not only a problem between members of a play group but a problem for strangers forming a pick-up game at a store or convention.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
You were always supposed to only be able to buy one Combat Effect per Change Enviroment. That is the reason that the villain Stormfront has an Elemental with multiple Change Enviroment powers (each one having a different Combat Effect - IIRC one is for Perception, one is for DEX rolls, and a third is for Temperature). I think it was the rethinking of Stormfront which eventually led Steve to create the Multiple Combat Effects Adder in the first place. Where was it in FRED? I've done played the game. I've had my "mouth set" for how Change Environment works and the funny thing is I haven't seen anything horrible happen out of not paying for an adder that wasn't mentioned in FRED.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
Where was it in FRED? I've done played the game. I've had my "mouth set" for how Change Environment works and the funny thing is I haven't seen anything horrible happen out of not paying for an adder that wasn't mentioned in FRED.
And you know what? Nothing horrible will happen. You now just happen to be playing by a house rule rather than an "official" rule. Once again though, this rule was implied by the character design of Stormfront. Either way though, when I am discussing rules on the message boards I prefer to use the actual rules over house rules. We all have so many house rules that none of us would make sense if we tried to answer each question with our own house rule variant. :)

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by Monolith
And you know what? Nothing horrible will happen. You now just happen to be playing by a house rule rather than an "official" rule. Once again though, this rule was implied by the character design of Stormfront. Either way though, when I am discussing rules on the message boards I prefer to use the actual rules over house rules. We all have so many house rules that none of us would make sense if we tried to answer each question with our own house rule variant. :)

"I'm sorry, but that character isn't written up correctly. You obviously didn't read the sidebar in Obscure Supplement #1092, in which..."

Unless they're published in the FAQ, I don't consider _changes_ to the rules are printed in FRED to be official. Additions to the rules, fine. More rules, fine. But _changes_ to the base rules? No way.

As for Stormfront...so what? I've never heard of Stormfront, I have no idea where Stormfront is in print, and IMO it's rather silly to go back and claim that a rule was implied by some character's write-up.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Kristopher
As for Stormfront...so what? I've never heard of Stormfront, I have no idea where Stormfront is in print, and IMO it's rather silly to go back and claim that a rule was implied by some character's write-up.
I realize you are new to the boards, but most of the things the vast majority of HERO System players learned about the game came from character examples, not book examples. The fact that you did not buy CKC does not mean that the majority of HERO System gamers did not as well. And when I see a rule actually being used in print I definately give it value over what is not.

And the rules FAQ does state that a GM should generally not allow more than one Combat Effect per Change Enviroment, but that the GM can allow it if they wish; and we all know the GM can allow anything if he wishes. :)

[Killer Shrike]

I personally liked the further clarification in the Until DB. For sticklers, I think they should also be added to the FAQ as options as I agree it is unfair to 'expect' players to purchase all products (although I would highly recommend the Until DB, I realize many gamers are on a budget -- all of my players for example ;) ) and rules expansions/clarifications like that should be added to the FAQ so that they are more centrally accessible.

One of the big selling points of the HERO System is that you really only need 1 book (FREd) to run it.

:cool:

[lemming]

Originally posted by Monolith
And you know what? Nothing horrible will happen. You now just happen to be playing by a house rule rather than an "official" rule. Once again though, this rule was implied by the character design of Stormfront.
It should be pointed out that Stormfront is from CKC, not the 5th edition rulebook. Which means that's an another dubious argument.
I'm of the view that adding restrictions to powers that weren't broken, gets messy. It also makes it more annoying for those of us using Hero Designer. Which doesn't have either adder...

And with the arguing "house" vs. "official", there's plenty of wiggle room all over the place. I don't like having to have all the books memorized just to be able to say I know X rule is now X-.001

edit: Just read the last few posts; If it's in the FAQ, I'll concede it's "official", but I wouldn't penalize a player for it.

[bryanb]

Maybe HERO could post a free download listing all the additional adders and their location?

Having said that is this not what you get when you buy TSR/WoTC products. I can only speak for 2nd Ed but all the character handbooks added extra rules for characters - can't DOJ do the same?

Daz

[J4y]

I think the problem is that it makes it appear that if you want the "right" rules you need to go out and buy more than just the 5th Ed rulesbook - which sort of violates the idea behind hero.

I see your point, but whats 5 points here or there anyway? Just look at your GM, shrug at each other, and bump your character up by 5 points. Or, 1 if it's in a multiform. Or, 0 if it's in a multiform's multipower or....

[Crimson Arrow]

I have to say that just because so-and-so character has a power constructed in a certain way does not mean that that is correct, or that it is the ONLY way to do it. Perhaps Stormfront's powers are designed that way because one power affects PER rolls, while another affects DEX rolls and if they were all in one slot, he'd have to use all of the effects at the same time.

Also (while I haven't the book in front of me), is it not a question of effect? Presumably the PER roll reductions represents fog, while the DEX roll one is high winds, which is inconsistent with fog.

I can't see what the problem is with paying for the extra combat effects. If people were saying, "I get the first point of PER reduction free and the first point of -1 to Dex rolls free, and the first etc.", I can see the mischief. However, if you say "you only get the cheapest effect free" (or "you can only choose one free point of effect"), then what does it matter if you have more than one effect from the same CE power when you are paying points to have those extra effects anyway?

I don't have a huge problem with later supplements adding new rules (although it can be a pain), I just don't see the point of this one.

[Primal]

Originally posted by bryanb
Having said that is this not what you get when you buy TSR/WoTC products. I can only speak for 2nd Ed but all the character handbooks added extra rules for characters - can't DOJ do the same?

Daz
Here, here! I think all of us use Hero because we are completely happy with the way D&D does things..

1 Core book +1 errata.

I too fall into the crowd that holds that rules _changes_ in supplements (not additions) blows big chunks and causes me serious concern about Hero as a point of principle..

I like Hero because I like the principles behind it (or at least what I perceive as the principles)...

If I don't have those principles to cling to, why not just shrug my shoulders and join the masses playing D&D? I'm 100% positive that with a good GM, I can have fun with D&D..

bleh.. melodrama..

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
And you know what? Nothing horrible will happen. You now just happen to be playing by a house rule rather than an "official" rule. Once again though, this rule was implied by the character design of Stormfront. Either way though, when I am discussing rules on the message boards I prefer to use the actual rules over house rules. We all have so many house rules that none of us would make sense if we tried to answer each question with our own house rule variant. :) Why am I playing with a house rule when I am playing with the rules as stated in FRED? In another post, you used the term "always" implying that the +5 adder is the way that it "should" have been all along and you point out Stormfront's construction - and it isn't even mentioned in the FAQ (according to soe posters). Seems to me, CKC came after FRED. For that matter, why use the +10 affects porous adder from Ultimate Mentalist when it isn't in FRED but in an FAQ that many gamers won't even look at? What really chaps my hide about that one is that there was no good reason to omit it from FRED and then add it in the FAQ.

This "actual rules" point actually supports my position IMO. By adding restrictions to powers in new books (in margins) that won't be universally purchased or to the FAQ, it only creates confusion over what are the actual rules. Imagine the meeting of several players in a pick-up game at a store and the tangled conversation that could ensue. It is one thing to use the FAQ or a "utility" book to solve rules interpretation problems. It is another thing to add restrictions to powers that nobody (at least me) didn't see coming and wasn't asking about. Was the USPD advertised as a rules supplement? I thought it was simply advertised as a book that could give you ideas and short cuts.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
I realize you are new to the boards, but most of the things the vast majority of HERO System players learned about the game came from character examples, not book examples. The fact that you did not buy CKC does not mean that the majority of HERO System gamers did not as well. And when I see a rule actually being used in print I definately give it value over what is not.

