How about Character Level Advancement?

[Lord Fyre]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.

It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:
It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:
Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:
I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:

[Klaus Mogensen]

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building
I think that one of the major things that seperate Hero from D&D and similar systems is the great freedom of character creation and advancement. I don't want to see that changed.

However, it is very possible to make a level-like construct within Hero (it is, after all, a toolkit). It could go something like this:


Character Levels in Hero System (sidebar option)
If you want something like character levels in Hero System, you can use the following guidelines:

Level one: 30 character points, active points limit 20, DC limit 4
Each +1 level: +30 character points, active points limit +5, DC limit +1
So at level 5, a character would e.g. have a total of 150 character points and an active points limit of 40.
You can add a few more items such as characteristics maximae if you like, but it doesn't have to be more complex than the above.

- Klaus

[Hugh Neilson]

I don't see moving the game to be more like d20 to be advantageous. If you want to play d20, play d20. Hero is, and should remain, a separate system.

That said, I see nothing wrong with some guidance in the rules for simulating a level-based system, though I don't see it as any kind of priority. There's only so many pages available.

[Vulcan]

Yeah, the system Klaus posted should be plenty. Maybe half a page in the GM's book should be plenty.

[NestorDRod]

I thought about it.

Years ago.

That's why I don't play those games any more. ;)

[nexus]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.

It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:


I've seen what happens when a tabletop game tries emulate a MMO (D and D 4e.) Not interested.



It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:


3-5 experience points which can be spent immediately to either get skills, talents, perks, multipower slots or small (or extremely limited powers). Things may have changed since I last played a level based system generally you didn't go up a level every session.



Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:


I've found point totals and active points do that pretty well and levels wouldn't work much better in a game like Hero where character creation is very open. Two characters of the same point total aren't totally "equal" across the board and, unless character generation was narrowed to "classes" and such, two of the same level would probably be different as well.



I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:

You can already "fake" levels with Hero system. Gestalt does it in a fashion. I could see this being given some mention in a GM guidebook or section but as inherit part of the system? No way. I moved away from level based systems along time ago

[AnotherSkip]

I have enough problems with characters saving XP and not spending it to worry about such things.

One guy will get in the 10-25 range if we let him. it is a baaaaaaaad habit we are trying to break.

[Lord Fyre]

I have enough problems with characters saving XP and not spending it to worry about such things.

One guy will get in the 10-25 range if we let him. it is a baaaaaaaad habit we are trying to break.

On the contrary, if the player has a strong idea of a power he wants, I think he is doing the right thing. :rockon:

[AnotherSkip]

On the contrary, if the player has a strong idea of a power he wants, I think he is doing the right thing. :rockon:

I would agree IF he were going for something, He ISN'T.
He is merely saving them because it is his bad habit, from D&D that you save points then level. I would rather the character grow organically from the adventures rather than "Bing" whenever we bs at the end of four or five weeks of gaming. He then spends his points in a twiddly fashion and kinda forgets what he has been doing. Keep in mind It isn't really a complaint about him or saving points (neither of which I have a complaint about in the slightest) or spending them in a twiddly fashion (which is just fine tuning the character) but when the player himself recognises it as a bad leftover habit....

Besides level advancement is a hangover from Tactical Studies Rules Millitary background. I have yet to see a character with a good background that is "fully funded" at the get go.

[Vulcan]

If a character is 'fully funded' at the get go, well, there's really not all that much point to actually playing the character, is there?

[NestorDRod]

If a character is 'fully funded' at the get go, well, there's really not all that much point to actually playing the character, is there?

Depends on your playing style. Not everyone is a builder; some players have a story for their characters that doesn't involve them starting as newbies.

[AnotherSkip]

In a 150 point Hero campaign I had plans for about the next 300-1000 character points by the time I hit 200 cp....

I don't start as a newbie most times (the others I game with complain about "skippy manuvers" when I play new kids). However if you are "fully funded" what are you gonna do with the Xp you accumulate? nothing? takes out one of the rewards of playing the game IMNSHO.

[caris]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.

It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:
It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:
Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:
I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:

I'm not rejecting it out of hand. First, I'd point out that it is not that unusual of a concept. In many ways my understanding is that DnD from 3rd on could be considered such a hybrid with just more emphais on the level than on the build. RoleMaster is certainly a hybrid of a level and a build system. Earthdawn is one as well. Unfortunately, I it most likely that any attempt to introduce levels to Hero would most likely follow the RoleMaster model, which while I liked RoleMaster well enough, I know was one of the reason that most of my friends did not like RoleMaster. They didn't like getting a rather large number of points that had to all be spent at that one point in time. Now, granted with RoleMaster it was aggravated by the way that points were spent, but that feel of having to go through what can for some people be the tedious part of character creation (yes, I know some people love doing that I'm one of them. I'll build characters just for fun in RoleMaster.), spending a lot of points all at one time, got to them.

