Steve's Guiding Philosophies For 6E -- Please Read Before Posting

[Steve Long]

Before starting on any major RPG project I think it’s important to define the nature of the project, the goals I have in mind for it, and the design philosophy that’s guiding my work. Since we’re asking y’all for your input and ideas on this particular project, I’d like you to be aware of my guiding philosophies for designing and writing the 6E rules so that you know where I’m coming from. I’m not posting them to suggest that you have to agree with them (though I hope you will), but so that my position is clear and you understand what I’m doing.

1. Everything is up for consideration.

There are no sacred cows here, no forbidden ground, no boundaries limiting where I’m going to go in my quest to make the HERO System rules even better — and therefore no restrictions on what you can suggest to me.

No potential change, no matter how radical, is going to be ignored if I think it could make the rules better. No rule, no matter how fundamental, is going to escape scrutiny. Literally everything — the type of dice used, the various scales in the game, point costs, how Skill and Attack rolls are made, everything — is up for discussion and consideration.

So don’t feel you have to hold back! If you have an idea for an improvement you think is solid, go right ahead and post it. All you’re risking is the ridicule of your fellow fans. I might say “No,” but I’m still going to consider what you said and appreciate that you said it.


2. The HERO System as it currently exists is a pretty solid rules system and doesn’t need a lot of significant changes.

Guiding Philosophy #1 notwithstanding, I am no fan of change for change’s sake. I’m not going to start changing things just because I have the opportunity and means to do so. I think the HERO System in its current incarnation is the best roleplaying game ever created — all I want to do is make it even better. I am contemplating some changes that are pretty significant, but for the most part I think the HERO System’s doing pretty damn well as it is.


3. We have to change the HERO System enough to make 6E worth doing.

Guiding Philosophy #2 notwithstanding, there’s no point in jumping through all the hoops to create 6E if all we do is tighten a nut here and polish a rivet there. If we’re going to go to all this effort there should be some substantive changes involved — not for the sake of change, but because those changes are solid improvements to the game. At this stage I don’t think the 6E rules changes are going to be so extreme as to “invalidate” old books, but as a practical matter they’re going to have to improve things enough to make you notice. As we said back when we launched 5E, “It’s not that you’ll have to upgrade — it’s that the new rules are so cool you’ll want to.”


4. I want to enhance the HERO System’s ability to simulate “dramatic realism” in your games, and thus to let you tailor it to the type of game you want.

By and large I think the HERO System does a great job of simulating “dramatic realism.” That’s not the realism of everyday life, but the “realism” depicted in comics, movies, novels, and TV shows — the sort of “reality” where the hero is hard to kill, can accomplish amazing things at times, and always gets the girl in the end. I don’t want to veer toward true “simulationism” of actual reality (if that’s even possible in an RPG), nor do I want to go too far off the beaten track toward a “narrativist” approach to gaming. By hewing toward dramatic realism, the HERO System makes it easy for the end user — the fan and customer — to tailor or customize the rules to reflect whatever type of “reality” he wants. If you want to go for “heavy realism,” you incorporate the optional rules that allow for that; if you do want to worry about “realism” at all, you can ignore some of the standard rules.

By and large I think the HERO System already does a fine job of this and doesn’t need to be tweaked too much (if at all) to meet this goal. However, presentation and organization of the rules may enhance its usefulness in this regard; so will calling things to the reader’s attention in sidebars, text boxes, and the like. I plan to keep all that in mind while writing and designing.


5. I would like to increase the HERO System’s granularity and precision.

As we’re all fond of saying, the HERO System can simulate anything. However, some aspects of the system don’t seem to have enough granularity — i.e., ability to precisely define and differentiate things — to make this as easy or helpful as it should be. Ideally I’d like to increase the System’s granularity. Unfortunately, most of the changes needed to really do this are so extreme that they’re not worth making. I’ll just have to settle for what I can get.


6. I want to continue to make the HERO System easier to learn and to use.

I think that in 5E and its product line we’ve made major strides in improving the approachability of the HERO System and increasing its “ease of learning” factor. The HERO System is hard-core gaming that rewards attention and effort, and we’re never going to get away from that entirely (nor should we). But anything that can reasonably be done to lessen the learning curve and improve usability is something I want to consider as part of the writing and design of the 6E rules.