And the rules FAQ does state that a GM should generally not allow more than one Combat Effect per Change Enviroment, but that the GM can allow it if they wish; and we all know the GM can allow anything if he wishes. :) If we used character examples in 4th edition then we could have justified almost anything.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
What really chaps my hide about that one is that there was no good reason to omit it from FRED and then add it in the FAQ.
The reason it was omitted from FREd are varied; ranging from "forgotten" to "did not think of it time." Your whole argument is based on the idea that the rules in FREd should be static, but they are not. The HERO System rules are evolving with each new book. There are new Martial Arts maneuves in UMA. There are new abilities for vehicles in TUV. There are official rules for different sized characters in the Beastiary. The HERO System is a constantly evolving system.

I always find it odd that Hero posters will make rants about how Steve never changes his mind about anything, but then turn around and make rants because he did change his mind about something. If you like the new rules then use them. If you do not lke the new rules then do not use them. Either way from the point of USPD onward all "official" characters will be published with the new rules; and will continue to be published with new rules as those rules evolve. The HERO System is not static.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
The reason it was omitted from FREd are varied; ranging from "forgotten" to "did not think of it time." Your whole argument is based on the idea that the rules in FREd should be static, but they are not. The HERO System rules are evolving with each new book. There are new Martial Arts maneuves in UMA. There are new abilities for vehicles in TUV. There are official rules for different sized characters in the Beastiary. The HERO System is a constantly evolving system.

I always find it odd that Hero posters will make rants about how Steve never changes his mind about anything, but then turn around and make rants because he did change his mind about something. If you like the new rules then use them. If you do not lke the new rules then do not use them. Either way from the point of USPD onward all "official" characters will be published with the new rules; and will continue to be published with new rules as those rules evolve. The HERO System is not static. Do the new rules expand on and/or restrict character construction from FRED? Do the new rules expand on and/or restrict vehicle construction for FRED? Do the new rules in the Bestiary expand on and/or restrict beastie construction from FRED?

This is my point. The adders and advantages and limitations that might be presented in new materials should not attempt to invalidate the obvious correct method to construct a character in FRED. The new stuff should add on but not take away. Otherwise, there is no consistent core set of rules that can be easily understood as such by players from player to player and play group to play group - and that is a weakness too many game systems fall prey to.

To my mind, there has to a horribly broken problem in FRED that needs to be addressed before this sort of action is taken.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
To my mind, there has to a horribly broken problem in FRED that needs to be addressed before this sort of action is taken.
Well perhaps Steve felt that it was a "horribly broken problem" (like so many feel about Damage Shield) and thus fixed it. I am certainly not going to feed your tangent. If you do not like it then do not use it. But when I am discussing rules in this forum I will only discuss official rules, no matter which book, errata, or FAQ they are presented in.

As of USPD the new rules additions are official, and I will use them as such until they become invalidated in either the FAQ or future HERO books. To me this is not something to get up on a soap box about. There are far too many real problems with the system we could be working on.

[tesuji]

And he said...


Originally posted by Monolith

And when I see a rule actually being used in print I definately give it value over what is not.


And he continued...


Originally posted by Monolith

But when I am discussing rules in this forum I will only discuss official rules, no matter which book, errata, or FAQ they are presented in.

yet overhere he says... in response to an in print example...


Originally posted by Monolith

I believe that Steve has since offically ruled that the power would require the Affects Advantage when this discussion came up in regard to Bodyjacker. The errata written for the Bestiary predates the errata information for Bodyjacker. Steve has just never gotten around to changing it.


So, official rules are somewhat more nebulously defined?

[Talon]

Even with the vastly improved quality of character writeups in 5th edition books, I hesitate to use those writeups as primary sources for rules interpretations.

I think that if Steve/DOJ wanted to cynically require people to purchase more books just to get all the rules, they would have put a lot more rules stuff into those books. I think what we see is a refining of the system over time, as the implications of various rules surface. I do agree, however, that such implications and refinings should be referenced in the FAQ, so that people with only FREd can find out what the current state of the rules is.

If the FAQ says "Change Environment works this way", that's an official change. If CKC or USPD says "Change Environment works this way," that's an optional rule, albeit one from an official source. I certainly wouldn't assume that any such rule was being used if I joined a campaign.

[Primal]

Originally posted by Monolith
There are far too many real problems with the system we could be working on.
:eek:

Good to know this now before I buy any more of the books I had been interested in! Actually, it would be best to hear from Steve if this is his true policy.

A core rule book that has all the core rules. An errata for printing errors & accidental omissions.

With the other things vying for my time and money, rules changes outside of those two sources (not including supplemental rules that _expand_ existing rules)--- I just don't want to deal with a game that has that policy.

Am I unworthy for not wanting to buy every thing put forth for the Hero system? ... eh ... if that is what the system is trying to require, then the system is not worthy (IMO).

[Monolith]

Originally posted by tesuji
So, official rules are somewhat more nebulously defined?
You, in your desire to cause trouble in most of the threads you are in, always overlook the obvious. You, apparently, think that Steve Long is a machine and that he can instantly remember all 100 pages of the rules FAQ and errata which has been updated or expanded over the last 18 months. I, on the other hand, understand that Steve has changed several rules over the last 18 months and that he cannot always remember to make the six updates in the FAQ.

To use your example which you are attempting to throw back in my face, DOJ's original policy was that Mind Control could be used without the Affects Real World advantage if the character was using it while Desolid (based upon certain sfx); and thus you see the write-up for the Ghost in the Beastiary as having that power. In the year that has since gone by DOJ changed that policy and ruled that you do need to put the Affects Real World Advantage of the Mind Control (that change was brought about when playtesters like my thought it was inbalancing). So what was legal a year ago is not legal today. The fact that over the last year Steve has forgotten to update the Beastiary errata (but did update the problem in the Millennium City errata) does not change the fact that the new rule is not valid.

I do not expect Steve Long to be perfect. I understand that there are several hundreds of thousands of words written and that no one person can easily remember all of them. You, because of your dislike for the system, get a great deal of pleasure finding those mistakes and throwing them into everyone's face.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Primal
Am I unworthy for not wanting to buy every thing put forth for the Hero system? ... eh ... if that is what the system is trying to require, then the system is not worthy (IMO).
Perhaps you need to learn a little more about the system before you start painting it with such broad strokes. 13 books have been published and this is the first instance that this has ever come up; and even then it is probably just an oversight that it has not been updated to the rules FAQ (I do take into account that Steve has spent the last 4 months intensely working on Fantasy Hero so that it would be ready in time for Gen Con).

[Klytus]

Originally posted by Geoff Speare
Even with the vastly improved quality of character writeups in 5th edition books, I hesitate to use those writeups as primary sources for rules interpretations.

I think that if Steve/DOJ wanted to cynically require people to purchase more books just to get all the rules, they would have put a lot more rules stuff into those books. I think what we see is a refining of the system over time, as the implications of various rules surface. I do agree, however, that such implications and refinings should be referenced in the FAQ, so that people with only FREd can find out what the current state of the rules is.

If the FAQ says "Change Environment works this way", that's an official change. If CKC or USPD says "Change Environment works this way," that's an optional rule, albeit one from an official source. I certainly wouldn't assume that any such rule was being used if I joined a campaign.
I'm all for that. If there are genuine instances of "whoops!", those should be available on a downloadable and constantly updated FAQ.

