Discussion of Hero System's "Health" on rpg.net

[Joe Walsh]

Yeah, it's easy to skew things toward yourself (and/or your most loyal customers) without realizing how that will seem to others.

 

It's also easy to be misled by nostalgia and fading memories.

 

I started playing Hero System back when Champions 2e was current. I upgraded to 3e, then when 4e came out I went hog wild. The BBB was my bible. I ran a ton of sessions with it and amassed a pretty big library of support materials.

 

More recently, I decided to go back and re-read the 4e Rulesbook closely. Turns out that in addition to the published errata, there's about one editing error per page. And some of the Powers are kind of hard to understand RAW if you're not already familiar with them. In short, it's far from the ultimate HERO bible that I remembered it being.

 

Of course, that's why 5e was necessary. It's basically 4e but with lots of explanations and thought-out edge cases. FRED is even moreso (yeah, some things moved around from one category to another and so on between editions, but on the whole 4e, 4e Deluxe, 5e, and FRED are remarkably similar).

 

Of course, by the time FRED came out we had a huge tome with tiny writing to explain a game that was, at its heart, a couple of hundred pages long. But those explanations and examples are there for a good reason.

 

Next we came to 6e which did make some more significant changes to parts of the system, but really nothing terribly radical in my view. Not like the changes in so many other games over the years.

 

But, yeah, it became a two-volume behemoth. It's not really all that many more pages than FRED, but they are much thicker. And I believe there's more whitespace. I doubt the word count is radically different.

 

Even so, two volumes is a hard sell to newbies. GURPS has the same issue. SJ Games has taken to mentioning in their marketing materials that you really only need volume 1 to get started (since it does include a basic combat system in its appendix).

 

I'm glad 6e1/6e2 were produced and I'm glad I own them. I'm glad the much smaller CC exists now, and I own it (as well as FHC). I just hope it's enough to keep the game alive...

[zslane]

When I speak of using a compelling campaign setting as the vehicle for drawing in new players, I am not necessarily talking about superheroes. It should probably be whatever genre will attract the most attention, even though that is probably "epic fantasy", a genre I am personally burned out on. If we believe our own hype, the Hero System should excel at any suitably cinematic genre, not just supers. Proof would be in the proverbial pudding, as it were, with a new fantasy or sci-fi (or whatever) campaign setting that can rival D&D or Star Wars. Is that a tall order? Sure it is. But I believe that is what it will take to draw in more new players to the system than are lost every year just due to natural attrition.

 

But ultimately even a killer campaign setting is probably not going to help that much. I won't go into all the ways that I feel the Hero System was sent flying off the rails after the 4th edition, but suffice to say I'm not sure there is any way to really "save" the Hero System at this point, at least in terms of molding it into something capable of substantially greater marketplace penetration.

[Jomster]

On the plus side, there's quite a lot of interest in the RPG.net thread. That's a good sign, I think.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Supers is probably the easiest open field even with M&M and other knockoffs out there.  Hero is still best known for Champions and its the standard for superhero games, even if its perceived as being a bit clunky and creaky these days.  A killer intro and a series of great campaign arcs like Pathfinder games would go a long ways toward making it the gold standard again.  We already have a campaign setting, all that's needed is the stuff to make it easy for GMs to jump right in.

[Altair]

Supers is probably the easiest open field even with M&M and other knockoffs out there.  Hero is still best known for Champions and its the standard for superhero games, even if its perceived as being a bit clunky and creaky these days.  A killer intro and a series of great campaign arcs like Pathfinder games would go a long ways toward making it the gold standard again.  We already have a campaign setting, all that's needed is the stuff to make it easy for GMs to jump right in.

 

So, as a bit of a community outlier, I'll advocate for the devil: I'm not sure that Supers and Hero are the best match. 

 

(takes cover)

 

Everybody still here? Gonna read further before declaring me Baron Poop of Incontinence Town? Let's assume yes

 

I thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed the CC supers thing I ran, as did the players. Incredible amounts of fun! But, we did nickname those sessions "wargame Wednesdays," because the amount of granularity and attention to detail benefited most from big, tactical action/combat scenes. That were fun as hell - let's just be clear on that point - but weren't the sort of gaming anybody was terribly interested in sustaining. We had a lot of great discussions about what would happen if we wanted to run an ongoing RPG with what we had, and most felt that we'd wind up ignoring massive chunks of the system for actual play. Now, we still discussed doing so, but the rules provide incredibly robust support for certain playstyles, and it seems silly to not make use of that. Otherwise, why are we using Hero in the first place?

