FRPG Ideas from Hero that ain't necessarily so

[Curufea]

Here's the thread that some folk just seem incapable of creating. Feel free to add things to this thread rather than putting things in threads on other subjects.


a normal person can demolish a car with his bare hands [1e objects had BOD only, and no defenses]
buying a 1d6 KA for a 75 STR character gives him a 6d6 killing attack [the cap was introduced in 2e]

[Curufea]

I should however point out that both 1 and 2 so far aren't usually in the fantasy genre. So modify accordingly.

[CTaylor]

You can cut a castle down with an axe.
You can read the entire Encyclopedia Britannica in a soliloquy during combat and everyone has to wait.
You can literally run past someone with a lower speed without any concern or threat from them.
People teleport around on the map during combat rather than moving smoothly together.

[Curufea]

You can literally run past someone with a lower speed without any concern or threat from them.
People teleport around on the map during combat rather than moving smoothly together.

I was actually thinking of mentioning that myself - it is one of my pet annoyances. Movement should be more simultaneous. If it were possible, I'd like to count all the hexes moved in a turn, and just have characters move one hex at a time (ie breaking down phases by multiplying them with running and smooshing them together).
Turn based has always been a bit too "game" and not enough "simulation" for rpgs.

[Lucius]

If you get enough people standing in a long enough line, you can pass the Olympic Torch across the continent in a matter of seconds.

(Grab, grab, grab, grab, grab, grab, grab, ad infinitum...)

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary asks "How does that grab you!?"

[Curufea]

Really though, we should be looking at Fantasy Hero related memes and ideas.

How about-
Weapons without sharp edges don't kill people, only knock them unconscious.

[Fitz]

Low-SPD mooks spend most of their time frozen like statues while the PCs act.

[CTaylor]

Fantasy Hero only? OK One level of Growth makes you a killing machine, but 1D6 of punch is nothing special
You can be the mighty dragon slayer but some idiot with a pitchfork can still kill you with a lucky shot.
Magic is either grossly overpowered or just a light show. Wait, that's all Fantasy games. Never seen a system yet that's well balanced.

[McCoy]

It is easier (fewer points) to be immortal than rich.

[steamteck]

When in real life its really not harder in lunge someone in the head than elsewhere in fantasy HERO you have to be Inigo Montya to succeed.

[Maur]

I was actually thinking of mentioning that myself - it is one of my pet annoyances. Movement should be more simultaneous. If it were possible, I'd like to count all the hexes moved in a turn, and just have characters move one hex at a time (ie breaking down phases by multiplying them with running and smooshing them together).
Turn based has always been a bit too "game" and not enough "simulation" for rpgs.

Which is basically GURPS as each action for all the characters is a one second window. So if it takes 30 seconds to reload a gun, then your character is busy for 30 rounds doing just that.

[Markdoc]

You can be the mighty dragon slayer but some idiot with a pitchfork can still kill you with a lucky shot.

I regard that one as a feature, not a bug!

cheers, Mark

[CTaylor]

Buying the perk to be a king is cheaper than buying the points to cast spells

[Markdoc]

Buying the perk to be a king is cheaper than buying the points to cast spells

Yes, but with spells you can get to be king for free!

cheers, Mark

[PhilFleischmann]

These are all completely different from the ones on the other thread. The idea was more of fantasy setting/genre/tropes that D&D seems to assume ought to apply to all FRPGs. The stuff mentioned here so far is mostly just game rules mechanics.

The fantasy genre is *huge*. D&D narrowed it down to one particular interpretation - nothing wrong with that interpretation per se, but it ain't necessarily so. Many other RPGs, without even realizing it, adopted many of the same assumptions that D&D made.

[Shadowsoul]

Earth's pre-history contains era that correspond to every concievable fantasy setting.

You can never kill the ultimate evil. You can only put it to sleep for an age or two.

[Kristopher]

Earth's pre-history contains era that correspond to every concievable fantasy setting.

You can never kill the ultimate evil. You can only put it to sleep for an age or two.

The first one is something I regard as part of the biggest problem with the overall HERO setting, the attempt to shoehorn all the various settings into one timeline, and the resulting "everything depends on magic, even superpowers and strange/hyper technology" kludge (IMNSHO).