I do like the Earthdawn approach, where you spend points on various things, once you meet certain criteria, than you can level up, which primarily consists of enabling you to spend points on new things, and getting bonus abilities for "free". A model that I think would be a bit more of a departure from the current structure than most people would desire, particularly getting "free" stuff.

[caris]

In a 150 point Hero campaign I had plans for about the next 300-1000 character points by the time I hit 200 cp....

I don't start as a newbie most times (the others I game with complain about "skippy manuvers" when I play new kids). However if you are "fully funded" what are you gonna do with the Xp you accumulate? nothing? takes out one of the rewards of playing the game IMNSHO.

Well, that is sort of what NestorDRod is getting at. XP is only one possible way of rewarding players. Now Hero is different in that almost all of the normal rewards used in RPGs: competency, power, influence, "toys," wealth, followers, etc. can be directly acquired with points. There are still rewards from the less "gamey" aspects of RPGs that can motivate people to play. At the risk of invoking too much White Wolf some peole are just interested telling an interesting story, or acting out an interesting character. I've oftened switched characters in a campaign, not because I've run out of interesting things to buy for the character with XP, but because I've run out of interesting things to have the character do.

[Kdansky]

One of the main things I dislike in DnD: Character level

Say, what level are you? What Level am I? I can tell you that I am "pretty good" at Computer Science, so I would give myself a Computer Programming Skill. But Level?

Yeah right, moving on.

[NestorDRod]

In a 150 point Hero campaign I had plans for about the next 300-1000 character points by the time I hit 200 cp....

I don't start as a newbie most times (the others I game with complain about "skippy manuvers" when I play new kids). However if you are "fully funded" what are you gonna do with the Xp you accumulate? nothing? takes out one of the rewards of playing the game IMNSHO.

Personally, I find my reward in playing the character, not accumulating stuff.

I've played in (and thoroughly enjoyed) games where XP was completely an afterthought.

But that's my playing style. YMMV. :)

[Hugh Neilson]

One of the main things I dislike in DnD: Character level

Say, what level are you? What Level am I? I can tell you that I am "pretty good" at Computer Science, so I would give myself a Computer Programming Skill. But Level?

Yeah right, moving on.

Yes and no. In Hero, you still need to determine your "level" of computer programming skill by assigning a roll to it. The difference, of course, is that D&D would cap your skill based on your level, so if you are a "level 2" character overall, your skill is capped, whereas in hero you could choose to be "the best computer programmer in the world" by paying the points, even if you are a starting character. Viva la Difference!

[incrdbil]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.


Ok, lets take a look.



It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:

Well, it won't really do that much for compatibility--since all of the other mechanics arent going to be compatible, putting in a level based system really want help that much. It will tremendously annoy HERO players however, for no good reason.

to make a game to chase after the MMO market, you have to make far more severe changes to do so. I refer you to the 4th ediiton D&d threads for an example of the gutting of a RPG that such a move calls for.



It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:

A GM is free to vary experience awards to pace the campaign as he wishes. If anything, level advancement can frustrate players..since you have to wait...and wait...and wait..then suddenly, you kill the magic monster, and all of your abilities blossom.

3 to 5 points per session will advance certain gere characters pretty well though. 3 to 5 points to a 350 poiht superhero is nice. 5 points to a 150 point heroic character is something more.



Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:

there's so much varied about HERO, that just slapping on levels would no nothing to help with encounter balancing, unless level advancement controlled everything--active point limits, real point limits, DC's, and defenses.



I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:

It's thinking about things like levels and such that made many HERO players quit other systems and choose HERo instead.

Now, you can simulate levelling, in a way. Simpy dont award XP to players as normal simply say you are holding it. (Or hold 75% of it, and let the payers have a few discretionary points) Then, at an appropriate time, you suddenly infuse the characters with their points--be it some form of training period, power development, the classic radiation accident, whatever explanation you use for 'level' advanacement. You can control omewhat how they are spent based on activites of the characters.