[James Gillen]

1. Everything is up for consideration.

There are no sacred cows here, no forbidden ground, no boundaries limiting where I’m going to go in my quest to make the HERO System rules even better — and therefore no restrictions on what you can suggest to me.

No potential change, no matter how radical, is going to be ignored if I think it could make the rules better. No rule, no matter how fundamental, is going to escape scrutiny. Literally everything — the type of dice used, the various scales in the game, point costs, how Skill and Attack rolls are made, everything — is up for discussion and consideration.

So don’t feel you have to hold back! If you have an idea for an improvement you think is solid, go right ahead and post it. All you’re risking is the ridicule of your fellow fans. I might say “No,” but I’m still going to consider what you said and appreciate that you said it.

How about shifting to a "roll high" Difficulty Number system like other games use these days?

2. The HERO System as it currently exists is a pretty solid rules system and doesn’t need a lot of significant changes.

Guiding Philosophy #1 notwithstanding, I am no fan of change for change’s sake.

Me neither.

3. We have to change the HERO System enough to make 6E worth doing.

Guiding Philosophy #2 notwithstanding, there’s no point in jumping through all the hoops to create 6E if all we do is tighten a nut here and polish a rivet there. If we’re going to go to all this effort there should be some substantive changes involved — not for the sake of change, but because those changes are solid improvements to the game.

Obviously.

4. I want to enhance the HERO System’s ability to simulate “dramatic realism” in your games, and thus to let you tailor it to the type of game you want.

By and large I think the HERO System does a great job of simulating “dramatic realism.” That’s not the realism of everyday life, but the “realism” depicted in comics, movies, novels, and TV shows — the sort of “reality” where the hero is hard to kill, can accomplish amazing things at times, and always gets the girl in the end. I don’t want to veer toward true “simulationism” of actual reality (if that’s even possible in an RPG), nor do I want to go too far off the beaten track toward a “narrativist” approach to gaming. By hewing toward dramatic realism, the HERO System makes it easy for the end user — the fan and customer — to tailor or customize the rules to reflect whatever type of “reality” he wants. If you want to go for “heavy realism,” you incorporate the optional rules that allow for that; if you do want to worry about “realism” at all, you can ignore some of the standard rules.

Have you considered making the Heroic Action Points from Pulp HERO a basic option rule for other genres?

By and large I think the HERO System already does a fine job of this and doesn’t need to be tweaked too much (if at all) to meet this goal. However, presentation and organization of the rules may enhance its usefulness in this regard; so will calling things to the reader’s attention in sidebars, text boxes, and the like. I plan to keep all that in mind while writing and designing.

This is similar to how 5th Ed. is organized, so that makes sense.


5. I would like to increase the HERO System’s granularity and precision.

As we’re all fond of saying, the HERO System can simulate anything. However, some aspects of the system don’t seem to have enough granularity — i.e., ability to precisely define and differentiate things — to make this as easy or helpful as it should be. Ideally I’d like to increase the System’s granularity.[/quote]

I'm not totally sure what this means in practice.

6. I want to continue to make the HERO System easier to learn and to use.

I think that in 5E and its product line we’ve made major strides in improving the approachability of the HERO System and increasing its “ease of learning” factor. The HERO System is hard-core gaming that rewards attention and effort, and we’re never going to get away from that entirely (nor should we). But anything that can reasonably be done to lessen the learning curve and improve usability is something I want to consider as part of the writing and design of the 6E rules.

That should be the main principle in getting this system to a larger audience. Of course, it still has to keep everything that makes HERO System worth using in comparison to everything else.

James

[Thia Halmades]

I've posted a series of thoughts elsewhere, but I'll go ahead and give you the nuts straight on my thoughts now, while I'm here:

1) There should be a stronger differentiation between "heroic" and the "superheroic" genre, considering that CU notwithstanding, everything else we do (Star HERO, Fantasy HERO, Dark Champions, Pulp HERO) is squarely Heroic. That means we need rules that 'favor' the development of heroic characters, and it's why I've always proposed:

Heroic: STR 2:1, Superheroic: STR 1:1. Seriously. We also need clearer combat rules sections and a streamlined breakdown of the maneuvers available and how they work in a concise format. Sweep still baffles some folks because they forget all of the penalties attached to it. I'm already excited about the 6th Edition Martial Artist, though.