[CrosshairCollie]

It's hard to do this kind of thread because HERO is just a mechanical system that's designed to be capable of doing almost anything. D&D is designed, well, to be D&D.

So, HERO is the toolkit, D&D is the 'here's the tools, here's the parts, here's the instructions' furniture kit.

And the unified HERO-verse timeline doesn't bother me. Makes me want to run a Turakian Age game then have the characters pop up later in a Supers game. :)

[Shadowsoul]

And the unified HERO-verse timeline doesn't bother me. Makes me want to run a Turakian Age game then have the characters pop up later in a Supers game. :)

Hmm. Doctor Who in the Hero Universe?

[CTaylor]

You can't really do a Fantasy Hero tropes that are assumed thread because... well there's no one setting for Fantasy Hero. D&D was Greyhawk, all the monsters and the modules until later were just flat out Grayhawk stuff. Even when Gygax was out of the loop, even with a new edition of D&D, it still clings to that basic generic setting and feel, the campaign is assumed in the system of classes and spells, it's a pre-generated generic D&D world. So there will be bits and pieces of it that assume things that aren't necessarily so about every fantasy setting.

Fantasy Hero is more a box of tools to make any setting. So it doesn't suffer from the same presumptions rather from the lack of ease to jump into.

[casualplayer]

How about the preponderance of burly mages because STR is so cheap?

What's wrong with all my stats ending in 3, 5 or 8? The wizened sage Goodman advised me so.

[Remjin]

I actually take a stat of 14 pretty often for dexterity. =) Bare minimum for CV 5.

In any case, we seem to be on mechanics, so I haven't much to say as I'm not really that great into the technicalities of the rules... as far as the tropes of genre, I've always found the D&D model to be hyper-boring since it plays like a video game. If I wanted that... I'd play a video game. Then all my "magic item slots" would have graphical representations and I could actually watch my experience points ding me to a new level with a light show. One of the reasons I like the Swords and Sorcery genre is because it depends much less on magic and big FX budgets and more on story and characters. On the other hand, I like many things in the high fantasy genres, yet too many of those genres overuse what they have available to the point of being boring.

One flaming mystical blade? Pretty cool, very unique, and nice... a party with a portable hole full of loot and magical items? Wow, this stupid flaming blade sucks... hand me the Dragon-Waster 3000 +5/+23 vs Dragons/+12 vs Fire Elementals/+52 vs GM so I can use my Holy Smite attack I learned from my mentor, whom I killed for mouthing off to me... cuz I'm holy like that.

Oops, sorry, slipped into a rant for a second there...

Like someone said, many games for many folks, kind of hard to nail one down unless you actually name one of the published settings, I suppose.

[CrosshairCollie]

I actually take a stat of 14 pretty often for dexterity. =) Bare minimum for CV 5.

In any case, we seem to be on mechanics, so I haven't much to say as I'm not really that great into the technicalities of the rules... as far as the tropes of genre, I've always found the D&D model to be hyper-boring since it plays like a video game. If I wanted that... I'd play a video game. Then all my "magic item slots" would have graphical representations and I could actually watch my experience points ding me to a new level with a light show. One of the reasons I like the Swords and Sorcery genre is because it depends much less on magic and big FX budgets and more on story and characters. On the other hand, I like many things in the high fantasy genres, yet too many of those genres overuse what they have available to the point of being boring.

One flaming mystical blade? Pretty cool, very unique, and nice... a party with a portable hole full of loot and magical items? Wow, this stupid flaming blade sucks... hand me the Dragon-Waster 3000 +5/+23 vs Dragons/+12 vs Fire Elementals/+52 vs GM so I can use my Holy Smite attack I learned from my mentor, whom I killed for mouthing off to me... cuz I'm holy like that.

Oops, sorry, slipped into a rant for a second there...

Like someone said, many games for many folks, kind of hard to nail one down unless you actually name one of the published settings, I suppose.

