Universality

[Lord Mhoram]

Don't know if this is really rules, but it ties in to the base ideas of the system, and I didn't see it on other threads, so I wanted to bring this up.

Please please please keep the system universal - the same gun write up is used in Supers, Modern, Cyber-hero ect. The same Tank write up is used in a WWII game, and a Supers game where that tank may show up.

That is one of the strengths of the Hero Line, and no other game system has that universality. It is one of the biggest reasons I play this game system, and I feel that is as central to the system as reasoning from Effect.

[Chris Goodwin]

Don't know if this is really rules, but it ties in to the base ideas of the system, and I didn't see it on other threads, so I wanted to bring this up.

Please please please keep the system universal - the same gun write up is used in Supers, Modern, Cyber-hero ect. The same Tank write up is used in a WWII game, and a Supers game where that tank may show up.

Ugh. Funny you should choose that particular example. As I recall, that discussion was a can of worms. Good reason for not making things universal.

See, you run into problems with supers in the source material being able to shred tanks and bounce tank gun shells, and those same tanks in a military setting either being unable to harm each other with their guns or being made of tinfoil.

I had thought of opening up a similar discussion, with a request to not force universality on the system.

[Vondy]

I'm going to take a contrary position.

The universal scale in hero is excellent for some genres and patently bad for others.

As a result, I think more than one scale should be provided.

This would allow hero to accomodate more genres more smoothly.

[Opal]

See, you run into problems with supers in the source material being able to shred tanks and bounce tank gun shells, and those same tanks in a military setting either being unable to harm each other with their guns or being made of tinfoil. "Eggshells with Howitzers." Or was that battleships?

[Lord Mhoram]

I knew there would be a number of contrary positions. I've been involved in a couple of the heated discussions on the topic over the years.

But I almost never play a single genre. My fantasy is transworld with supers, SF and Old west characters. My SF is a science fantasy (think Dragonstar for D20), My supers has elements of other genres.

One of the truly unique things in the Hero system (because I play the Hero system, not champions or Pulp Hero, or Fantasy Hero) is that universality. That is one of it's greatest strenghts. Do the writeups need to be adjusted - probably, but I would still like to see the writeups themselves the same.

For the supers thing, just have genre rule that reinforces the genre, without affecting writeups - such as "attacks with the real weapon limitation do no stun if the body does not penetrate" and "defenses with the "real armor" limitation are half effect (or the attack is treated as penetrator) when attacked by a superhero" - I saw something like that on the boards, and instantly incorporated.. Makes superman much cheaper to make bulletproof. :)

That, as a rule in the Champions book would mean no change in writeups, keep the system universal, and allow everything to be universal.

[Vondy]

I knew there would be a number of contrary positions. I've been involved in a couple of the heated discussions on the topic over the years.

But I almost never play a single genre. My fantasy is transworld with supers, SF and Old west characters. My SF is a science fantasy (think Dragonstar for D20), My supers has elements of other genres.

One of the truly unique things in the Hero system (because I play the Hero system, not champions or Pulp Hero, or Fantasy Hero) is that universality. That is one of it's greatest strenghts. Do the writeups need to be adjusted - probably, but I would still like to see the writeups themselves the same.

For the supers thing, just have genre rule that reinforces the genre, without affecting writeups - such as "attacks with the real weapon limitation do no stun if the body does not penetrate" and "defenses with the "real armor" limitation are half effect (or the attack is treated as penetrator) when attacked by a superhero" - I saw something like that on the boards, and instantly incorporated.. Makes superman much cheaper to make bulletproof. :)

That, as a rule in the Champions book would mean no change in writeups, keep the system universal, and allow everything to be universal.