[Talon]

Originally posted by Klytus
I'm all for that. If there are genuine instances of "whoops!", those should be available on a downloadable and constantly updated FAQ.

Which, for the most part, is the case.

[lemming]

Originally posted by J4y
I see your point, but whats 5 points here or there anyway? Just look at your GM, shrug at each other, and bump your character up by 5 points. Or, 1 if it's in a multiform. Or, 0 if it's in a multiform's multipower or....
Actually my only beef with this is that it's going to overflow an MP somewhere and make you do more math. ;)

[Vondy]

I have no issues with cool new options in new books that expand already existing powers, such as new adders that have been thought up since Fred was completed and first shipped. That will happen in any system from time to time.

What I have an issue with is cool new options that restrict already existing powers as they are written. With that said, however, it only seems to have happened once or twice in the last few years [a pretty good record if you ask me] and could have easily been an oversight, or a "repair" to the system that needs to go into the FAQ.

I think we should simply ask Steve to look at the thread and answer the question -- what was intended and why -- instead of leaping to conclusions we don't have enough information to support in the first place.

[Killer Shrike]

Most importantly, the HERO System is the "toolbox" system. The basic idea is treat it like a buffet line. Take what you want, leave the rest behind the sneeze shield for somebody else.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by D-Man
I have no issues with cool new options in new books that expand already existing powers, such as new adders that have been thought up since Fred was completed and first shipped. That will happen in any system from time to time.

What I have an issue with is cool new options that restrict already existing powers as they are written. With that said, however, it only seems to have happened once or twice in the last few years [a pretty good record if you ask me] and could have easily been an oversight, or a "repair" to the system that needs to go into the FAQ.

I think we should simply ask Steve to look at the thread and answer the question -- what was intended and why -- instead of leaping to conclusions we don't have enough information to support in the first place. I'm not seeing a train wreck here. I just want to avoid one. I started this thread because I didn't want runaway rules changes. Why wait for four or forty more books to come out before I bring this up?

It's a simple problem. Follow this: I run a game at a store. I have a new guy come up and ask if he can play. I am enforcing the new rules in the USPD and mention it, once. He builds his character without owning the USPD and assumes Hero Designer will take care of him there. He builds his character, a water elemental with tk that does not affect porous and a change environment that does not have the adder. He shows up at the game to be told his character is illegal. Now, some groups can handle that gracefully but some can't - and a lot of the ones that can't handle it gracefully play in game stores (in my experience). Of course, that's an great place to turn new people on to or off of a game. So, this policy seems problematic to me.

Yeah, it would be nice to hear a response from Steve.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
Perhaps you need to learn a little more about the system before you start painting it with such broad strokes. 13 books have been published and this is the first instance that this has ever come up; and even then it is probably just an oversight that it has not been updated to the rules FAQ (I do take into account that Steve has spent the last 4 months intensely working on Fantasy Hero so that it would be ready in time for Gen Con). I understand he's busy but I also understand that affects porous is not a new idea. Incidentally, I thought it was silly the first time I saw it.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
You, in your desire to cause trouble in most of the threads you are in, always overlook the obvious. You, apparently, think that Steve Long is a machine and that he can instantly remember all 100 pages of the rules FAQ and errata which has been updated or expanded over the last 18 months. I, on the other hand, understand that Steve has changed several rules over the last 18 months and that he cannot always remember to make the six updates in the FAQ.

To use your example which you are attempting to throw back in my face, DOJ's original policy was that Mind Control could be used without the Affects Real World advantage if the character was using it while Desolid (based upon certain sfx); and thus you see the write-up for the Ghost in the Beastiary as having that power. In the year that has since gone by DOJ changed that policy and ruled that you do need to put the Affects Real World Advantage of the Mind Control (that change was brought about when playtesters like my thought it was inbalancing). So what was legal a year ago is not legal today. The fact that over the last year Steve has forgotten to update the Beastiary errata (but did update the problem in the Millennium City errata) does not change the fact that the new rule is not valid.

I do not expect Steve Long to be perfect. I understand that there are several hundreds of thousands of words written and that no one person can easily remember all of them. You, because of your dislike for the system, get a great deal of pleasure finding those mistakes and throwing them into everyone's face. He had to know he was placing a new restriction on a power from FRED.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Agent X
I'm not seeing a train wreck here. I just want to avoid one. I started this thread because I didn't want runaway rules changes. Why wait for four or forty more books to come out before I bring this up?

It's a simple problem. Follow this: I run a game at a store. I have a new guy come up and ask if he can play. I am enforcing the new rules in the USPD and mention it, once. He builds his character without owning the USPD and assumes Hero Designer will take care of him there. He builds his character, a water elemental with tk that does not affect porous and a change environment that does not have the adder. He shows up at the game to be told his character is illegal. Now, some groups can handle that gracefully but some can't - and a lot of the ones that can't handle it gracefully play in game stores (in my experience). Of course, that's an great place to turn new people on to or off of a game. So, this policy seems problematic to me.

Yeah, it would be nice to hear a response from Steve.

I agree with your fundamental precept, which is why I made a distinction between new options that expand powers as written, and new options that restrict them as written. I think the first can be, if handled properly, good for the system, while the second is detrimental (and fits into your example as given).

I view the "affects pourous" adder, as explained in this thread [I don't have USPD], as falling into the second category. If its a fix for an oversight in the sacred text that is Fred I have no issues with it insofar as it gets FAQ'd. If its something else I would be more inclined to yell foul and start a picket line in front of steves apartment :D

Why don't we mail him and see what he says?

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Agent X
He had to know he was placing a new restriction on a power from FRED. Or perhaps, in his mind, the restriction was always there and he only belatedly realized that it had not been directly expressed. I know Ive done that before; forgotten to mention bits that seem totally obvious to me.

Whichever, I really think that this is all much to do about nothing. Eventually somebody at DOJ will take a break from thier breakneck schedule and get around to sticking it into the FAQ.

[Kristopher]

It seems that most of the people who have commented in this thread have agreed that expansions on the rules and powers are good, but that rules changes that restrict and/or increase the cost of a power that are printed in supplements are detrimental to the HERO system.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
Whichever, I really think that this is all much to do about nothing. Eventually somebody at DOJ will take a break from thier breakneck schedule and get around to sticking it into the FAQ.
I agree. Steve has just been too busy to worry about the small stuff. Eventually the only two new adders from USPD (both for Change Enviroment) which are not in the FAQ will be included. It is just an oversight due to time constraints.

Edited to add: Actually only the Multiple Combat Effect Adder for Change Enviroment is new. The Varying Combat Effect Adder was already in the Rules FAQ.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Kristopher
It seems that most of the people who have commented in this thread have agreed that expansions on the rules and powers are good, but that rules changes that restrict and/or increase the cost of a power that are printed in supplements are detrimental to the HERO system.
I think this just has to do with the fact that people do not like change. The odd thing is that the HERO System has changed a great deal over the last 22 years and 99.9% of those changes (both positive and negative to powers) have been good for the game. I do not think people should get too hung-up on changes. They are just part of the evolution of the game. People forget things, and change their minds, even when a manuscript has been sitting around for 2 years waiting to be published. :)