 

Obviously, that's not everybody's experience. And I'm in no way trying to say that anybody's wrong for enjoying something, far from it. 

 

But the hobby has changed. Specifically, how people enter the hobby is very different. Wargaming doesn't really lead into roleplaying so much. And at this point, neither does LARPing, frankly. No, people who are coming into tabletop RPGs tend to be doing so from a couple different angles, in my experience.

 

Reason one: This podcast/webcomic/youtube show that I like was talking about RPGs and how they're actually fun. I want in!

• These folks tend to go for whatever the original source was talking about. Lately, that tends to mean D&D 5th edition, or Fantasy AGE by way of Titansgrave. 
• They're going after a specific thing that caught their eye, and that's usually not intricate mechanical representation.

Reason two: This video game/novel/other is amazing! Oh man, it's based on a "pen and paper RPG?" Maybe I should check that out...

• Again, something sparked their interest; maybe a setting, maybe a type of mechanical interaction. Whatever it is, they want either more or adjacent to The Cool Thing
• These folks will usually hit up the property said game is based on. And why not, right? The idea that setting =/= system is alien from that perspective; it might be cool to play Mario with XCOM's mechanics, but that's not on the table (though I desperately want it now.) So if you like Shadowrun, you find Shadowrun.
  • Honestly, I feel like the ball wasn't so much "dropped" as it was "punted into another stadium" with Champions Online in this regard. 

Reason three: My friend/sibling/co-worker/romantic partner is super into this RPG thing. So I agreed to try it out!

• This tends to introduce new players to whatever the person/group thinks is cool. That has strengths and weaknesses!
• We're pretty familiar with this. It's one of the reasons why I'm always harping on the existence of different agendas/play styles; I've seen so many potential new players turned off to the hobby because the person introducing them assumed they'd like it in the same way.
  • My S/O is an incredibly dedicated gamer; but she prizes representational verisimilitude above all, and hates combat scenes. If I tried to introduce her to RPGs via a 4-color supers game in Fate, she'd hate it. (She hates Fate in general, as near as I can tell). She, however, came into gaming via reason four.

Reason four: I'm actually super big into Role Playing, I do it all the time! I'm interested in exploring doing it outside of an online forum, though.

• I haven't done any quantitative studies on the topic, but my observation indicates that this is how people are coming into the hobby at the greatest rate. 
• Forum RP generally doesn't have any mechanics to speak of, and I've seen a lot of people get turned off of tabletop RPGs, as they seem to involve "a lot of work that gets in the way of the fun part of the game, in order to minimize said fun bits." (That's a paraphrase, but whatevs.

Whew! That was a lot of jabber to get to this point: new players tend to be less interested in complex simulationist mechanics than in the old days, because they're really not coming in via wargames. They tend to be interested in different things. 

 

So the idea that something with the complex structure of Hero is good for a mass-market Supers game, is one I'm not sold on. Many casual fans of the supers genre - of which there are SO MANY right now, capes are the biggest draw in theatres - could give a crap about the difference between an HKA and a Blast, let alone their real cost. Those aren't really value-added propositions, just more work. 

 

If I wanted to run or play in a supers campaign, I'd probably look at Masks (a PbtA game), Fate (via Venture City Stories), or Marvel Heroic. And I like Hero. But to my tastes, I'm not sure the experience of what I'd want in a supers game is strengthened by Hero's strengths. Now, that's just me, and don't get me wrong - I'd be ecstatic to play in a proper Champions game, no doubt - but to me, and many others, supers aren't really about granular detail. 

 

Now, if there was going to be, I dunno, a Deus Ex RPG? HOLY CRAP, do I want that. And I want it in Hero, because attention to detail is a bigger part of the cyberpunk experience to me. I daresay that Hero might be better suited to running Shadowrun than any edition of that game to date. Or yeah, even Epic Fantasy, because the variety of archetypes should be pretty different, and Hero does that neatly with a very slick combat system. 