[sbarron]

I don't start as a newbie most times (the others I game with complain about "skippy manuvers" when I play new kids). However if you are "fully funded" what are you gonna do with the Xp you accumulate? nothing? takes out one of the rewards of playing the game IMNSHO.IMHO, the massive deluge of epic, rags-to-riches, fantasy novels have really shaped the way people view the fantasy genre as a whole now (along with the D&D leveling template). The Lord of the Rings is the classic example of PCs starting wimpy and getting stronger as the campaign progresses. The PCs in the LOTRs learn to fight (the hobbits), aquire excellent armor and magic items (all of them), get bigger and stronger (Pipen and Merry), etc...until the story ends and our wimpy starting characters are all "bad ass" in their own way. Think of all the fantasy novels out there now that follow this basic premise. There are too many to even count.

However, there are other ways of telling a fantasy story. How much "better" did Hercules get throughout his stories? Or Druss the Legend? Or Conan? Or Lancelot? Or Odysseus?

Odysseus is a great example because he bounces around the Med for 20 years throughout the course of his tale, and stayed basically the same. Did he learn to become a ninja-assasin while on the island of the Lotus-Eaters? Nope. Did he learn sorcery from Circe? No he didn't. Did he become immortal while he was with Calypso? No again. So 20 years of adventuring (10 fighting Troy and 10 getting home), and Odysseus arrives back in Athens basically the same guy he was when he left, just 20 years older, and not much wiser.

You don't think it would be fun to go through similar adventures to the guys I listed above just because you wouldn't "advance" along the way? It's different than the template D&D established, but I still think it would be fun.

[steamteck]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.

It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:
It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:
Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:

I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:


Ok, I've thought about and now really understand what an incredibly bad idea it is. I loath ( actually too mild a word) the idea of HERO becoming level based which I can tolerate in a video game but not in my PnP at this point in my life.:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:

[IndianaJoe3]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interesting benefits.

The best way to simulate a level-based (or class-based, for that matter) system with Hero is to pre-build everything, and forbid the players from going outside those lines. It's a lot of work for the GM, but it won't break the system.

[Vulcan]

At which point you're playing D&D with the HEROs Combat system.

Worse, it's 4th Edition D&D.

[Kdansky]

At which point you're playing D&D with the HEROs Combat system.

Worse, it's 4th Edition D&D.

Better than third at least. Which was better than second. Which was better than first. So technically, you play the best D&D you can get, with HERO combat system. :P

[Vulcan]

I honestly wouldn't compare HEROs to D&D, it's apples and oranges.:)

Or in the case of 4E D&D, apples to oragutans.:rolleyes:

I have seen the future of D&D... and it's no longer D&D.:(

[Tech]

At a time when many games were emulating the level-up idea, Hero Games came up with a radical idea: don't use it and use power points instead; create a system which is unique. It has maintained that basic concept because it is a good concept, so much so that it was voted into the Origin Awards Adventure Gaming Hall of Fame in 1999, among other awards. I am against the 6th edition becoming a level-up game. As someone on this thread said, if you want D20 then play that. The Hero Games System is special; it's survived these years because of it's specialness. However, any GM can add houserules to create a level-up campaign.

[AnotherSkip]

I'm not rejecting it out of hand. First, I'd point out that it is not that unusual of a concept. In many ways my understanding is that DnD from 3rd on could be considered such a hybrid with just more emphais on the level than on the build. RoleMaster is certainly a hybrid of a level and a build system. Earthdawn is one as well. Unfortunately, I it most likely that any attempt to introduce levels to Hero would most likely follow the RoleMaster model, which while I liked RoleMaster well enough, I know was one of the reason that most of my friends did not like RoleMaster. They didn't like getting a rather large number of points that had to all be spent at that one point in time. Now, granted with RoleMaster it was aggravated by the way that points were spent, but that feel of having to go through what can for some people be the tedious part of character creation (yes, I know some people love doing that I'm one of them. I'll build characters just for fun in RoleMaster.), spending a lot of points all at one time, got to them.

I do like the Earthdawn approach, where you spend points on various things, once you meet certain criteria, than you can level up, which primarily consists of enabling you to spend points on new things, and getting bonus abilities for "free". A model that I think would be a bit more of a departure from the current structure than most people would desire, particularly getting "free" stuff.

really the "Free" things are kinda minor, but then when you consider that the amount of XP that is used in advance from level to level is more than fibonachily increased then I don't see it as a problem. And skills are ridiclously expensive in both time and xp.

[AnotherSkip]

Frankly try this for level:
1. build your own skill enhancer
2. tie levels to skill rolls (across the board averages) for the Skill enhancers this gives you the ability to come off as more Seventh Sea ish, since combat isn't really tied into the performance values.