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Monolith
I think this just has to do with the fact that people do not like change. The odd thing is that the HERO System has changed a great deal over the last 22 years and 99.9% of those changes (both positive and negative to powers) have been good for the game. I do not think people should get too hung-up on changes. They are just part of the evolution of the game. People forget things, and change their minds, even when a manuscript has been sitting around for 2 years waiting to be published. :) Wasnt it longer than two years that it sat idle? I remember Steve put up a summary of significant changes in his Longshot article for Haymaker many years ago, where in Megascale was mentioned, along with the increased cost for Aid and some other goodness.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
I think this just has to do with the fact that people do not like change. The odd thing is that the HERO System has changed a great deal over the last 22 years and 99.9% of those changes (both positive and negative to powers) have been good for the game. I do not think people should get too hung-up on changes. They are just part of the evolution of the game. People forget things, and change their minds, even when a manuscript has been sitting around for 2 years waiting to be published. :) I don't dislike change. I was glad to see the affects porous adder wasn't included in FRED.:)

I dislike changes that invalidate a character construction that is legal insofar as FRED is concerned. If a new guy joins a group and buys FRED and builds a character that conforms to what FRED says, not what the game designers forgot to or chose not to include, the new guy shouldn't go through the added stress of finding out that he needed to check the rules FAQ or game supplements. I always thought FAQs were for frequently asked questions about how to interpret complicated areas of a power or powers, etc. I thought the FAQ was meant to clear up confusion, not change the rules of the official rulebook. The way I read Change Environment in FRED, I never would have gone to the FAQ to find out that the power had been restricted beyond its initial description. Should there be a disclaimer on FRED that reads, "Oh, by the way, you need to check the FAQ to see if character construction rules have been changed?"

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
Wasnt it longer than two years that it sat idle?
You could be right about that. I have only been a part of the online community (the message boards and mailing list) for around 10 months. Most of my knowledge about that comes from hearsay. My memory seems to stretch back to 1999 when I first heard a 5th Edition was going to be done. It might have been before that though.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
"Oh, by the way, you need to check the FAQ to see if character construction rules have been changed?"
Not to continue the debate, but if the FAQ has no relevance than why have it at all? I am sure that Steve could save several hours a week if he just stopped answering people's questions and told them to just use whatever interpretation of FREd they want. :)

The FAQ is there to correct and make clear the rules in FREd. Sometimes those rules corrections are positive and sometimes those rules changes are negative. Eventually DOJ will get around to publishing an updated version of FREd. Until that time we must use FREd, the FAQ, and the Errata to get the most concise rules version possible.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Monolith
You could be right about that. I have only been a part of the online community (the message boards and mailing list) for around 10 months. Most of my knowledge about that comes from hearsay. My memory seems to stretch back to 1999 when I first heard a 5th Edition was going to be done. It might have been before that though. Im positive it was before 99; I was doing Haymaker while I was still in the Marines, and my EAS was in 98. So it would have been at least in 98 and probably 97. Maybe Bob G., Surbrook, or of course Dave M. might remember better; I know Bob G. was on Haymaker when I started; I cant recall if Surbrook was or if he came later with the inestimable Surbrook's Stuff.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
Not to continue the debate, but if the FAQ has no relevance than why have it at all? I am sure that Steve could save several hours a week if he just stopped answering people's questions and told them to just use whatever interpretation of FREd they want. :)

The FAQ is there to correct and make clear the rules in FREd. Sometimes those rules corrections are positive and sometimes those rules changes are negative. Eventually DOJ will get around to publishing an updated version of FREd. Until that time we must use FREd, the FAQ, and the Errata to get the most concise rules version possible. Clearing up misconceptions about the rules isn't quite the same thing as a rules change. I didn't have any questions about how to use Change Environment and then USPD comes out...

Steve's not doing people a favor when he answers their questions. He's keeping his customers from going elsewhere. I like DOJ but I am a customer, not a fanboy. Should DOJ follow such policies that you provide as options when someone has a criticism of something that DOJ is doing, it may well be negative for DOJ as well as the customer.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
Should DOJ follow such policies that you provide as options when someone has a criticism of something that DOJ is doing, it may well be negative for DOJ as well as the customer.
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here. Talkin' about Steve not answering questions

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
Talkin' about Steve not answering questions
Oh. Well Steve would never stop answering questions. Steve actually likes his fans. I was being facetious. :)

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
Oh. Well Steve would never stop answering questions. Steve actually likes his fans. I was being facetious. :) I'm actually surprised at how quickly he responds to questions. My complaint is a tempest in a teapot, at present, and I love many of the things that have been done with 5th Edition. I also know that by making my tastes known, I represent some, or at least one, member(s) of the gaming community. By pointing out my tastes, I am putting in my "vote" for how the game should be conducted.

What do I want in this case: I want any character that is built following the rules in FRED to be considered a validly constructed character in any appropriate genre game barring house rules. I really don't think that is too much to ask.

[Killer Shrike]

Ok, Im really not seeing the big deal here. I mean, what is the problem? Its just an Adder. Its not like its a +2 mandatory Advantage or a major change in how the game system functions.

Ignore it, grandfather it, email Steve a reminder of it, whatever. Buy why stress over it? :confused:

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by Monolith
I think this just has to do with the fact that people do not like change. The odd thing is that the HERO System has changed a great deal over the last 22 years and 99.9% of those changes (both positive and negative to powers) have been good for the game. I do not think people should get too hung-up on changes. They are just part of the evolution of the game. People forget things, and change their minds, even when a manuscript has been sitting around for 2 years waiting to be published. :)

With me, it's not that I don't like change.

I specifically don't like rule changes in supplements. It's a gaming pet-peeve. If I buy the basic book, that should be enough to run the game. Rules additions, extra powers, extra abilities, I can deal with, and sometimes I even like them. But actual *changes* to the rules, no way.

Specific to this case, I don't like the fact that rules changes requiring the expenditure of more points for the same effect are being tacked on in supplements. If they also end up in the FAQ or another freely and readily available form, I can deal with them.

Personally, I consider the FAQ a -- maybe THE -- valid place for those kinds of changes.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
What do I want in this case: I want any character that is built following the rules in FRED to be considered a validly constructed character in any appropriate genre game barring house rules. I really don't think that is too much to ask.
It is not too much to ask. But you have then just invalidated 100 pages of Rules FAQ. You cannot really have it both ways by toting the FAQ when it benefits you and ignoring it when it does not. Fully half the questions in the FAQ are about understanding the interpretation of the rules in FREd. If we did not include the FAQ information in those instances then people would still be using FREd differently because each GM and group would interpret the book rules differently.

In any event, if someone does not agree with something in either FREd or the FAQ they are quite free to house rule it however they see fit. That is even in the book. :)

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
It is not too much to ask. But you have then just invalidated 100 pages of Rules FAQ. You cannot really have it both ways by toting the FAQ when it benefits you and ignoring it when it does not. Fully half the questions in the FAQ are about understanding the interpretation of the rules in FREd. If we did not include the FAQ information in those instances then people would still be using FREd differently because each GM and group would interpret the book rules differently.

In any event, if someone does not agree with something in either FREd or the FAQ they are quite free to house rule it however they see fit. That is even in the book. :) Wow, this parallels the Judicial Restraint/Judicial Activism debate concerning the Supreme Court.:)

I am refuting any portion of the FAQ that changes the rules in FRED, not the portions of the FAQ that interpret the rules. On this issue, if DOJ agreed with me, I could have my cake and eat it too.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
Ok, Im really not seeing the big deal here. I mean, what is the problem? Its just an Adder. Its not like its a +2 mandatory Advantage or a major change in how the game system functions.