To a degree, however, it's logical. In a world where magic exists, can be studied and behaves predictably ('make this gesture, say this word, and something will explode'), magic replaces science, so inaccessible magic items make about as much sense as the real world having inaccessible toasters. Magic should have effects on sociological development, including communications, agriculture, and, indeed, warfare and weaponry.

[tancred]

To a degree, however, it's logical. In a world where magic exists, can be studied and behaves predictably ('make this gesture, say this word, and something will explode'), magic replaces science, so inaccessible magic items make about as much sense as the real world having inaccessible toasters. Magic should have effects on sociological development, including communications, agriculture, and, indeed, warfare and weaponry.

Pretty much my sentiments.
I've always thought that, if magic is as predictable as you describe, it would essentially replace technology.
(For a REALLY cool take on this, read Hell's Gate by David Weber and Linda Evans. No spoilers, but they explore this very concept.)

I've created any number of "mundane" magic items in my games over the years, things with no use in combat but that logically (to my mind at least) would get created because magic makes them possible.

The two examples that stand out are a magic "icebox" and a flameless stove.
The implications are large. Remember what refrigeration did by making it so easy to store food.
And imagine being able to cook under conditions where an open flame simply isn't practical (aboard ship in a storm, for example).

[Remjin]

To a degree, however, it's logical. In a world where magic exists, can be studied and behaves predictably ('make this gesture, say this word, and something will explode'), magic replaces science, so inaccessible magic items make about as much sense as the real world having inaccessible toasters. Magic should have effects on sociological development, including communications, agriculture, and, indeed, warfare and weaponry.

I don't deny its logic, I deny its general entertainment value for me. I know lots and lots of people who love it, so I can't really argue with it. =) The magic replacing science idea is an interesting way to see it, though, and is certainly worth some thinking about in general... but in following that line, when magic replaces science and is predictable and no longer mysterious... isn't it just science? Isn't part of the definition of magic its mystery and improbability? It kind of loses its luster to me that way...

I like the idea of magic as a mystery and as awe-inspiring... scaring the yokels, terrifying those in the know, and always impressive. The rarity makes it more fantastic to me, whereas being festooned with it... well, its the whole "too much of a good thing" type of feeling I suppose.

Again, this is preference on my part, and certainly not fact for everyone... heck, I'm probably in the minority.

[Inu]

It is easier (fewer points) to be immortal than rich.
It costs fewer points, but that doesn't make it easier. ^_-

As regards the king perk: it's cheap to be the king. To be an effective king costs more than 150 points worth of contacts, allies, retainers, wealth, bases, etc. A 10-point 'king' merit is almost more a Disad than a Perk... or at the very least, it'll come with a whole scad of 'Hunted: More powerful, NCI, 14-, intends to dethrone and imprison/kill'.

Some perks ain't quite so cheap as they seem to be. :D

[casualplayer]

It costs fewer points, but that doesn't make it easier. ^_-

As regards the king perk: it's cheap to be the king. To be an effective king costs more than 150 points worth of contacts, allies, retainers, wealth, bases, etc. A 10-point 'king' merit is almost more a Disad than a Perk... or at the very least, it'll come with a whole scad of 'Hunted: More powerful, NCI, 14-, intends to dethrone and imprison/kill'.

Some perks ain't quite so cheap as they seem to be. :D

This is why I don't use any Perks except Follower and Vehicle. All the others come with drawbacks and disadvantages that pretty much make them a wash.

[CTaylor]

How bout this one: if your duplicate dies you lose character points permanently.

[Inu]

How bout this one: if your duplicate dies you lose character points permanently.
That seems to be true of real life.

Well, inasmuch as when we lose something, we don't get something else in return. ^_-

I don't think many people other than Steve have duplicates.

[Lucius]

I don't deny its logic, I deny its general entertainment value for me. I know lots and lots of people who love it, so I can't really argue with it. =) The magic replacing science idea is an interesting way to see it, though, and is certainly worth some thinking about in general... but in following that line, when magic replaces science and is predictable and no longer mysterious... isn't it just science? Isn't part of the definition of magic its mystery and improbability? It kind of loses its luster to me that way...