 

Obviously, many people disagree with those assertions. That's good! People like different things.

 

But no, I'm not convinced that doubling down on supers would be the best marketing strategy. Because I'm not sure that the current market wants to experience supers in a way that plays to Hero's strengths. Hero has amazing strengths! I consider it best-in-class at granular representation. That's an important tool in the kit! But it's not the 80's, where every RPG is some variant of wargame, and if that's not what you want, you should find the one you hate the least. You don't have to hammer in nails with your wrench, if you don't want to. 

 

If I were the Hero line developer, I'd go after some survey data, and try to figure what people want simulated. Then I'd go after that genre hard, because there really isn't much catering to the simulationist playstyle, and that's an opportunity. 

 

...

 

I am not, however, the Hero line developer, so I'mma slink off and dream about my Deus Ex Hero game now....

[Christopher R Taylor]

I think its more that more immediate, visual and tangible methods of this sort of entertainment are available without as much trouble to attain.  Computer games, fantastic films, console games, etc all fill the gap in the past which we filled with imagination and being together in person.  True, the imagination/in person model is superior, but it is something you can do only once in a while, when people have the time and schedule to do so.  I can play a MMOG any time I can log on to the game, and don't need anyone else.  Playing a nice session of Champions or Fantasy Hero requires at least one other person, time, and a particular location.  Someone has to put in a lot of work to prepare the game, and it is minimal in its visual presentation.

 

So: its just easier to play computer games, even if they aren't quite as satisfying or deep.  Educations are roughly the same, reading has gone down hill significantly, but is still out there.  But attention spans and demands have changed.  Role Playing Games are too much work for the level of personal satisfaction and pleasure.

[CaptnStrawberry]

I can't claim to have any kind of definite finger on the pulse of gaming culture, but I sometimes do pick up on a backlash to video games, even among younger gamers.  Impressive as the eye candy might be, MMORPGs and the rest are essentially linear - there are things you can and can't do.  Pen and Paper has no such limitations, and I think a fair number of folks dissatisfied with the current setup are realizing this (a minority, but slowly growing?).

 

What is that saying? "Human imagination - the ultimate graphics card."

[zslane]

Champions is definitely a tactical wargame, especially when you pull out the hexgrid and keep track of everything according to the RAW. I liked it precisely because it was such a good wargame. For other genres I wasn't as married to the tactical wargame mode of play as I was for supers, but it was the high crunch factor that made the game so addictive for me. I guess I liked that panel-by-panel action, and the fact that I could directly influence my chances of victory by smart, tactical play.

 

Watering down the Hero System to something less than a tactical wargame can be done, and I'm sure it is done by folks who don't have the same 35-year history with the system I have, but I wouldn't want to play in that supers campaign. If that is what's required to make the game palatable to "today's roleplayers," then so be it; it is merely more evidence that today's roleplayers and I are not compatible with each other. Aside from pushing for a great campaign setting, I'm not sure there's anything I can do to help them (in terms of making product suggestions).

[Christopher R Taylor]

Impressive as the eye candy might be, MMORPGs and the rest are essentially linear - there are things you can and can't do.  Pen and Paper has no such limitations, and I think a fair number of folks dissatisfied with the current setup are realizing this (a minority, but slowly growing?).

 

 

I think you could definitely appeal to players along those lines: try the real thing.  I've had some success with that in the past, its true.

[bigdamnhero]

Champions is definitely a tactical wargame, especially when you pull out the hexgrid and keep track of everything according to the RAW.

Well, I'd say Champions can be a good tactical wargame. But it doesn't have to be. All the RAW is there so you can use the bits you like; nothing says you have to use all the bits. I've played and run some very stripped-down and simplified games of Hero that worked very well, and weren't any more complex than most Savage Worlds games. See multiple threads on running simplified Hero games...

 

Reminds me of a conversation I had some years ago (maybe here? don't remember).

 

Guy: I love Hero, but I want to run a pulp game. What system should I use?

Me: Well, why not use Hero?