Vehicles need a complete and total overhaul. We need clearer delineation and rules governing how a Pistol affects a Car, a Jeep, a Tank, preferably without resorting to "higher armor ratings." I'd very much like to see a "standardized" damage system and armor rating system all around that we can merrily chuck out the window as we see fit. But many of the builds have felt "all over the map." The Ultimate Vehicle is great, but doesn't (for me) fully express the "feel" of a vehicle. We're missing rules like Mass, Weight, and so on. Additionally, in that same vein, I'd like rules that govern what happens when a 7 Hex Pattern AOE Line drills through a Freighter. In the current rules set, as you answered me once before Steve, "Nothing. Even if the attack is an AOE, it still deals damage once." And maybe that shouldn't change.

And maybe it should, at least a little bit.

More than anything I can think of at the moment I want a complete and total reorganization of all the material. I mean a 100% overhaul, with things tabbed out better, with a cleaner flow from bullet point to bullet point. I'd like to see the writing lose some of the total dryness (some of which is essential) and pick up where White Wolf left off some; an "ongoing series of examples" that draw the reader in and make the book stand out and come alive somewhat. I know other folks will have opinions on Healing as a power, Regen, Ressurection, and so on. I'd like to see those refined and balanced back, point wise.

I'd like to see Hand to Hand attacks unbroken. And something that's been tossed around a bit, which I think I agree with, a rebalance of the structure so that Armor and Force Field are "the same." In other words, I can take armor, and put together the same series of advantages and limitations, and make it "Force Field," and then "Force Wall" if I so choose. More as I think of it, as it's quite late.

[Half Baked]

4. I want to enhance the HERO System’s ability to simulate “dramatic realism” in your games, and thus to let you tailor it to the type of game you want.

By and large I think the HERO System does a great job of simulating “dramatic realism.” That’s not the realism of everyday life, but the “realism” depicted in comics, movies, novels, and TV shows — the sort of “reality” where the hero is hard to kill, can accomplish amazing things at times, and always gets the girl in the end. I don’t want to veer toward true “simulationism” of actual reality (if that’s even possible in an RPG), nor do I want to go too far off the beaten track toward a “narrativist” approach to gaming. By hewing toward dramatic realism, the HERO System makes it easy for the end user — the fan and customer — to tailor or customize the rules to reflect whatever type of “reality” he wants. If you want to go for “heavy realism,” you incorporate the optional rules that allow for that; if you do want to worry about “realism” at all, you can ignore some of the standard rules.

This is the area that I feel the Hero System is lacking in. I'd love to see some sort of in-game mechanism that encourages the players to accept dramatic genre conventions and encourage them to engage in collaborative story developments with the GM. Something that rewards the players when they make decisions for their characters rather than gaining additional points for Disadvantages at the design stage or experience point awards at the end of the session/adventure. The systems I've enjoyed using more in recent years have all included this element in their design philosophy.

[davidstallard]

My biggest beef with Hero System is sort of a larger issue which can't be solved by tweaking a rule here or there. I'm not sure what the solution is without radical change, but I would love to see this addressed:

Character creation is too difficult to do "correctly" in one draft. There will be math errors unless you use software. There will be power constructs that are abusive or illegal. There will be powers that are grossly underpowered compared to other PCs and published NPCs because the player doesn't intimately understand all of the efficiency tricks that have become standard operating procedure over the years. As a GM, I don't like having to review a character and send it back for revision. As a player, I don't want to go through a draft process to get a character completed.

As a corollary to this, I would love to see the "efficiency tricks" stamped out somewhat. When these tricks (such as power frameworks) become more-or-less required in order for your character to have the same amount of ability and flexibility as published NPCs, then something's wrong.

Disclaimer for context: I've only used Hero for superhero gaming, and haven't used Hero since 4th Edition.

[Edsel]

How about shifting to a "roll high" Difficulty Number system like other games use these days?

Personally I am strongly opposed to this. Of course I have played Hero since inception and rolling low for success is ingrained into my nature. For that matter I have played Hero pretty much exclusively for about the last ten years so a system that goes to "high roll" seems alien and counter-intuitive to me.