The need to use a rule that reinforces genre is a fix that indicates the universal scale doesn't meet all genres needs equally (I use the rule you noted for supers). I don't object to there being a default scale for published products (or at least, related groups of products like champions and dark champions), but we do need some options and some official genre reinforcing rules that will give those of us pedestrians who do not run genre-hoppers and seldom run supers the power to model their desired genres more easily without having to fiddle with something so basic. This is why I propose more than one strength scale for lift capacity (and adders-advantages-whatever for GMs who may decide they have characters who are an exception to their game's default genre). The limited granularity the universal scale currently imposes on heroic characters can be a real problem for people who don't play superheroic style games. As such, while I understand where you are coming from, my feeling is the scale needs to be reworked, or a heroic and superheroic scale need to be provided (though one will probably serve as the default for most published products).

[Lord Mhoram]

but we do need some options and some official genre reinforcing rules that will give those of us pedestrians who do not run genre-hoppers and seldom run supers the power to model their desired genres more easily without having to fiddle with something so basic.

I can see that. I also figured with a rule like I suggested, it means everything doesn't have to have two writeups. :)

Dunno about Seperate STR charts, I've run many Heroic games (well 2 very long running Fantasy games) and never had any problems, although I do understand completley about the non granularity.

Personally as long as it was "genre rules" and not in the writeups, I could handle that. Have a seperate STR chart, and genre enforcing rules like I mentioned in Champions, and build everything else for Heroic scale... as Champions is sort of the odd man out there. Like you said a perk/adder/thing that says "Superhero" and in Champions that is a default free adder. Sorta like the difference in equipment purchasing or human max on characteristics.

As long as the writeup itself doesn't change, and it is still used the same way (even if the effect on the character may be different) I can handle that. :)

[ghost-angel]

I think the ABILITY to be Universal and have a single write-up work cross-genre is important.

But this is Hero. I model on a game-by-game basis unless I have the express intent of making a game move across genres and settings.

[Captain Obvious]

It would be nice to have weapons and vehicles work cross-genre, and for the most part they do now, but I think no matter how they're done in 6th, there will still be those who are dissatisfied and will retool them anyway.

[misterdeath]

I think that in the main book(s) there should be a particular scale, sort of a universal scale, "Default Scale", whatever.

Then, in each Genre book, a discussion about how the scale can/should change in order to fit the genre that you're trying to create.

Then I'd like to see Setting books divided in half; one for the players on how to create characters, what kind of things they might know, etc., and one for the GM, with sample bad guys, adventures, and information the GM needs to know. And have those two use the Genre specific construction methods introduced in the Genre book.

And one of the Genre's could be "Transdimensional Hero" where it talks about/uses the default scale.

D

[James Gillen]

Ugh. Funny you should choose that particular example. As I recall, that discussion was a can of worms. Good reason for not making things universal.

See, you run into problems with supers in the source material being able to shred tanks and bounce tank gun shells, and those same tanks in a military setting either being unable to harm each other with their guns or being made of tinfoil.

I had thought of opening up a similar discussion, with a request to not force universality on the system.

I think that's less an argument against universality and more an argument against the current design philosophy on vehicles. I figured this out a while ago when I looked over the Star HERO/Terran Empire starships and realized they couldn't damage each other. On the other hand, even Galactic Champions heroes can't get through their fields either, which depending on genre is also not accurate. ;)

JG

[James Gillen]

Now that I think about it (since Steve mentioned the possibility of a 'Size' trait), one of the mechanics I liked about the West End d6 Star Wars Revised was that they had a "Scale" mechanic, going from Personal scale, Landspeeder scale, Starfighter scale, all the way up to Death Star scale, which basically traded damage rating for dodge/resistance roll ability, which explains why it's hard to hit a much smaller target (it gets bonus to dodge) and also why a starfighter, no matter what its weaponry, is not going to hurt the Death Star point on (it gets bonuses to 'soak').

Now, HERO doesn't use dice codes to dodge attacks or soak damage, but if something like that could be implemented, it just might work...

JG

[Markdoc]

To me, the simplest solution is just to scale your games correctly. When we were playing JLA level champions, Bricks typically had rDEFs in the 30-60 Range and attacks like 18d6AP EB, 120 STR or 9d6 HKA were in play. More nimble characters had DCVs that went up into high double figures. For characters like that, a tank is an annoyance, but not a major threat and a squad of guys with automatic weapons is simply a speed bump.