I like the idea of magic as a mystery and as awe-inspiring... scaring the yokels, terrifying those in the know, and always impressive. The rarity makes it more fantastic to me, whereas being festooned with it... well, its the whole "too much of a good thing" type of feeling I suppose.

Again, this is preference on my part, and certainly not fact for everyone... heck, I'm probably in the minority.

Hm, so does this mean that in science fiction, stardrives and blasters and light sabers aren't awesome or impressive because they can be reproduced by those who understand their principles and have the right tools?

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary notes that when Lucius ran a game once that was very light on magic items, a funny thing happened - a character went on a cross-continental quest to recover the equivalent of a +1 sword when it was stolen.

[Remjin]

Hm, so does this mean that in science fiction, stardrives and blasters and light sabers aren't awesome or impressive because they can be reproduced by those who understand their principles and have the right tools?

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary notes that when Lucius ran a game once that was very light on magic items, a funny thing happened - a character went on a cross-continental quest to recover the equivalent of a +1 sword when it was stolen.

I think in science fiction its a bit different... perhaps its the genre conventions? Honestly, I can't say I have a big analytical reason so much as just a preference. =)

In campaigns with low magic, I must say that I usually prefer the item actually be pretty neat. I'm not much for "+x swords" in and of themselves... but magical swords on fire, or items like "sting" that have a certain "feel" to them are neat in my eyes. And if you're going to make magic items rare, you really should put some effort into making the few that players get be really neat. :D

And now that I think about it... blasters aren't special, they're the main tool of the trade in science fiction. Lightsabers are, because they can only be wielded properly by Jedi. But again, its just a "gut" thing and not a "I'm smart and know why I like it that way" thing :o

Please don't take my comments as argument so much as stating a preference. I'm not trying to down anyone else's opinions on the matter or anything like that. :hush:

[teh bunneh]

Again, this is preference on my part, and certainly not fact for everyone... heck, I'm probably in the minority.

You and me both, bro. You and me both.

[Remjin]

You and me both, bro. You and me both.

Brother! *hugs* *cry* :D

[eternal_sage]

*joins the others to form a trio...or maybe Voltron*

....

maybe we should just take a whole bunch of followers with the +5 doubling rules and then conquer the world and make everyone play fantasy games the way WE DESIRE!!


and maybe forge a cool ring (maybe we could alternate using it) or maybe we each have a single really powerful artifact that we rule the world with... or maybe we can invent some sort of psi-crown thing to control peoples minds.... or or or

[Remjin]

*joins the others to form a trio...or maybe Voltron*

....

maybe we should just take a whole bunch of followers with the +5 doubling rules and then conquer the world and make everyone play fantasy games the way WE DESIRE!!


and maybe forge a cool ring (maybe we could alternate using it) or maybe we each have a single really powerful artifact that we rule the world with... or maybe we can invent some sort of psi-crown thing to control peoples minds.... or or or

Well, we have a triumvirate, right? We should invent some kind of 3 piece artifact, each wielding one appropriate to our particular strengths, that combine into one world dominating power only to be used in emergencies most dire... each item should be cool in its own right, though not excessively powerful, and combine to give us some mystical yet benign power only usable by us three together. See, that'd be more in the style, bro.. like.. uh... well, heck, perhaps it just brings to light the faith in men's hearts that we might unite many people. Like one of those deals where it doesn't change anyone's thoughts, but it allows the bravery and sense of right they have to come to the front instead... y'know, etc. etc. Not like I'm bringing an original thought out here... :o

[Old Man]

Anyway...

- A normal can quadruple his strength, becoming a Schwarzeneggerian freak of nature, after a few months of adventuring.
- A slight speed advantage translates into a huge advantage in combat.
- Higher agility generally means you can run faster.
- You are most likely to hit your opponent in the chest, even in melee, regardless of what weapon you're using.
- Shields are totally awesome. Wait, that is so. Never mind.
- Hammers and axes suck when compared to spears (in 5th) or swords (in 4th).