[megaplayboy]

Well, we always used +1 DC/+5 AP per 50 xp as a general guideline in supers games--a 10 DC 250 point game becomes a 12 DC game after 100 xp, a 15 DC game after 250 xp(about the most xp in any campaign I've played), etc.

There's a lot of gradations between "newbie" and "fully funded" characters. Most comic book characters tend to be in between those two states of being. Even a "fully funded" character can still find room to grow--contacts, favors, minor background skills to add flavor, lots of "hero bling"(random gadgets, vehicles, bases, a super horse, super monkey, super cat, super dog, super androids, a super zoo, etc.), and even new powers on occasion.

[Tonio]

Regarding the "if you wanna play a level-based system, go play D&D" argument... There are plenty other differences between D&D and HERO. Or, I could just say "if you wanna play a points-based system, go play GURPS".

That being said... I don't think levels as a core rule is a good idea for HERO. As an optional rule, maybe... although even then I think it'd serve more as a crutch for level-system players who are moving to HERO.

[megaplayboy]

I do remember that in Allston's old "Super Agents" book, that xp levels affected one's rank in their organization, and that higher ranking agents had more perks and equipment. So, you could possibly do something like that as a way to handle some of the external perks of becoming more experienced, renowned, etc. It wouldn't impact combat stats or anything like that, but it might mean rep bonuses, "free" equipment/base/vehicle points, contacts, etc.

[Diamond Spear]

I think part of the problem is that in many HERO games the GM ignores rewards other than experience points. The spunky kid that keeps showing up to help out doesn’t eventually become a follower; the police sergent they keep running into and have finally won over doesn’t become a contact; the questing fighter who performs a great service for the lord of the realm doesn’t get knighted with all the privliges that attached to a knighthood; the mage who has been collecting books for years doesn’t aquire Knowledge Skills based on his library.

The fault I think lies partially with the GMs for not taking full advantage of the multiple ways they can reward players but also in large part with the HERO books themselves for not doing a better job of conveying to GMs all the different rewards players should get. I know they mention it but I think it needs to be much more prominently expressed to help those GMs coming from different, often level-based systems. Of course it might just be me so….:)

[Lord Fyre]

Okay. I was just throwing out an Idea. :shock: (Mr. Long did say that everything was up for consideration.)

Clearly, given the vocal rejection from this thread, It was not a very good idea. :no:

[Klaus Mogensen]

I think part of the problem is that in many HERO games the GM ignores rewards other than experience points. The spunky kid that keeps showing up to help out doesn’t eventually become a follower; the police sergent they keep running into and have finally won over doesn’t become a contact; the questing fighter who performs a great service for the lord of the realm doesn’t get knighted with all the privliges that attached to a knighthood; the mage who has been collecting books for years doesn’t aquire Knowledge Skills based on his library.
This can be done simply by having the GM designate (say) half the XP for contacts, perks, knowledge skills, and such, and only allow the players to designate the other half. This would be a useful suggestion for the GM section.

- Klaus

[Bokrug]

The problem I have with the current experience system is how difficult it is to add your points into a power framework while still trying to keep it balanced for best efficiency. You basically have to rebuild the whole thing, which seems like an awful waste of time when just spending a few points, and you may not even be able to do it if everything doesn't 'round' well.

[Markdoc]

I think part of the problem is that in many HERO games the GM ignores rewards other than experience points. The spunky kid that keeps showing up to help out doesn’t eventually become a follower; the police sergent they keep running into and have finally won over doesn’t become a contact; the questing fighter who performs a great service for the lord of the realm doesn’t get knighted with all the privliges that attached to a knighthood; the mage who has been collecting books for years doesn’t aquire Knowledge Skills based on his library.

Yeah, that's just bad GM'ing though. Most of the GMs I have played with do all of those things, even in systems that had no inbuilt mechanism for contacts and perks, like AD&D. I award (or take away, depending) "non-costed" perks like reputation, contact, wealth, etc all the time. If the players spend points on such things, then they tend to be more "permanent" than game-based awards, so I don't figure them directly into Xp, but I certainly award (and keep track of) such things.

cheers, Mark

[Crypt]

I am serious. :think:

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.

It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:
It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:
Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:

I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:



You can alreay simulate levels thanks to the great flexibility of Hero so i see no good reason to reduce this flexibility by injecting levels in his core system. IMHO, that would be an anti-Hero process. Hero is a full system, not just a fun but heavily limited game like DD4.

BUT it could be a supplement using the system to build an heroic fantasy levelled variant in the DD way with a limited number of defined classes and powers.... a dungeonning parody based on the Hero engine. It could be fun.