Ignore it, grandfather it, email Steve a reminder of it, whatever. Buy why stress over it? :confused: Because I have too much spare time.:)

Like I have said. I want to make a stink so DOJ carefully considers any rules changes that make a character illegal that would be legal without such information. Players do join new groups and join pick up games at stores and it would be helpful to keep FRED sacred until there actually is a 6th edition.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
Perhaps you need to learn a little more about the system before you start painting it with such broad strokes. 13 books have been published and this is the first instance that this has ever come up; and even then it is probably just an oversight that it has not been updated to the rules FAQ (I do take into account that Steve has spent the last 4 months intensely working on Fantasy Hero so that it would be ready in time for Gen Con). So... You are telling him he has to buy all 13 books to be worthy.:rolleyes:

[Primal]

heh.. I have been playing Hero since third edition..

to clarify my position, I was reacting to comments along these lines-

The rules FAQ is full of hundreds of new additions and clarifications. Why should published books be any different?
if there can be rules restrictions added in books that don't make it into a freely available errata, i have a problem.. you are now saying its absence from the FAQ/errata is temporary oversite and not policy, so i have no problem with that, once it is rectified..

i may dislike "affects porous", and may house rule it away, but I can know it is official policy from FREd + errata.. I don't have to have run across it in some obscure (to me) book..

[Blue Angel]

That whole affects porous thing is a misnomer anyway. Something that is porous can absorb water. Like sponges or or certain bassaltic rocks that are filled with holes. Doesn't he mean affects liquids?

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Blue Angel
That whole affects porous thing is a misnomer anyway. Something that is porous can absorb water. Like sponges or or certain bassaltic rocks that are filled with holes. Doesn't he mean affects liquids?

He meant liquids, but until he FAQs it out it means affects sponges. :p

In that case I cry foul! +5 or +10 points to have your TK affect a sponge is horrendously overpriced.

Why are sponges exempt after all. I mean, what's so special about sponges that they are inherently immune to TK. Is this a meta-rule? Hero Meta Rule No. 10: Sponges are inherently immune to superpowers?

Time for a house rule...

[Blue Angel]

ROFDL

HAHAHAHAHA:)

Hey people have pores. It must affect people.

[Kristopher]

Poor us, we can't be affected by telekinesis.

[Blue Angel]

Oooo. Groaner. Just jealous cause I didn't think of it first.

With that sponge super power immunity the good guys could realy get their clocks cleaned.

[J4y]

Why are sponges exempt after all. I mean, what's so special about sponges that they are inherently immune to TK. Is this a meta-rule? Hero Meta Rule No. 10: Sponges are inherently immune to superpowers?

Ohhhh, who lives in a pineapple under the sea?

[Kristopher]

Yellow, absorbant, and POURUS is he!

[Superskrull]

Well, I have carefully read this thread that may actually be indirectly my fault since I'm the obsessive guy reading over the Until book and grumbling to Agent X after the game this weekend. I was trying to figure out this Martinez Scale, BTW, and it seems kinda inconsistent.
Anyway, I read the prior posts and I'm gonna talk too, for what it's worth.

When it comes to rule mods for characters I have previously constructed, I am of exactly one mind; I already balanced those point totals. I did it using the 5th Ed rulebook and a calculator. They balanced and there was no attempt to cheese a few points here and there. Tell me why I have to look at a newer book and go online to check the FAQ I have no interest in reading.

FAQ stands for frequently asked questions, not for rules errata. Why should there be anything but clarifications of hazy points in rule use in a FAQ? If I wanted a new rule book, I'd start asking for one. I'd ask for it in print, too.

The big problem I have with these alterations to the rules isn't that I don't want a change but that the change I see is one that is causing further alterations. In D&D, your character sheet can change due to all sorts of circumstances. Gods grant you additional Strength, touching the cursed relic of Whazzat makes you kill plants by looking at them, drawing a card can add 50000 XP or steal your soul. That happens, the only thing you do is note the changes on the sheet. In Hero, you not only have stats, they cost points. Beefcake, hidden deity of gymnasiums gives you +5 Str for saving him from Infomercial Hell, that goes on the sheet as " 5pts -Blessing of Beefcake: +5 Str" & 5 XP are added to your total or listed as Beefcake Bonus 5pts over by disads and XP. Tell me why I have to suddenly add Stupid New Rule Bonus
6pts to Water Witch's sheet because her book-legal Str 50 TK Water only (-1/2) now costs more or lower her TK to Str 43 or so to make up the 10 active point difference.

The problem isn't that there was a change, it's that the change messes with the characters and they need to be rebalanced, pointwise. It's annoying to be told that I need to keep shelling out the bucks and checking the web lest my character grow obsolete.

[tesuji]

[/B][/QUOTE]


Originally posted by Monolith
You, in your desire to cause trouble in most of the threads you are in, always overlook the obvious.

Well, now that we have gotten past the seemingly obligatory "first, attack the messenger" snipe...

Originally posted by Monolith

You, apparently, think that Steve Long is a machine and that he can instantly remember all 100 pages of the rules FAQ and errata which has been updated or expanded over the last 18 months.

Since i did not mention MR Long in my post, this is an interesting, imaginative, and downright fantastic thing to derive from my post, to say the least. It could just be an extension of the "attack the messenger" opening salvo you seem to prefer. hard to say.

Originally posted by Monolith

I, on the other hand, understand that Steve has changed several rules over the last 18 months and that he cannot always remember to make the six updates in the FAQ.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Monolith

To use your example which you are attempting to throw back in my face,

Actually, i am just trying to clear up what i felt might be an inaccurate impression. The first couple seemed to be leading one to the conclusion that "monolith views official" as printed, in the faq and such. But the latter seems to extend it to also include a broader scope of things... "things Monolith thinks ought to be in print" or maybe just "things monolith thinks steve said at some point even if they are not in print or in the faq or in the erratta." and so forth.

regardless, when commented on which rules should be used in discussions, the notion of printed or online... something that has a publically accessible quality to it so that everyone can be on the same page seems very plausible and reasonable... but once you choose to include "things i heard" from any source, so that there is no common frame of reference, then you have gone well beyond such a plausible set.

Your first couple of points seemed to define the former, but the second seemed to expand it to reference what you heard even if not in print or faq or erratta and so forth... not commonly available.

If you see that as something that should not be discussed, or is not important, thats OK.

Originally posted by Monolith

DOJ's original policy was that Mind Control could be used without the Affects Real World advantage if the character was using it while Desolid (based upon certain sfx); and thus you see the write-up for the Ghost in the Beastiary as having that power. In the year that has since gone by DOJ changed that policy and ruled that you do need to put the Affects Real World Advantage of the Mind Control (that change was brought about when playtesters like my thought it was inbalancing). So what was legal a year ago is not legal today. The fact that over the last year Steve has forgotten to update the Beastiary errata (but did update the problem in the Millennium City errata) does not change the fact that the new rule is not valid.

So, the in print and commonly available resources say that it depends on FX and that both charging for the advantage and not charging for the advantage (as described in the HERO5 book) are permissable. Given the erratta, there are examples of both.

This however, should not be considered as official because somewhere you heard someone say that it wasn't.

Ok, i get this and can accept this as your view of official.

But it seems to be an exception to the notion of giving more priority to EXAMPLES in print or in erratta faq than other sources.

But, the point was to get you to clarify your scope of official and such in the light of those comments.

Thank you for that.

Originally posted by Monolith

I do not expect Steve Long to be perfect.

Has anoyone said they did?

Originally posted by Monolith

I understand that there are several hundreds of thousands of words written and that no one person can easily remember all of them.

Absolutely... has anoyone said they think he should?

Originally posted by Monolith

You, because of your dislike for the system, get a great deal of pleasure finding those mistakes and throwing them into everyone's face.

And now we have the obligatory "attack the messenger" parting shot.

It would be better if you could let your personal grudges against me give way to just discussion without needless pot shotting once in a while.