[lazarus]

Personally I am strongly opposed to this. Of course I have played Hero since inception and rolling low for success is ingrained into my nature. For that matter I have played Hero pretty much exclusively for about the last ten years so a system that goes to "high roll" seems alien and counter-intuitive to me.

I agree here. Although I like BESM 3's roll-over, I don't believe it's necessary in HERO, nor should it be there. The roll-low is one of the distinguishing factors of the game. (BESM 3, by the way, has opposed attack vs defence rolls, and under 2nd edition Tri-Stat rules, that got into an "everyone succeeds all the time" very quickly)

Laz

[BobGreenwade]

4. I want to enhance the HERO System’s ability to simulate “dramatic realism” in your games, and thus to let you tailor it to the type of game you want.

By and large I think the HERO System does a great job of simulating “dramatic realism.” That’s not the realism of everyday life, but the “realism” depicted in comics, movies, novels, and TV shows — the sort of “reality” where the hero is hard to kill, can accomplish amazing things at times, and always gets the girl in the end. I don’t want to veer toward true “simulationism” of actual reality (if that’s even possible in an RPG), nor do I want to go too far off the beaten track toward a “narrativist” approach to gaming. By hewing toward dramatic realism, the HERO System makes it easy for the end user — the fan and customer — to tailor or customize the rules to reflect whatever type of “reality” he wants. If you want to go for “heavy realism,” you incorporate the optional rules that allow for that; if you do want to worry about “realism” at all, you can ignore some of the standard rules.

By and large I think the HERO System already does a fine job of this and doesn’t need to be tweaked too much (if at all) to meet this goal. However, presentation and organization of the rules may enhance its usefulness in this regard; so will calling things to the reader’s attention in sidebars, text boxes, and the like. I plan to keep all that in mind while writing and designing.

Despite all you say here, Steve, I'd really like to see optional rules to help create a sort of continuum between what you call "simulationism" and the "narrativist" approach. I don't think anyone really wants to play at either extreme, but different people have different views on what's the best point on the continuum, and some (like myself) like to play different settings at different points. Hero already has a number of options to help with this, but even more -- including not just optional rules, but also suggestions and recommendations for GMs -- can only be a good thing.

[nexus]

Personally, I'd like to avoid much of "narrativism" approach, at least in the core rules. I'm not a big fan of that style of game or the "Shared Narrative Power" idea beyond a certain point. I know it's popular in certain arenas but it's not a direction I want to see Hero go. Keep Hero "crunchy" and "traditional" with maybe the options to go otherwise. That's what I'd prefer.

Edit: And I know I'm probably using the terms "wrong" but no one can seemingly agree on what they mean anyway.

[Southern Cross]

Actually,what I'd prefer is that the problems with the DEF of vehicles & bases are fixed.Vehicles & bases don't take STUN,but their DEF costs as much as a PC's Armor Power.Superman should'nt need a Pushed Haymaker to punch through an M-1 Abram's front armor,after all....

[GreyGuardian]

I suspect that you've already taken this idea into account, but just in case - Arrange for the character creation tool (new edition of hero designer or whatever else it ends up being) to be released at the same time as 6th edition.

There is probably a need for two types of character sheet. One for creating a character without the character creation software and one for printed output of a clear and easy to read and use character sheet from the software. The first can help with learning the rules from the book. The second useful for teaching to new players at conventions. It's also useful for players that don't want to know the nitty gritty of the rules and are satisfied with the game master assembling their character the player has described. Speaking of learning the rules - a character creation tutorial for various settings perhaps should be included in the character creation software.

Initiative order / speed chart / however you end up handling this - A combat summary from the character creation software is very useful in keeping combat moving... however other systems often have a much simpler initiative order allowing the game master to say, go through a stack of index cards one per character (or group of opponents). Assuming the speed chart or something similar stays around, create an intuitive system for a game master to quickly organize a combat as well as keep it moving steadily... some variant on the stack of index cards or initiative order scribbled on the battlemat etc... software that unobtrusively helps with this is also desirable.