[Lucius]

I think in science fiction its a bit different... perhaps its the genre conventions? Honestly, I can't say I have a big analytical reason so much as just a preference. =)

In campaigns with low magic, I must say that I usually prefer the item actually be pretty neat. I'm not much for "+x swords" in and of themselves... but magical swords on fire, or items like "sting" that have a certain "feel" to them are neat in my eyes. And if you're going to make magic items rare, you really should put some effort into making the few that players get be really neat. :D

And now that I think about it... blasters aren't special, they're the main tool of the trade in science fiction. Lightsabers are, because they can only be wielded properly by Jedi. But again, its just a "gut" thing and not a "I'm smart and know why I like it that way" thing :o

Please don't take my comments as argument so much as stating a preference. I'm not trying to down anyone else's opinions on the matter or anything like that. :hush:


I appreciate your ideas; and I'm not trying to be critical of anyone's preferences either. I think it's wonderful that Hero can accomodate all KINDS of styles.

And remeber, "Sting" probably WAS a "+1 sword" in D&D terms! BUT it was a sword with a NAME, and with an atmosphere.


Old Man:

Thanks a lot for getting us back on topic!

Lucius Alexander

The Palindromedary reminds Me that we need to visit the Pob Ox.

[starblaze]

I appreciate your ideas; and I'm not trying to be critical of anyone's preferences either. I think it's wonderful that Hero can accomodate all KINDS of styles.

And remeber, "Sting" probably WAS a "+1 sword" in D&D terms! BUT it was a sword with a NAME, and with an atmosphere.


Old Man:

Thanks a lot for getting us back on topic!

Lucius Alexander

The Palindromedary reminds Me that we need to visit the Pob Ox.

Don't forget that it warned you if orcs were coming.:thumbup:

[eternal_sage]

actually, Sting had to be a +1 weapon, because it was enchanted. you can't have a Orc Bane weapon without it also being at least +1 (that goes for any other enchantment as well, of course)

[Old Man]

Don't forget that it warned you if orcs were coming.:thumbup:

IIRC, more often than not it only warned you if orcs were here, i.e. too late. :)

[L. Marcus]

Nah. Those scenes took place in sites (Moria, Cirith Ungol) that had no viable escape route. If they'd been out in the open, they would've had no problems. :)

[Remjin]

I appreciate your ideas; and I'm not trying to be critical of anyone's preferences either. I think it's wonderful that Hero can accommodate all KINDS of styles.

And remember, "Sting" probably WAS a "+1 sword" in D&D terms! BUT it was a sword with a NAME, and with an atmosphere. (snip)

In many cases, I think atmosphere is a lot to it. I appreciate a great visual and a story more than the power of an item. Cool powers is also neat, though, of course. :D And as later mentioned, Sting did have that "orc detection" ability, and I believe it actually worked a bit more effectively in the books or at least the characters reacted better than having a 30 second pow-wow when it glowed. :p

And the whole reason I love Hero is because it accommodates the various play styles and allows for everyone to do what they want rather than force you into a style and type of play.

[Inu]

Don't forget that it warned you if orcs were coming.:thumbup:
And everyone seems to forget that it ignored defences of Morgoth's creatures. It was one of the few weapons in the world capable of wounding Shelob. It was even extra-effective against orcs.

[CTaylor]

The movie didn't handle the orc detection well, it always detected them when any idiot already knew there were orcs around. Sort of a Betazoid empath of orc detection. I sense hostility, captain. No kidding?

And yeah, Sting was a very powerful weapon (as powerful as Gandalf's sword and the king's weapons the other hobbits got from the Barrow Downs).

[Old Man]

Yeah, but is it better than a lightsaber? Because a lightsaber's blade glows in the presence of orcs too! :p

[Old Man]

- The difficulty of a spell has only to do with its overall power, not its intricacy.
- The requirements for casting a given spell are set--you can't take extra time or use additional materials to make it any easier, for example.
- Fire hurts exactly the same as cold.
- Flight is the easiest spell to learn.

[Inu]

- The difficulty of a spell has only to do with its overall power, not its intricacy.
- The requirements for casting a given spell are set--you can't take extra time or use additional materials to make it any easier, for example.
- Fire hurts exactly the same as cold.
- Flight is the easiest spell to learn.
An immortality spell is an apprentice-level cantrip. =D

[Lucius]

Ignore this message.