When we were playing low-level fantasy, rDEF of 6, a DCV that reached double figures or a STR of 20 was pretty awesome.

To me, the problem is not the game system, but the design philosophy: if you play a game where (for example) you cap players' attacks at 60 AP and an assault rifle is 2d6 RKA, autofire, then you are - in effect - saying "I want normals to matter".

It seems strange to say it on teh Hero boards, but when designing your setting, maths matters.

cheers, Mark

[Vondy]

To me, the simplest solution is just to scale your games correctly. When we were playing JLA level champions, Bricks typically had rDEFs in the 30-60 Range and attacks like 18d6AP EB, 120 STR or 9d6 HKA were in play. More nimble characters had DCVs that went up into high double figures. For characters like that, a tank is an annoyance, but not a major threat and a squad of guys with automatic weapons is simply a speed bump.

When we were playing low-level fantasy, rDEF of 6, a DCV that reached double figures or a STR of 20 was pretty awesome.

To me, the problem is not the game system, but the design philosophy: if you play a game where (for example) you cap players' attacks at 60 AP and an assault rifle is 2d6 RKA, autofire, then you are - in effect - saying "I want normals to matter".

It seems strange to say it on teh Hero boards, but when designing your setting, maths matters.

cheers, Mark

My issue is that the current scaling in the system (a universal scale that was born for supers) means that you have a very narrow range to create heroic characters. I want more range. I can do that myself, and I have, but it does require me to hack the system to do it.

[steamteck]

I run a multiverse of three connected campaigns( fantasy/steampunk-space opera-superheores) and the present scaling works for me. I love that I don't have to worry about translation when characters move between world. Keep me able to do that in 6th or you lose tons for me.

[Markdoc]

My issue is that the current scaling in the system (a universal scale that was born for supers) means that you have a very narrow range to create heroic characters. I want more range. I can do that myself, and I have, but it does require me to hack the system to do it.

Yeah, I run heroic games mostly and I can see the point - but personally, I wouldn't trade universality for a more granular scale at the heroic end.

cheers, Mark

[ghost-angel]

I think that's less an argument against universality and more an argument against the current design philosophy on vehicles. I figured this out a while ago when I looked over the Star HERO/Terran Empire starships and realized they couldn't damage each other. On the other hand, even Galactic Champions heroes can't get through their fields either, which depending on genre is also not accurate. ;)

JG

Actually.. I built a spreadsheet that tracks damage in the Terran Empire setting.

They can very much damage each other. It does take 3-5 hits to break down the Ablative layers however. One thing to keep in mind is that all TE ships weapons have Armor Piercing on them and that 2 layers of TE Defenses are ablative. For most of the ships the Ablative FF will drop with a single Autofire Volley that hits with 3+ shots doing average or just over average damage.

I've run several dozen simulations. They are specifically designed to last several "broadsides" before you cause damage. There are no one-shot kills in Terran Empire.

I have not attempted to have a Galatic Champion face off against a Terran Empire ship.

[James Gillen]

My issue is that the current scaling in the system (a universal scale that was born for supers) means that you have a very narrow range to create heroic characters. I want more range. I can do that myself, and I have, but it does require me to hack the system to do it.

I find it a LOT easier to make heroics in HERO than in DC HEROES, and a lot easier to make supers in HERO than in GURPS.

jg

[James Gillen]

Actually.. I built a spreadsheet that tracks damage in the Terran Empire setting.

They can very much damage each other. It does take 3-5 hits to break down the Ablative layers however. One thing to keep in mind is that all TE ships weapons have Armor Piercing on them and that 2 layers of TE Defenses are ablative. For most of the ships the Ablative FF will drop with a single Autofire Volley that hits with 3+ shots doing average or just over average damage.

I've run several dozen simulations. They are specifically designed to last several "broadsides" before you cause damage. There are no one-shot kills in Terran Empire.

I have not attempted to have a Galatic Champion face off against a Terran Empire ship.