[AnotherSkip]

I really don't care for the Cryptic info/tie in, Steve specifically said more or less "it won't influence our game system".

I would prefer to get people to think more creatively than levels which were tied to millitary concepts TSR was based upon.

[Ockham's Spoon]

First let me say that I think Lord Fyre has a point. There is a visceral appeal and simplicity to the "leveling up" process. The complexity of HERO offers fantastic flexibility, but it often offers little direction. For a lot of people that isn't a problem, but most of the people that I have introduced to HERO get their XP and don't really know what to do with them because it isn't laid out. Maybe it is lack of imagination on their part, but if HERO wants to expand its fan base and not come across as snobbish, it might do well to throw a bone to those people used to d20-type systems and video games.

That said, I agree with the idea that if you want a "level" based system in HERO, then you should just house-rule it, and some of the suggestions listed above are good ones. I would add the idea put forth in one of the Fantasy Hero additions that some spells had a (small) limitation that they were only available to wizards who had spent 20+ or 30+ points in spells for that particular spell college. That made those megaspells slightly more affordable, but it also effectively limited their use to "high level" wizards, ie, those that had spent a lot of points in that spell college. Similar things could be done for warriors (e.g. the "Critical Hit" power which adds +1d6 KA can only be purchased by people with at least 3 levels with the weapon being used). Granted this does mean more work for the GM generally, but if you want that flavor you can have it. Because really you *can* do anything with HERO, right?

[levi]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Fyre
I am serious.

If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.
It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system.


I've seen what happens when a tabletop game tries emulate a MMO (D and D 4e.) Not interested.


Quote:
It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.)

3-5 experience points which can be spent immediately to either get skills, talents, perks, multipower slots or small (or extremely limited powers). Things may have changed since I last played a level based system generally you didn't go up a level every session.


Quote:
Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make.

I've found point totals and active points do that pretty well and levels wouldn't work much better in a game like Hero where character creation is very open. Two characters of the same point total aren't totally "equal" across the board and, unless character generation was narrowed to "classes" and such, two of the same level would probably be different as well.


Quote:
I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes.
You can already "fake" levels with Hero system. Gestalt does it in a fashion. I could see this being given some mention in a GM guidebook or section but as inherit part of the system? No way. I moved away from level based systems along time ago


I would be willing to bet that Steve & Darren would LOVE to sell the numbers of books that WotC does with D&D 4e. In reality, this is a business designed to bring the joys of HERO games to the masses. I have been playing and loving HERO system games since 1986 but I can tell you that it has been the hardest RPG to find players for. Not due to a lack of Levels, but due to the complexity of the character creation and the gameplay. Any ideas that attract more players without sacrificing what makes HERO unique is a good thing for the game.

As for GMing and balancing encounters, point values are no way to balance an encounter. All this does is emphasize differences in character creation methodologies. The best way, I've found currently, to provide encounter balance is to balance Attack - Defense - Stun - Body values against each other. I can say that I would love to have some stronger materials for designing encounters from Steve.

[Kdansky]

We already have a power indicator: It's called Character Points.

If you add a level to that, it will just be very arbitrarily be something like:

Level 1: Up to 100 points
Level 2: Up to 150 points
Level 3: Up to 200 points

So in effect, it's utterly useless. There is a german system who does that, and levels are just not used anymore. Sure, they exist, but why bother keeping track of an extra number which has no effect at all?

[Tech]

Personally, I find my reward in playing the character, not accumulating stuff.

I've played in (and thoroughly enjoyed) games where XP was completely an afterthought.

But that's my playing style. YMMV. :)

That's how me, my brothers and my friends play it. Experience points are fun and great, allowing growth but if you don't like playing your character, all the experience points in the world isn't going to help you. We have a very experienced hero team where they're pretty much where we want them to be at, power-wise and skill-wise. They probably all have anywhere from 50-100 experience pts lying around but aren't spending it because their concepts are pretty much complete. They're just fun to play.

[Vulcan]

50-100 points unspent? That could be a lot of contacts.

When spending XP, I've noticed that a lot of players (myself included) tend to neglect things like contacts. As a group we tend to want more combat levels, bigger attacks, and higher skill rolls. The lowly contact is an afterthought.