Lucius Alexander

Ignore this palindromedary.

[CTaylor]

-Mages are the equal of triathletes in terms of Endurance
-Jumping to another dimension is easier than blowing up a bunch of goblins

[Mr_Yuck]

You can't Haymaker a door to blast it down! (unless it is somehow threatening you or you are at a disadvantage for using Haymaker)

You can't Push to blast said door down. (Unless the world will be destroyed if that door does NOT come down!)

I understand why these rules exist... but sometimes it seems kind of trite.

[Hugh Neilson]

You can't Haymaker a door to blast it down! (unless it is somehow threatening you or you are at a disadvantage for using Haymaker)

I tend to laugh that one off. Either you can hit full force by spending extra time and leaving yourself open or you can't. Saying "the drawbacks must be relevant" makes Haymaker a SuperDetect.

Player1: "Do you think the Invisible Ambusher is still around?"

Player2: "Good question - none of us can sense him."

Player3: "I'll attempt to Haymaker the wall."

GM: "OK, your haymaker is effective.

Players 1,2,3: "He must be here - there's no drawback to Haymaker unless someone is here to take advantage of it!"

You can't Push to blast said door down. (Unless the world will be destroyed if that door does NOT come down!)

I can live with this one. Pushing needs real adrenaline/reason to push, not just "gee, I'd sure like to hit harder".

[Doc]

When ridding, it's better off having the same speed than your horse. If the horse has more, it get to wait until you're ready before charging an enemy. If you have more, you're stuck on your horse waiting for him to move another time.

[psychoticbarber]

Hmm. Doctor Who in the Hero Universe?

You running? I'm in.

As for the topic:

Actually, most of my objections to the Hero system silliness have already been logged. Nothing is coming to mind. I'll let you know if something comes up.

[PhilFleischmann]

You can't Haymaker a door to blast it down! (unless it is somehow threatening you or you are at a disadvantage for using Haymaker)
Sure you can. Whatever is on the other side of that door can take advantage of your reduced DCV.

And if there is no combat threat, who cares? It wouldn't make any difference anyway. If it's important to the plot for the door to come down, then go ahead. If it's not important to the plot, then let the haymaking fool embarrass himself with the extra property damage.

[Lucius]

You can't Haymaker a door to blast it down! (unless it is somehow threatening you or you are at a disadvantage for using Haymaker)

You can't Push to blast said door down. (Unless the world will be destroyed if that door does NOT come down!)

I understand why these rules exist... but sometimes it seems kind of trite.

I can agree with the Push one...not sure about the Haymaker.

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary wants to Push it's Luck for the extra two dice

[jtelson]

I can agree with the Push one...not sure about the Haymaker.

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary wants to Push it's Luck for the extra two dice

First make your luck cost end, then make the fate of the world relay on you being licky, then we'll talk :)

[Mr_Yuck]

The Haymaker was something I picked up in the Hero System 5th Edition Rules Questions.

I'll copy and paste to make it easier!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you Haymaker a Presence Attack?

Lucius Alexander

Inquiring palindromedaries want to know
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rules for Haymaker state that it applies to “any attack,” and while a Presence Attack isn’t a typical sort of attack, it’s still an attack, so unless the GM rules otherwise a Presence Attack can be Haymakered, adding +4d6 to it. However, there are several things to keep in mind. First, Haymakering a Presence Attack converts it from an Action that takes no time to one that takes the usual time for a Haymaker. Second, Haymakering a Presence Attack will affects a character’s CV, as usual for a Haymaker. Third, as always, performing a Haymaker has to actually subject a character to some potential drawback — if he’s in a situation where having a lowered DCV and taking extra time to make a Presence Attack aren’t any inconvenience, he absolutely can’t Haymaker his Presence Attack (or anything else, for that matter).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That last sentance was what prompted my post on this duscussion.
I was being a bit facetious is all.

[Steve]

Hmm. Doctor Who in the Hero Universe?

Discussed here (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50640).

Back on topic, characteristic "efficiency" can be a problem in Hero Fantasy (as well as all other Heroic-level games). 14-15 DEX can be common, for example.