Well, yeah, the Ablative makes some difference, and I think is designed to simulate the Star Trek-style deflector shield. Of course the Ablative DEF includes some Armor/DEF, which technically violates rules in that all the Ablative defenses have to stack 'above' the regular DEF, so there's hull armor that will blow off before the (non-Ablative) Force Field is penetrated. I'd probably rewrite them with the hull DEF added to Force Field then make the entire FF Ablative.

A combat simulator/examples wouldn't hurt either.

JG

[Warp9]

See, you run into problems with supers in the source material being able to shred tanks and bounce tank gun shells, and those same tanks in a military setting either being unable to harm each other with their guns or being made of tinfoil.

I'd prefer a few optional damage/lethality rules, which can be put in one place, rather than having to deal with a number of different write ups for each and every gun.

[Warp9]

My issue is that the current scaling in the system (a universal scale that was born for supers) means that you have a very narrow range to create heroic characters. I want more range. I can do that myself, and I have, but it does require me to hack the system to do it.
I'm curious about how wide a range you want for heroic characters.

What do you think would be good?

[Vondy]

I'm curious about how wide a range you want for heroic characters.

What do you think would be good?

When I've done this in the past (by slapping on a new strength table) I ran primary characteristics to 30. The main issue, however, is this: heroic characters with the traditional range will have characteristic rolls of 11, 12, or 13. That is also the range of their skill rolls before points are dumped in. That's not very... granular. I would also like to see skills with more base range, but that's harder to deal with without breaking the system. This isn't a problem in superheroic or many cinematic genres, but in heroic genres, where characters are effectively defined by their skills and talents (and maybe one schtick stat) it becomes more readily apparent. Its not a deal breaker (and I've dealt with it in various ways over the years), but it is a drawback for the kinds of games I run.

[nexus]

Ideally (my ideal not everyone’s) is that Hero would be a like a sculptor’s block. You develop an idea for a setting or game, take Hero System and chip away everything that isn’t your idea and viola! Physically, I can understand this isn’t feasible. The book would be huge and send people screaming into the night.

I’d like to see it move as close to this goal as possible though, with more options than arbitrary limitations, more add-ons and modularity than restrictions. I might be an oddity but I run more home brew settings than published ones and, unlike some of others gamers, I don’t want to learn a totally new system every time I want to switch genres or settings. That’s why I came to and stick with Hero System. Basically, IME, with most generic systems (D20, GURPS, to a lesser extent BESM) you end up more adapting your setting to them instead of adapting them to the setting or if you do adapt the system (such in the case of Mutant and Masterminds) you end up basically redesigning the game from the ground up. I used (and still do to some extent) enjoy doing that but I don’t have the time anymore.

Right now, 5th edition (baring some places) is a pretty good fit for my style. I hope 6th moves more in that direction. Variable scaling (however it's implemented) would be go a good way in that direction as would increased granularity, particularly at the low end. I DON'T want to see Hero System divorced from its Superhero/comic roots and I think its' one of the genres it does best. I would like to see it's muscle made more applicable to other genres as well.

[Warp9]

When I've done this in the past (by slapping on a new strength table) I ran primary characteristics to 30. The main issue, however, is this: heroic characters with the traditional range will have characteristic rolls of 11, 12, or 13. That is also the range of their skill rolls before points are dumped in. That's not very... granular. I would also like to see skills with more base range, but that's harder to deal with without breaking the system. This isn't a problem in superheroic or many cinematic genres, but in heroic genres, where characters are effectively defined by their skills and talents (and maybe one schtick stat) it becomes more readily apparent. Its not a deal breaker (and I've dealt with it in various ways over the years), but it is a drawback for the kinds of games I run.
I agree with you about the cha rolls.

There are multiple ways to handle that matter. Of course, you could change the scale (and BTW, I wouldn't mind going to something where each doubling was based on +10 rather than +5, such a modification would put human max STR at 30) , but there are other ways the problem can be dealt with too.

For example, GURPS 3rd edition uses a stat set up based on 10, with normal human max at 20. However, you almost never see any characters with stats near to 20 (at least not in lower power games), in most heroic games, a very good DEX would be 15.