The goal was to get you to clear up your views on official, particularly after you chose to make it such a big deal in your posts.

Thanks for helping with that.

much appreciated.

[tesuji]

Well i haven't chimed in with my opinions so i will now.

Summary of what it seems to me to have been over...

Most everyone is cool with and expects new books to provide new rules and additions and expansions. That is not a problem.

Some people do not like it when new books provide erratta, changes to current rules, in the same vein. This gets particularly disagreeable when these rules are not in the FAQ/erratta for common availability.

So, would it be more or less preferrable if DOJ began doing something along these lines...

1. When true erratta, a change to how a previous rules was written (example requiring +5 adder for more than 1 effect in CE) then it is given its own sort of box, maybe a consistent square box with round edges or whatever, so it is clearly distinguished from addendum and is earmarked as erratta.

2. before any book goes to print, any items in the special boxes is added to the faq/erratta.

Now, before the fans get all up in arms about how DOj is pressed for time yahhdee yahdee... remember that the "this happens so rarely" argument also made cuts this out. if indeed the erratta is one or two items every 18 months, then it should not take too long to do it.

The bigg3est hit will be the graymatter time spent looking at the new thangs and thinking about whether it is addendum or erratta... which i think we all admit would be time well spent and something that should be considered.

Just an idea.

[Talon]

What I think is needed (and I might do after GenCon) is some sort of condensation of the FAQ which focuses on stuff you should know for character creation. Right now it's very hard to look through the FAQ for "stuff that I might want to know when making a character". I believe that it would be possible to present that information in a more friendly manner, and keep that updated as the FAQ changes.

[Agent X]

You know guys, there are plenty of Hero gamers who don't visit this website. When you guys say it's all good if it is in the FAQ, I just cringe. There are many, many players who will never read the FAQ (I think a lot of the posters on the board forget that not every gamer is a computer geek). That means that the problems I fear will not go away by placing every rules change in the FAQ, especially as the FAQ is not clearly constructed for such a purpose as already pointed out by another.

It's simple to me, characters built using only FRED as a source, should be absolutely legal.

A Point to consider about Dungeons and Dragons, at least in the old ADnD days - they had a billion and one rules supplements but I never remember them invalidating rules from their core rulebooks - anything that deviated from standard rules was "optional".

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
It's simple to me, characters built using only FRED as a source, should be absolutely legal.
We understand your position. The only part you keep failing to understand is that there are mistakes in FREd. In Change Enviroment, for example, It was Steve's intention that the power could only have 1 Combat Effect unless the GM ruled otherwise. The fact that Steve did not make this clear in FREd is why it was put in the FAQ.

Even though FREd was sitting around on a shelf for 2+ years it was still published in a hurry and certain things were overlooked. If FREd were being published today the playtesters would have had a chance to go over it with a fine-tooth comb and many of the FAQ clarifications would have been caught and added to the book before it went to print. As it is we must deal with an imperfect FREd. So ultimately it comes down to playing by the "written" rules (as given in the book) or playing by the "intended" rules (as clarified in the FAQ). In either event this will not change until an updated version of FREd is published.

And also while I do understand your point about everyone not having access to the FAQ, you, and the other people on this message boards, do. So when we are discussing the rules here we all have access to the same information; and when we are playing with people who do not we have the ability to tell them the new rules. That is a big part of the GM's job.

[Lord Liaden]

Originally posted by Geoff Speare
What I think is needed (and I might do after GenCon) is some sort of condensation of the FAQ which focuses on stuff you should know for character creation. Right now it's very hard to look through the FAQ for "stuff that I might want to know when making a character". I believe that it would be possible to present that information in a more friendly manner, and keep that updated as the FAQ changes.

Geoff, that would be a wonderful contribution, and I'm sure you'll get cyber hugs and kisses from Herodom Assembled if you take that on.

What I feel would be really helpful, though, would be a compilation of all the new Adders, Advantages and Limitations that have made it into the FAQ (and maybe the USPD). Many people don't even know that they exist unless they happen to stumble across them. I'm not sure whether Steve Long would object to putting the Data Base ones up on the website for free, but those in the FAQ are free already, so should pose no copyright problem.

[Killer Shrike]

Actually, if Ben & Steve are amenable they could create a seperate Forum ("FAQ"), give Geoff (or some other poor volunteer) Admin rights to it, and make it non-postable for non-Admins.

Then he could come up with an orderly methodology to add each Power, Advantage, Lim, etc as a Topic, and then copy and paste the FAQ bits into it.

This would make it searchable using the boards search engine. New info would naturally bounce to the top. Etc.....

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
We understand your position. The only part you keep failing to understand is that there are mistakes in FREd. In Change Enviroment, for example, It was Steve's intention that the power could only have 1 Combat Effect unless the GM ruled otherwise. The fact that Steve did not make this clear in FREd is why it was put in the FAQ.

Even though FREd was sitting around on a shelf for 2+ years it was still published in a hurry and certain things were overlooked. If FREd were being published today the playtesters would have had a chance to go over it with a fine-tooth comb and many of the FAQ clarifications would have been caught and added to the book before it went to print. As it is we must deal with an imperfect FREd. So ultimately it comes down to playing by the "written" rules (as given in the book) or playing by the "intended" rules (as clarified in the FAQ). In either event this will not change until an updated version of FREd is published.

And also while I do understand your point about everyone not having access to the FAQ, you, and the other people on this message boards, do. So when we are discussing the rules here we all have access to the same information; and when we are playing with people who do not we have the ability to tell them the new rules. That is a big part of the GM's job. And yet, regardless of Mr. Long's intent, there is no harm, no foul to playing without that adder. Had DOJ paused to notice, they would have perceived there was no hue and cry for the horribly broken change environment rules concerning multiple effects. It just wasn't a problem. If there's no problem then the "solution's" cost of providing points of confusion becomes the true problem. Frankly, I have never heard anyone complain when somebody assumed TK picked up liquids. I have been playing the game for over 10 years and that has never come up as an issue for my groups or in stories other gamers have told me. What I have heard about it was only criticism when it was included in the Ultimate Mentalist.

It's one thing if Mr. Long had forgotten to make endurance costs increase for autofire attacks or something to that effect, but muddying the waters over a +5 adder to change environment is merely a nuisance. If these are the only items that were intended to be included that weren't, we could have lived well enough without them. If he wants to make a rules change that seems warranted by the buzz I have heard among players on the boards, in stores, and in my group, he should feel free to fix damage shield because it is messed up.

Sometimes, Monolith, I think you think everyone here works for DOJ.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
Sometimes, Monolith, I think you think everyone here works for DOJ.
I do not think any such thing. But then again I do not think we need an 80 post thread because one over zealous poster wants to make a mountain out of a mole hill. Go figure. :)

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
I do not think any such thing. But then again I do not think we need an 80 post thread because one over zealous poster wants to make a mountain out of a mole hill. Go figure. :) Smiley faces don't change the tenor of your statements. You were condescending to Tesuji and myself and continue to condescend to me. If you don't think the subject was worth 80 posts then you don't have to post. You seem to get awfully defensive any time someone has a beef with something DOJ is doing. I don't think it's a public company so I don't imagine you own any stock.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
Smiley faces don't change the tenor of your statements. You were condescending to Tesuji and myself and continue to condescend to me.
That is because you are a reactionists. Everytime something comes along which you do not like you immediately jump upon your message board soapbox and spout to the world how it is all wrong. This issue is not a big dea. I think I have only said 3-4 times now that if you do not like the change then do not use it. Of course you keep ignore that statement for some reason.