But look at what they do for the character. A contact is a person who is willing to be helpful to the character. Just consider all the things that could mean:

The owner of a high-tech company is willing to sell (at cost) or donate equipment to the character (so he can buy it with points).
A friendly judge is willing to issue a warrant more easily or at odd hours.
A socialite can get a character into an exclusive event.
A PR agent can help a character improve his public image (Hancock, anyone?)
An FBI agent could intervene on behalf of a character in a shaky legal situation.
An aerospace firm might be willing to provide a new vehicle for the team.
The CIA might be able to get the character into (or out of) an unfriendly country.
The president can issue a pardon on behalf of the character.

The list goes on and on. So why don't more characters have more contacts? Part of it may be that, as game geeks (those of us who are) we tend to be a kinda shy group. So the social aspects of the game get slightly overlooked beyond buying Interaction Skills. Not to say we don't actually roleplay out the situations to the best of our ability, but sometimes the long-term aspects of a social situation.

Of late, I've been taking the Well Connected enhancer on my more social characters, even (or maybe especially) if I can't scrape up points for some starting contacts. It encourages me to buy them in game, to go along with the ones the GM hands out in play.

Just a thought.

[NestorDRod]

50-100 points unspent? That could be a lot of contacts.

When spending XP, I've noticed that a lot of players (myself included) tend to neglect things like contacts. As a group we tend to want more combat levels, bigger attacks, and higher skill rolls. The lowly contact is an afterthought.

But look at what they do for the character. A contact is a person who is willing to be helpful to the character. Just consider all the things that could mean:

The owner of a high-tech company is willing to sell (at cost) or donate equipment to the character (so he can buy it with points).
A friendly judge is willing to issue a warrant more easily or at odd hours.
A socialite can get a character into an exclusive event.
A PR agent can help a character improve his public image (Hancock, anyone?)
An FBI agent could intervene on behalf of a character in a shaky legal situation.
An aerospace firm might be willing to provide a new vehicle for the team.
The CIA might be able to get the character into (or out of) an unfriendly country.
The president can issue a pardon on behalf of the character.

The list goes on and on. So why don't more characters have more contacts? Part of it may be that, as game geeks (those of us who are) we tend to be a kinda shy group. So the social aspects of the game get slightly overlooked beyond buying Interaction Skills. Not to say we don't actually roleplay out the situations to the best of our ability, but sometimes the long-term aspects of a social situation.

Of late, I've been taking the Well Connected enhancer on my more social characters, even (or maybe especially) if I can't scrape up points for some starting contacts. It encourages me to buy them in game, to go along with the ones the GM hands out in play.

Just a thought.

<shrug>

Generally, characters gain contacts as part of the game, not because the players paid points for them. Same way that any Disadvantages gained from playing (such as a new Hunted or DNPC) don't automatically give the characters more points.

At least, that's the way we've always played it. :)

[ghost-angel]

You really have to ask yourself what Levels even add to a Game.

They are a measuring stick for some form of Power Level. And Hero already has a large number of those:

OCV Maximum, Active Points, Character Points, Damage Classes

What would levels add to the system? Do certain DC and AP levels denote certain Levels of Characters? Are they Character Point based?

You can have one game with both a Damage Class and Active Point cap (for example I played in one game that was 75 Active Points, but no more than 12 Damage Classes) or several with just an Active Point cap (Most I play in have the standard 60AP cap, though one of them was 120).

The problem with System denoting Levels is now you've forced every Game into the same framework for determining Power. Which is closing the system off, not opening it up.

[casualplayer]

You could easily set up a level system in HERO by making little, incremental package deals but it would only add constraints to the game and add little to nothing.

I mean, would you rather save up 20 xps and then buy +1 to all Primary Characteristics except COM and 1 level w/ All Combat or would you rather spend them as you get them and develop as the story suggests?

[NestorDRod]

I mean, would you rather save up 20 xps and then buy +1 to all Primary Characteristics except COM and 1 level w/ All Combat or would you rather spend them as you get them and develop as the story suggests?

Just in case that wasn't a rhetorical quesiton, my personal choice would be the latter. ;)

[AnotherSkip]

It might help GM's control the advancement of the players (a problem I also have right now) but in the long run negotiation with the players and solving those problems are a big part of GM ing In HERO.

no level advancement means the training wheels are off.

[Chris Goodwin]

Under the current RAW, there's nothing stopping the GM from putting together "level advancement" packages.

[Tonio]

Under the current RAW, there's nothing stopping the GM from putting together "level advancement" packages.

Right. Given HERO's "toolkit" status, and given you can use HERO mechanics and rules to create a level-advancement system, I don't think there's a need to change the rules to move in that direction. At best, a section on how to implement a level-advancement system might be appropriate.