GURPS tends to have a lower stat range than Hero, but it avoids the problems you mention because it does not base rolls on 9 + stat / 5

Instead GURPS rolls are just based on the stat with no modifications. . . .

In GURPS, if you have an 8 DEX your DEX roll is 8-
In GURPS, if you have an 12 DEX your DEX roll is 12-
In GURPS, if you have an 15 DEX your DEX roll is 15-

I've never been a big fan of randomness, and I wouldn't mind seeing Hero move in a direction where each point makes a difference.

[Teflon Billy]

I agree with you about the cha rolls.

There are multiple ways to handle that matter. Of course, you could change the scale (and BTW, I wouldn't mind going to something where each doubling was based on +10 rather than +5, such a modification would put human max STR at 30) , but there are other ways the problem can be dealt with too.

For example, GURPS 3rd edition uses a stat set up based on 10, with normal human max at 20. However, you almost never see any characters with stats near to 20 (at least not in lower power games), in most heroic games, a very good DEX would be 15.

GURPS tends to have a lower stat range than Hero, but it avoids the problems you mention because it does not base rolls on 9 + stat / 5

Instead GURPS rolls are just based on the stat with no modifications. . . .

In GURPS, if you have an 8 DEX your DEX roll is 8-
In GURPS, if you have an 12 DEX your DEX roll is 12-
In GURPS, if you have an 15 DEX your DEX roll is 15-

I've never been a big fan of randomness, and I wouldn't mind seeing Hero move in a direction where each point makes a difference.Except human max for the Hero system already is 30 for physical stats (and 50 for non-physicals, though I've never seen this level used for mundane humans), it's right there in the front of the Characteristics section.

My objection to granularity is completely focused on Skills, there is just not enough play in the numbers for Char based skills, Characters already start at 11- at the worst and likely 12-, if not 13-. Going beyond 15- and you start getting into the ridiculous "why bother rolling, you're going to succeed if you don't botch" or "pile on more and more penalties just to make the die roll mean something."

Which is why, only with regards to skill rolls, I wish hero used 3d10 and just left all published character's skill ratings (11-, CSLs, etc...) as is. Yes, it'd make most published characters a whole heck of a lot less competent, it'd force players to sink a lot more points into Skills or SLs etc..., but it'd make those Skill rolls more varied.

TB

[Vondy]

Except human max for the Hero system already is 30 for physical stats (and 50 for non-physicals, though I've never seen this level used for mundane humans), it's right there in the front of the Characteristics section.



You are missing part of the equation: the strength chart is a literal measure with lift ratios tailored to the superheroic genre. Lets say I'm running a gritty medieval fantasy game and I want a character with a 30 strength (the defined human maxima). He's not supposed to be beowulf or hurcules (who are superheroic in essence), but I want more range for this nasty, brutish, and short little genre I'm running. Go look at the strength chart and tell me I don't have a problem. I mean, its right there in the characteristics section, right?

(I'm sorry, when someone is snarky and implies the answer is obvious and proceeds to propose the problem is the solution in the process I get an urge to snark back).

This is why, above, I mentioned wanting the ability to rescale the system to different genres and proposed using a different strength chart for heroic level games. The other stats run to 30/50 as well, but they are completely abstract. I can define a 30/50 as anything I want for my genre. I can't do that with strength. Its literal and set in stone. I hit strength 22-23 and suspension of disbeleif goes on a bender and my genre breaks. I have to change the strength chart or settle for a smaller range and almost no variation in strength rolls to make it work.

This scale issue plays out with "universal builds" of various things that are theoretically cross-genre, but clearly work better for some than others, but that's much easier to deal with. Its just work, not system-editing. I think the ability to be universal is a good thing. Forcing every genre onto a universal scale, however, not so good.

[Steve Long]

To the extent there was any reason to start a separate thread on the issue of universality, this thread has clearly veered into subjects that should be posted on established threads. Please keep Characteristics-related issues in the Characteristics thread; if you have something to say about "universality," General Issues will do fine. Thank you for your input. ;)