DOJ has changed numerous rules over the last 18 months. I can only guess that as you learn of each of the changes you will jump right back up upon your soapbox and start spouting how they are all wrong too. But every time you do that I will still be around saying "Calm down. It is not that big of a deal. It is just a rules change."

And by the way, I have no particular love for DOJ. They and I have butted heads on more than one occassion. I just happen to have a stronger dislike for people who spend all their time telling me the sky is falling every time a cloud passes over head.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
That is because you are a reactionists. Everytime something comes along which you do not like you immediately jump upon your message board soapbox and spout to the world how it is all wrong. This issue is not a big dea. I think I have only said 3-4 times now that if you do not like the change then do not use it. Of course you keep ignore that statement for some reason.

DOJ has changed numerous rules over the last 18 months. I can only guess that as you learn of each of the changes you will jump right back up upon your soapbox and start spouting how they are all wrong too. But every time you do that I will still be around saying "Calm down. It is not that big of a deal. It is just a rules change."

And by the way, I have no particular love for DOJ. They and I have butted heads on more than one occassion. I just happen to have a stronger dislike for people who spend all their time telling me the sky is falling every time a cloud passes over head. Good night. Have you read my posts? I never claimed the sky is falling. Please show me where I said the sky was falling? I kept on saying that I thought characters built only using FRED as a source should be 100% legal and you disagreed with me, every time, and I responded. I also brought up concerns with the use of the FAQ and you responded.

If this is simply a molehill why do you respond. It should be beneath your notice.

What do you think the forums are for? I thought they are for people to speak about issues they are interested in. If you are "above" my petty interests then just go on about your business. Talk about soapbox, whoo! I didn't know you have a dislike of me but I... think I can cope with that.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
If this is simply a molehill why do you respond. It should be beneath your notice.
Well I have to respond because I am over 1,000 posts behind you. That's what I get for not spending all my time in the non-gaming forums. :)

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Monolith
I realize you are new to the boards, but most of the things the vast majority of HERO System players learned about the game came from character examples, not book examples. The fact that you did not buy CKC does not mean that the majority of HERO System gamers did not as well. And when I see a rule actually being used in print I definately give it value over what is not.

And the rules FAQ does state that a GM should generally not allow more than one Combat Effect per Change Enviroment, but that the GM can allow it if they wish; and we all know the GM can allow anything if he wishes. :)

I haven't read through the thread entirely yet but I have to pause and say I VEHEMENTLY disagree.

It does not matter if the "majority of HERO System gamers" do or do not buy a book published post-5th edition. The 5th edition is the rule book, the only rule book until the 6th or "5.5" or whatever HERO puts out that IS specifically a rulebook. You and I ought to be able to sit and play a game based upon that and nothing else (save common sense, yes, I grant), otherwise we're back to the same house rule situation you previously claimed to dislike. I think it's folly to assume every HERO gamer will buy every HERO supplement and wade through those and the FAQ and the errata to arrive at the "correct" rules. Supplements are really like house rules and settings, they should not be mistaken as "required" to the degree that any rules are required.

Now, I grant you that the errata and FAQ are specific and deliberate and clear changes to the rules. I have a problem though with a FAQ that continues to grow and get so detailed. HERO is very much becoming a "bible study" game with the FAQ and supplements. Now nearly every game gets to some point of this, of course, but a sprawling FAQ and oddball conflicts spread througout the "gospel" is creating an increasingly interpretive situation.

And to the FAQ, I say that "should generally not allow" is an important difference from "should not allow". I think it's clear in the former case, the actual "should generally not" case, that there is no rule even implying that an adder is necessary, simply that this is something to be done with caution, for which no specific game balancer exists.

Then you have the confusion that Hero Designer will not support these many incremental changes yet purports to "enforce the rules". Monolith, I give you credit for consistency so this is not directed at you - I realize you want HD to support these incremental changes per each product. And you're right in one respect - HERO can't have it both ways. They can't be a living breathing "evolving" ruleset and claim a software that maintains all the complex rules.

So to me the obvious thing is for HERO to simplify, first of all, and second of all for the considered standard practice for cons, etc., to be the 5th edition book and anything outside of that to be considered a house rule. Of course you can say "House Rule: Adopting Adder as published for CE". But it has to be STATED and cannot be assumed.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Monolith
...But when I am discussing rules in this forum I will only discuss official rules, no matter which book, errata, or FAQ they are presented in. ...

What if they are printed by another company under license? Are those official?


...To me this is not something to get up on a soap box about. There are far too many real problems with the system we could be working on.

Like your outrage that Hero Designer won't put the Adders from USPD/the FAQ into its product, even though it would take you 5 minutes to do so yourself? You see, I think this is the root of the other issue you are concerned about, and philosophically I think the bigger issue IS this issue of things being added throughout the lifecycle. Especially those that don't seem of any great consequence - Damage Shield, whichever way it changes, clearly has a more obvious points and balance impact, given the outcry, where was the concern on CE driving this? Someone's character was really unbalanced by 5 or 10 points?

[Monolith]

Originally posted by zornwil
ISo to me the obvious thing is for HERO to simplify, first of all, and second of all for the considered standard practice for cons, etc., to be the 5th edition book and anything outside of that to be considered a house rule. Of course you can say "House Rule: Adopting Adder as published for CE". But it has to be STATED and cannot be assumed.
5th Edition did simplify. The problem is everyone then started asking DOJ: "what if?" All those thousands of "what ifs" changed the rules over the last 18 months. We started asking questions which Steve never envisioned when he originally started writing the manuscript some 5 years ago. So now the game is already HERO System 5.5. Just in this case the .5 version is contained in a separate Genre-By-Genre document and a 100 page FAQ.

I do agree that we should be able to pick up FREd and play a game, and for the most part we can, but that does not change the fact that the rules are continuing to evolve and expand; and most of the new rules have only made the game better.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith
5th Edition did simplify. The problem is everyone then started asking DOJ: "what if?" All those thousands of "what ifs" changed the rules over the last 18 months. We started asking questions which Steve never envisioned when he originally started writing the manuscript some 5 years ago. So now the game is already HERO System 5.5. Just in this case the .5 version is contained in a separate Genre-By-Genre document and a 100 page FAQ.

I do agree that we should be able to pick up FREd and play a game, and for the most part we can, but that does not change the fact that the rules are continuing to evolve and expand; and most of the new rules have only made the game better. It's the "for the most part" in your statement that creates an obvious conflict between your position and mine. Also, it is very debatable about whether the changes are good are not.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by zornwil
What if they are printed by another company under license? Are those official?
The only things which are official are those which DOJ dictates as such. I do not think anything in the Kandris Seal, for example, is considered "official." :)


Like your outrage that Hero Designer won't put the Adders from USPD/the FAQ into its product, even though it would take you 5 minutes to do so yourself? You see, I think this is the root of the other issue you are concerned about, and philosophically I think the bigger issue IS this issue of things being added throughout the lifecycle.
Hero Designer is not the issue. I personally understand that the rules are always changing. My issues with Hero Designer is that Dan refuses to change the software to reflect the rules Steve has put in place.


Especially those that don't seem of any great consequence - Damage Shield, whichever way it changes, clearly has a more obvious points and balance impact, given the outcry, where was the concern on CE driving this? Someone's character was really unbalanced by 5 or 10 points?
I happen to like change. A constantly improving game is one that I want to play. If this game did not change people would still be having the Great Linked Debates every month.