Again presuming you keep OCV and DCV and 3d6 - the to hit formula of OCV + 11 - 3d6 die roll total = DCV has been more practical to use than the traditional formula. It enables the game master to maintain some ambiguity on the ease of hitting a particular opponent without slowing down the game by requiring the game master to do all the arithmetic. Similarly a nice die roll utility is probably a good inclusion for any game master assist software (possibly associated with the character generation tool). If you're hoping to attract computer game players to pencil, paper, and dice gaming then software tools to make it convenient are one possible way to reduce the barriers to adoption of the pencil, paper, dice game.

[buzz]

2. The HERO System as it currently exists is a pretty solid rules system and doesn’t need a lot of significant changes.

With all due respect, Steve, you pretty much lost me here. I don't see how this is really reconcilable with #1.

Not too long ago, I sold more than half of my HERO books, as I was really sick of the game after 26 years and not interested in playing again any time soon. In the back of my mind, I held on to the idea that, should a new edition come around, I'd definitely give it a look, but it'd have to be a pretty radical overhaul for me to consider playing. I.e., I'm talking ground-up rebuilding, not just tweaking point costs and such.

Reading #2, and looking at some of the pre-defined topics in this forum, I'm getting the impression that 6e is probably not going to go far enough for me. IMO, HERO has never really seen a genuine revision, and I think it *really* needs one.

Still, I won't judge until I see an actual product.

Anyway, the one question I would ask is: What's the playtesting plan for 6e? I would hope that Hero Games plans to let a good number of groups hammer for a good, long time on any new incarnation of such a venerable RPG.

[CourtFool]

Personally, I'd like to avoid much of "narrativism" approach, at least in the core rules.

I would like to see more narrativism, less crunch and only keep traditions if they can stand on their own merit.

[nexus]

I would like to see more narrativism, less crunch and only keep traditions if they can stand on their own merit.

To each their own but if that does come to pass I'll have to part ways with Hero. I play it to get away from the "rules lite" ideal and its associations. Well, not totally part ways. I'll probably stick with my 5th edition material.

[Fedifensor]

1) There should be a stronger differentiation between "heroic" and the "superheroic" genre, considering that CU notwithstanding, everything else we do (Star HERO, Fantasy HERO, Dark Champions, Pulp HERO) is squarely Heroic. That means we need rules that 'favor' the development of heroic characters, and it's why I've always proposed:

Heroic: STR 2:1, Superheroic: STR 1:1. Seriously.

Oh, ick! Absolutely not...the whole point of the HERO system is that it's unified in cost structure. Sure, individual campaigns may allow or disallow cost adjustments like ECs, Multipowers, ditching Normal Characteristic Maxima...but paying 5 points for STR gets you a 15 whether you're a hero or a superhero.

The biggest problem with the current system for heroic characters is the lack of diversity. A 13 STR is always more cost-effective than a 10 STR, and the usual breakpoints for characters are 10, 13, 15, 18, and 20 (or 11, 14, 17, 18, 20 for DEX). There needs to be a reason to take more of the numbers in the range. Expanded damage differentiation from the Ultimate Brick helps, but there's still only a few points on the scale that most characters take.

What I would like to see is an expanded scale for the heroic level, which carries over to the superheroic level. For example (and this is just a random suggestion with no extended thought behind it), maybe you can change the ranges so that a 10 STR is a "couch potato", a 15 STR is someone who exercises regularly, a 20 STR is a weightlifter, and a 30 STR is a world-record holder for weightlifting. Do the same thing with the other stats, so a 10 in a stat is average human, 15 is a trained human, 20 is exceptional human, and 30 is the breakpoint between hero and superhero. Sure, 30 is already technically at that breakpoint according to the guidelines...but NCM kicks in at 20.


My other big request is to lower the huge inflation of real-world hardware. As Steve mentioned, the HERO system is supposed to reflect "dramatic realism". There's a big thread on the Champions board by Lord Liaden that shows how superhero games have a tough time with this because real-world armor and weapons are so much more powerful than your average superhero. This needs to change.

Finally, I would remind everyone that HERO started with Champions. While the system has grown to encompass many genres, superheroes represents the largest portion of your fanbase, and changes that improve heroic play at the cost of diminishing superheroic play should be avoided whenever possible (especially given the recent deal with Cryptic).