There's no inherent evilness in "level advancement". It has some advantages and some disadvantages. So use it if you want, or don't. You have the option, currently. =)

[JmOz]

Right. Given HERO's "toolkit" status, and given you can use HERO mechanics and rules to create a level-advancement system, I don't think there's a need to change the rules to move in that direction. At best, a section on how to implement a level-advancement system might be appropriate.

There's no inherent evilness in "level advancement". It has some advantages and some disadvantages. So use it if you want, or don't. You have the option, currently. =)

Agreed, while I would like to see a paragraph or two in the main book suggesting the idea (With an example or two), however I would like to see it become a feature in the new genre books

[Istaran]

Character Levels in Hero System (sidebar option)


If you want something like character levels in Hero System, you can use the following guidelines:

Level one: 30 character points, active points limit 20, DC limit 4
Each +1 level: +30 character points, active points limit +5, DC limit +1
So at level 5, a character would e.g. have a total of 150 character points and an active points limit of 40.
You can add a few more items such as characteristics maximae if you like, but it doesn't have to be more complex than the above.

- Klaus

I think something like this, but keeping the XP per session immediately available to spend could give the 'benefits' of leveling rather cheaply. The players and the GM both know what the AP/DC caps are for any given character and when and how they will change. So even without predicting what your players will spend their points in, you can automatically predict what their maximums are going to be and use that to pre-plan adversaries. If you need to tweak things when you get there, they shouldn't be too far off. And the players can get excited about hitting a new higher AP/DC cap (aka level).
You should probably concider CV and defense maxima in their as well.

----

DC limit 4 at 'level 1' is kind of restrictive though. I say this only because for 10 pts someone can pick up martial arts, including offensive strike. Added to a mighty 10 str, that's 6 DCs. Do they really need to be a 90 pt character before we allow that? Just musing.

[Klaus Mogensen]

DC limit 4 at 'level 1' is kind of restrictive though. I say this only because for 10 pts someone can pick up martial arts, including offensive strike. Added to a mighty 10 str, that's 6 DCs. Do they really need to be a 90 pt character before we allow that? Just musing.
I think the problem here lies with Offensive Strike, which I've always found very cheap for +4 DC. A STR 20 character with Offensive Strike can do as much damage as a brick capable of lifing a small jet!

I hope 6e gets a consolidated system for building martial arts maneuvers (as has been discussed under Skill Issues) so we can get more resonable costs.

Anyway, DC4 is what a STR 12 character with a broadsword does, or an average human with a .30 Luger or 9mm Browning. That seemed like Level 1 to me. If you feel this is to low, start characters at a higher level or redefine what Level 1 is.

- Klaus

[The Main Man]

I am serious. :think:


If the Hero system could be done as some kind of hybrid of character level advancement and point building, I believe that this would open up some interresting benefits.

It would improve convertability with the MMO, which Cryptic has clearly stated that will be a level based system. :sneaky:
It would give more a sense of character advancement, which is somewhat limited now, as the typical adventure only yields 3-5 experience points. (This is expecially true for players coming from other game systems.) :eg:
Finally, it would add some structure to encounter balancing, which would make senarios easier to make. :yes:
I do understand how radical this idea is, but before rejecting it out of hand, think about it for a coupld of minutes. :angst:
No (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjnu8qWRXsA)

[Kdansky]

Let me put it like this:

Not having Levels but being a toolkit allows those who want it to use them. For whatever reasons, they are an abstraction in the first place which is not required anymore, because we already have that abstraction with character points.

Having Levels will probably make the game problematic for those who don't want them. AkA the not-so-diehard-DnD fans. Because face it, Levels are only there because we had DnD first. Many systems don't use them and that works fine. In fact, DSA (a german system) made levels a lot less important in a big overhaul new edition and subsequently removed them completely in a small revision (like FRED to 5ER).

Levels are only good for bragging about your "Level 20 gnome mage with my magic staff which killed the dragon in a giant crit fireball for 180 damage (because we have crit houserules) and then ...." You may add some horrible gaming story afterwards :P


One more thing: If "character advancement" means "Needs moar powa!" to you, then you have missed the idea of "ROLE-playing"...

[Istaran]

I think the problem here lies with Offensive Strike, which I've always found very cheap for +4 DC. A STR 20 character with Offensive Strike can do as much damage as a brick capable of lifing a small jet!

I hope 6e gets a consolidated system for building martial arts maneuvers (as has been discussed under Skill Issues) so we can get more resonable costs.

Anyway, DC4 is what a STR 12 character with a broadsword does, or an average human with a .30 Luger or 9mm Browning. That seemed like Level 1 to me. If you feel this is to low, start characters at a higher level or redefine what Level 1 is.