I also have no issues over 5 points. I do not even think it is an issue. I see it as nothing more than a rules change that you can either use or not use.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X
It's the "for the most part" in your statement that creates an obvious conflict between your position and mine.
I think we can both sit down at a table and play a game directly from FREd. When I first started my new campaign I made of point of only playing with the rules from FREd for the first 6 months. I wanted to test the rules before I started changing them. There is no major problems with them. But having said that many new rules and rules changes have made the game better over the last 18 months (especially for people who are not into playing simple character concepts).


Also, it is very debatable about whether the changes are good are not.
Any change is always debatable (as this thread has clearly shown). But I did say "most of the new rules," not all the new rules. :)

[Vondy]

I don't think rules fixes should be in the faq.

They should be separated out into a nicely formatted eratta document. It should be available as an insert in later print runs and/or as a download on the website, in which case there should be an insert saying: the eratta can be found at x-url.

I don't have the time or the inclination to sift through 100+ pages of commonly given answers for what should be a grand total of 3-4 pages worth of "fixed" material to date -- at most. I shouldn't have to check back on a regular basis, either. The eratta should be updated on a quarterly (?) basis as opposed to whenever, too. I say this because then I know how often to check for said "fixes".

Some may suggest -- "boy, people will love you if you parse the rules eratta out from the FAQ for them so have at it!" I most certainly will not. I am not an employee of DOJ. Its their job to provide up to date and user friendly customer resources. Its their product. I wouldn't expect them to update it as often as the FAQ, however. 3-4 times a year at most.

Until its parsed out FRED and my House Rule doc are the law of the land.

That and... the colors on that FAQ have to change.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Monolith
...the HERO System has changed a great deal over the last 22 years and 99.9% of those changes (both positive and negative to powers) have been good for the game. ...

Please cite those changes and WHICH 99.9% were the positive ones - I don't buy that it's over 60%. :D

(just figured I should balance my last couple replies, Monolith, with something more light-hearted)

Oh but I can't stop! Changes....hmmm.....I'm not sure. I think the majority of incremental changes have been good in that more than not have been towards the direction of consistency. Otherwise though too much detail and too much "legalese" has been introduced with each succesive rulebook, and too many things which seemed to work well have been tinkered unduly with. More importantly to most though, I'd have to say that on the whole the core rules could and should be much shorter with more open-endedness and interpretation required but with the greatest possible consistency and the clearest underlying design philosophy laid bare so that any issues can be worked out among consenting adults based on that. Something like the 5th edition as we know it now could then be a tremendous supplementary material, with expansion and with "one man's notions" of how the more "bare" core rules should be implemented. We don't need as part of official rules so much information on Transform or Shape Shift, we just need the bases for how powers interact and the essential costing and characteristics for these powers. The positive thing is that then a book like the 5th edition wouldn't have to explain much on the basics and could spend more time on the interpretive aspects and how a particular cost was changed or tweaked, what some of the conflicts regarding how to craft a power/effect have been, etc..

As to the companion software, it should just be that one more step modular so that if you want to adopt any of the various extra add-ons you can do so with ease, getting an update for each tidbit (literally 100s or 1000s of extra rules, lims, etc.) you want to use much in the way plug-ins work for audio programs and such.

On the positive side, with Sidekick and the hierarchal templates for HD, things are looking sort of like this anyway.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by D-Man
I don't think rules fixes should be in the faq.
I agree. Trying to find anything in the FAQ is a major pain in the butt. New rules should have its own little section on the message boards, IMO.

As far as the colors go, have you ever downloaded the PDF? I do not think the newer ones are using the webpage colorschemes.

[zornwil]

This is one chorus we seem to be singing the same tune on, I definitely agree the rules shifts or omissions should be in a single errata doc and not something you have to go through the FAQ (and btw, these are not always "Frequently" asked) to find.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Monolith
The only things which are official are those which DOJ dictates as such. I do not think anything in the Kandris Seal, for example, is considered "official." :)


Hero Designer is not the issue. I personally understand that the rules are always changing. My issues with Hero Designer is that Dan refuses to change the software to reflect the rules Steve has put in place.


I happen to like change. A constantly improving game is one that I want to play. If this game did not change people would still be having the Great Linked Debates every month.

I also have no issues over 5 points. I do not even think it is an issue. I see it as nothing more than a rules change that you can either use or not use.

But your issue with HD is rooted in the issue that the core rules are changing - but Dan wants to stick with the book and generally its errata as much as possible. This is the philosophical underpinning, what changes are canonical and which are more ephemeral. And how those are identified. So identifying and "fixing" that problem (I'm not convinced it needs to be fixed yet but Agent X raised a valid issue, as evidenced by your many replies Monolith) is paramount to understanding how HD fits into it. Right now I don't blame Dan at all - it is not yet entirely in the FAQ or the errata. So by a "strict constructionist" method it is not a rule yet.

I have no issue with "change" in the sense that I would like lots of new rules and even lots of rules change in the supplements. And personally I'd like HD to embrace all those. My point is that all these things are "optional" though, essentially "house rules". I have tons of house rules, some of which are holdovers from previous editions of HERO, others which are just changes. And they do continue to change incrementally. But that's nothing to do with what an orthodox HERO game should be.

I realize you nor anyone else cares about the 5 points - it's the principle underlying we disagree on. I feel strongly that the construction presented in USPD is okay, but should be OPTIONAL and not a requirement as it is not in the books AND (now it comes into play) for the trivial effect it has, it should not be considered canonical until such a time as it does make it into the regular rulesbook - like years from now. If it were fixing some great wrong then it would be an understandable errata, but it's not.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by zornwil
But your issue with HD is rooted in the issue that the core rules are changing - but Dan wants to stick with the book and generally its errata as much as possible.
That is only partially right.

Dan does not include most of the errata or FAQ material in his updates. Dan's ideology deals with producing software which works with FREd and only FREd (except for his desire to include the stuff which he likes like the material from UMA). In that instance HD is the perfect product for someone like Agent X. I, on the other hand, think HD should evolve to include all the new rules in the FAQ and the errata.

This really is not the right place for a HD discussion anway. And besides that, I have already moved on from HD. :)

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Monolith
That is only partially right.

Dan does not include most of the errata or FAQ material in his updates. Dan's ideology deals with producing software which works with FREd and only FREd (except for his desire to include the stuff which he likes like the material from UMA). In that instance HD is the perfect product for someone like Agent X. I, on the other hand, think HD should evolve to include all the new rules in the FAQ and the errata.

This really is not the right place for a HD discussion anway. And besides that, I have already moved on from HD. :)

Well, my point is, what is "official" in terms of rule - just 5th and the errata? Does the FAQ count? Anyway....so now that you made your last statement, do you mean you moved on from using it (and to what?) or just moved on from that issue? Inquiring minds and all...

[nHammer]

Originally posted by zornwil
This is one chorus we seem to be singing the same tune on, I definitely agree the rules shifts or omissions should be in a single errata doc and not something you have to go through the FAQ (and btw, these are not always "Frequently" asked) to find.

Just incase any DOJ folks read this thread, I'd like to add my agreement to this statement.

I for one rarely read the FAQ, but it would be nice to be updated on changes to FREd.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by zornwil
Anyway....so now that you made your last statement, do you mean you moved on from using it (and to what?) or just moved on from that issue? Inquiring minds and all...
I just do not use Hero Designer any longer. I have switched over to the Meta-Creator software. It runs quicker on my computers, has, IMO, a superior printing process, and is easier to adapt for our Terran Empire game. HD is good software. It is just not for me any longer.

[Killer Shrike]

Thats too bad Mono. Im testing v2 now and its pretty slick even half built.

[Talon]

See this thread (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5583) for a stab at a FAQ summary.