A simple matter of approach

[Sean Waters]

So, hero is the Ultimate Gamer's Toolkit. Cool. What I'd like to see is this:

1. Various alternative rules, options, if you will, sprinkled throughout the text of the book. Don't like 3d6? Use d20. Don't like killing attacks? Here's some alternatives. Want more accurate representations of damage? Here's hit location tables. OK some of that exists already, I'd just like to see a bit more codification - base rules and alternates seperately (I know we are not supposed to be commenting on layout but bear with me)

2. Genre specifications using the alternative rules. So, a 'Realistic Heroic' game uses Base rules with Optional rules 1, 2, 3a and 7c (for example) and a 'Golden Age Superheroic' game uses base rules with optional rules 5, 9 and 12d.

The point, I suppose, is to codify alternative rules in such a way that they can define a campaign 'look and feel'. This could be anything from alternative XP systems (maybe it works on a level based system - Hero can cope), to alternative combat systems (firearm attacks don't work against DCV, but a set modifier based on size, for example - you can't dodge a bullet) to alternative character generation systems (character templates, for blaster, brawler, brick, brain, and anything else you can think of beginning with 'b').

Hero could become truly universal, having its own identity but also the ability to shapeshift into another form, if that is what you want it to do.

[Adventus]

That is a very interesting Idea. Rep to you. It would increase the versatility of the rules. And make more campaigns easier to run without a lot of kludgey rules.

This would also allow different scale of power charts for different power levels.

[Enforcer84]

Right, but you do know the rules are already like 70000 pages. How many more options do you want in there?

[Dead guy on tab]

So, hero is the Ultimate Gamer's Toolkit. Cool. What I'd like to see is this:

1. Various alternative rules, options, if you will, sprinkled throughout the text of the book. Don't like 3d6? Use d20. Don't like killing attacks? Here's some alternatives. Want more accurate representations of damage? Here's hit location tables. OK some of that exists already, I'd just like to see a bit more codification - base rules and alternates seperately (I know we are not supposed to be commenting on layout but bear with me)

2. Genre specifications using the alternative rules. So, a 'Realistic Heroic' game uses Base rules with Optional rules 1, 2, 3a and 7c (for example) and a 'Golden Age Superheroic' game uses base rules with optional rules 5, 9 and 12d.

The point, I suppose, is to codify alternative rules in such a way that they can define a campaign 'look and feel'. This could be anything from alternative XP systems (maybe it works on a level based system - Hero can cope), to alternative combat systems (firearm attacks don't work against DCV, but a set modifier based on size, for example - you can't dodge a bullet) to alternative character generation systems (character templates, for blaster, brawler, brick, brain, and anything else you can think of beginning with 'b').

Hero could become truly universal, having its own identity but also the ability to shapeshift into another form, if that is what you want it to do.

Why couldn't the various people in the forums collect all the variant rules from assorted fifth books addition and index them (e.g. Skills Variant Rule 1 - Unskilled use; as people add variant rules just increase the index/subindex by 1 and list in an all encompassing "index")? I bet you could get a thread started along these lines.

[vincemcd]

I agree wholeheartedly with Sean's suggestions. Having options for "tweaking" the system seems a natural extension of HERO's "toolkit" nature. And while everyone has their own house rules (and will continue to do so - it's in many gamers' natures), options that have been considered and thought through by a game designer are probably "safer" than a typical house rule.

[buzz]

The core rules need to present just that: a core. Too many options for too many facets of the system (like alternates to 3d6 resolution) presents a game without focus that begs for analysis paralysis.

The place where flexibility matters is the Powers system. Outside of that, HERO should present what's been shown to work best with that system. Really outre variants should be reserved for the various (and inevitable) genre and "Book of" books.

E.g., Pulp HERO presents a wide array of possible uses for Heroic Action Points. Looking through the options, I was flummoxed trying to determine which option was worth using. I honestly would have preferred one, really good set of rules, tailored for pulp.

[Markdoc]

Sean, I have to respectfully disagree. I can see where you're coming from, but it's possible to push the "toolkit" analogy too far: the idea is not to enable "any game" but to provide maximum flexibility within a game that remains recognizably Hero system. The reason for that assertion is that it provides a "common language" for the players and the GM - and also places them in a context where you can talk to other gamers. The game is based on a selection of rules that have been tuned by many minds to work together more or less harmoniously.