- Klaus

That sounds fair. So Offensive Strike would simply be unavailable at level 1. I think that works.

[Klaus Mogensen]

Levels are only good for bragging about your "Level 20 gnome mage with my magic staff which killed the dragon in a giant crit fireball for 180 damage (because we have crit houserules) and then ...."
I have also found levels/classes a good shorthand for describing a character's abilities and power levels. I can live without that, though.


One more thing: If "character advancement" means "Needs moar powa!" to you, then you have missed the idea of "ROLE-playing"...
I though Hero was about ROLL-playing. ;)

- Klaus

[Hugh Neilson]

Levels are only good for bragging about your "Level 20 gnome mage with my magic staff which killed the dragon in a giant crit fireball for 180 damage (because we have crit houserules) and then ...." You may add some horrible gaming story afterwards :P

I'm not a fan of adding levels to Hero at all. That said, is this materially different from your "750 point gnome mage with my magic staff which killed the dragon in a giant crit fireball for 42 BOD and 210 STUN damage (because we have crit houserules) and then ...."

Levels are not the same as power gaming, and point based systems do not prevent power gaming.

[Navar]

Another vote for NO level based system. MAYBE a sidebar in a book that isn't the main book. MAYBE.

[Captain Obvious]

If someone wants levels, and compromising will get them to play Hero instead of pressuring me to play D&D, then I'm all for it. I'll even work up level package deals, so you'll know what to spend your points on when you get enough to level up.

I don't intend on using them myself.

[Lord Fyre]

That sounds fair. So Offensive Strike would simply be unavailable at level 1. I think that works.

Depends on Genre. For Supers, you start could start at DC 8 for example as Lvl 1 for example.

[satyr]

Maybe we could all go back to living in trees.

[mayapuppies]

If someone wants levels, and compromising will get them to play Hero instead of pressuring me to play D&D, then I'm all for it. I'll even work up level package deals, so you'll know what to spend your points on when you get enough to level up.

I don't intend on using them myself.
Seconded

[Istaran]

Depends on Genre. For Supers, you start could start at DC 8 for example as Lvl 1 for example.


Level one: 30 character points, active points limit 20, DC limit 4
Each +1 level: +30 character points, active points limit +5, DC limit +1
Ergo level five = 150 character points, active points limit 40, DC limit 8. So Supers might start at level 5 more often than level one. Level one is a bit high for a Normal, not typical super-hero fare.
---
I am also musing that perhaps a 'level' based moving soft cap would be good. So maybe the caps above would be the point where things start costing double (with or without a hard cap beyond that)? Then when you hit the new 'level' you get some points back for the things that no longer cost double. Maybe you'll reinvest to keep that thing ahead of the curve, or maybe you'll broaden your character. It would have the advantage that you get points as you go but also potentially get a good chunk of points upon leveling. (For me at least, I have a hard time not spending the trickle of points as I get them, making it really hard to get anything that doesn't have increments in the 5 or less points range.)

Just musing. Overall it seems the HERO-ites aren't really interested in D&D, and adding levels doesn't really address the strengths of D&D.

[AnotherSkip]

There is something of a soft cap for characters in my game but one character was past the cap and now tens of points later people are catching up.

He appreciates having other damage dealing people n his side.

[neogeo69]

I just bought the Villains, Vermins etc. and I'm disappointed with the huge fluctuations in Total Character Points. It makes it a bit difficult to gauge the strength of a villain when the total points is 450 points to 550 points and you have 350 point character heroes to play with. I find that some 550 point villain to be weaker than a more tightly written 450 point character.

It would be nice if there was an "assessment" level perhaps to let GM's know quickly the relative "toughness" of a villain is.

[incrdbil]

I just bought the Villains, Vermins etc. and I'm disappointed with the huge fluctuations in Total Character Points. It makes it a bit difficult to gauge the strength of a villain when the total points is 450 points to 550 points and you have 350 point character heroes to play with. I find that some 550 point villain to be weaker than a more tightly written 450 point character.

It would be nice if there was an "assessment" level perhaps to let GM's know quickly the relative "toughness" of a villain is.

Such a mewasure would be not terribly universal due to the varities of games. Some GM's may have 350 point characters with 8 DC. 15 DEF maxes, while others may allow much higher levels.

Point levels can't be a reliable level of character comparison unless they are built on the same campign basis and setting.

[Steve Long]

To the extent you want to discuss this issue further, please do so in the General Issues board, rather than starting other new threads. Thank you.