You could - for example - abolish figured CHA and roll STR, CON, BOD and DEX into one Stat, INT, EGO, PRE and COM into a second stat and move into a third, to get a game with three stats defined as Combat, Social and Move*. But that's going to make it kind of hard to talk with other Hero players, no?

When you buy a toolkit, you get certain things - a hammer, some screwdrivers, etc. You don't get a selection of handles and oddly shaped metal bits that you can combine to make tools. You can actually buy such things, it's just that they are a tiny niche product serving a tiny niche market. A set of "rules" (loose suggestions, really) on how to assemble a game out of assorted bits and mechanics would be popular with some GM's it's true. But I doubt the couple of dozen people who'd buy such a ruleset constitute a viable market.

cheers, Mark

*Don't laugh - I played in this game for the three sessions it existed.

[Vondy]

Right, but you do know the rules are already like 70000 pages. How many more options do you want in there?

30,000 pages worth. It brings us to a nice round number.

[Enforcer84]

30,000 pages worth. It brings us to a nice round number.

I'm down. Will it come with a magnifying glass?

or


Well sure, but then what about the index?

[Sean Waters]

Sean, I have to respectfully disagree. I can see where you're coming from, but it's possible to push the "toolkit" analogy too far: the idea is not to enable "any game" but to provide maximum flexibility within a game that remains recognizably Hero system. The reason for that assertion is that it provides a "common language" for the players and the GM - and also places them in a context where you can talk to other gamers. The game is based on a selection of rules that have been tuned by many minds to work together more or less harmoniously.

You could - for example - abolish figured CHA and roll STR, CON, BOD and DEX into one Stat, INT, EGO, PRE and COM into a second stat and move into a third, to get a game with three stats defined as Combat, Social and Move*. But that's going to make it kind of hard to talk with other Hero players, no?

When you buy a toolkit, you get certain things - a hammer, some screwdrivers, etc. You don't get a selection of handles and oddly shaped metal bits that you can combine to make tools. You can actually buy such things, it's just that they are a tiny niche product serving a tiny niche market. A set of "rules" (loose suggestions, really) on how to assemble a game out of assorted bits and mechanics would be popular with some GM's it's true. But I doubt the couple of dozen people who'd buy such a ruleset constitute a viable market.

cheers, Mark

*Don't laugh - I played in this game for the three sessions it existed.

I'm not suggesting we break Hero into quark, strangeness and charm (but if we do, can I do the 'strangeness' bit?).

There are a couple of levels that we could do this at; on the one hand we could create Hero in such a way that it can emulate any other system. That's going too far for the core rules but might make a nice 'Book of Alternatives'.

OTOH we could USE the idea of a common language to create more defined settings. At present we have rules for hit locations, for example, and we can all decide if we use them or not. Generally they are not used in superheroic games, but they COULD be. The idea is already there with campaign sheets and such; this simply codifies it. Then if we talk about Iron Age Champions we KNOW what, in system terms, we are talking about, where the rules that are used vary from the core rules, what options are used etc.

Some might see that as limiting (I want my OWN Iron Age Champions) but it is simply creating a common language, and if you prefer a regional dialect, so be it

[Duke Bushido]

I've read the threads, as per the request, and I'm still not quite certain where to put this, but this one seems the most appropriate.

I know that I am in the radical minority, but I myself would like to see considerably less granularity.

No matter how hard we try, or how hard we want to, we're not going to create life here. There is no one uber-rule that's going to unify all the disparate concepts. Sure-- such a thing can be created, and I'm sure a lot of people would be willing to be the four-hard-drives of text that it took.

But, for me and my group-- we did buy 5e, and gave it a fair shake. It had a micro-managed feel that robbed a lot of what we enjoyed, so we didn't use it. Still using 2e, with a few excerpts of newer editions (new powers, etc).

More granularity seems to lead to more errata, more need for clarification, and for us, it had lead to increased sluggishness come game time.

Though I would like to see some typos.

[Steve Long]

To the extent there's any material in this thread that's appropriate for this forum, it belongs in the General Issues thread. Continue discussing such topics there if you wish.