Guy: Hero's too complicated. It works well for supers because you have all these optional mechanics, maneuvers, etc. I love having lots of choices and maneuvering around the hex mat and all that. But Pulp needs something fast and simple.

Me: OK, why not just leave out all those optional mechanics, don't use a map, don't track END, don't sweat the fiddly bits...

Guy: But I like all those optional rules and fiddly bits! They're what attracted me to Hero in the first place!

Me: OK...but you said you wanted to run a simple game that plays fast.

Guy: Exactly.

Me: So leave out some of the optional rules, maneuvers, choices, etc and Hero plays remarkably fast and you don't have to learn a new system.

Guy: But I like all those optional rules and fiddly bits! They're what attracted me to Hero in the first place!

[rinse & repeat]

 

[ghost-angel]

Well, I'd say Champions can be a good tactical wargame. But it doesn't have to be. All the RAW is there so you can use the bits you like; nothing says you have to use all the bits. I've played and run some very stripped-down and simplified games of Hero that worked very well, and weren't any more complex than most Savage Worlds games. See multiple threads on running simplified Hero games...

 

Reminds me of a conversation I had some years ago (maybe here? don't remember).

 

Guy: I love Hero, but I want to run a pulp game. What system should I use?

Me: Well, why not use Hero?

Guy: Hero's too complicated. It works well for supers because you have all these optional mechanics, maneuvers, etc. I love having lots of choices and maneuvering around the hex mat and all that. But Pulp needs something fast and simple.

Me: OK, why not just leave out all those optional mechanics, don't use a map, don't track END, don't sweat the fiddly bits...

Guy: But I like all those optional rules and fiddly bits! They're what attracted me to Hero in the first place!

Me: OK...but you said you wanted to run a simple game that plays fast.

Guy: Exactly.

Me: So leave out some of the optional rules, maneuvers, choices, etc and Hero plays remarkably fast and you don't have to learn a new system.

Guy: But I like all those optional rules and fiddly bits! They're what attracted me to Hero in the first place!

[rinse & repeat]

 

 

Reminds of the occasional confused look I see on people's faces when I point out that Knockback is actually an Optional Rule... It's like removing aspects to better create genre simulation actively hurts them.

[Surrealone]

IMHO, leaving out optional rules (or making some non-optional rules optional -- just because it makes sense) tends to fall apart unless it is clearly stated from the start which ones will be omitted ... and then that list adhered to from start to finish of campaign.  I've just seen too many GM's state certain rules were out, and then omit things in ad-hoc fashion as the games progressed -- frustrating players because the omissions/changes that came later were ones they felt would have influenced some of their early-on build and/or exp expenditure choices had they known up front.

[bigdamnhero]

IMHO, leaving out optional rules (or making some non-optional rules optional -- just because it makes sense) tends to fall apart unless it is clearly stated from the start which ones will be omitted ... and then that list adhered to from start to finish of campaign.

Well yeah, obviously the rules need to be communicated and agreed to up front. I took that as a given. But that's true for any Hero game; I've never played a single game that used all of them. (For example, Knockback and Hit Locations seem to be mutually exclusive in practice.) So of course you need to be clear about what rules are/aren't in effect, and any changes to that need to be discussed as a group.

[Surrealone]

The game I'm presently playing in treats RAW much like fundamentalists treat the Bible's text -- if it's written then it's RAW and applicable (no omissions).  It's kind of interesting, as there's zero hand-waving and it has a wargaming feel to it, which I like.  Lots of rules lookups, though...  lots.  (Usually by players before needing to cite them, so little slowdown.)  Thank the powers that be for searchable PDF's!  It also helps that it's a low-SPD heroic power level.

[zslane]

I can only speak to the Hero System that I like to play. You can trace it from 2nd edition, to 3rd, to 4th. Back in 2nd ed. days, there were just the rules. Nothing was optional because the rules weren't 1,000 pages long, nor weighed down by a need to cater to any genre but supers. For me, Champions in all its glory (minus "Heroic Level" stuff that tries to add detail for "grittier" campaigns) is what the game is all about. Playing with fewer mechanics is like playing chess with only pawns. Sure, it can be done, but I don't see the point in it.

 

That's not to say that anyone who uses a stripped down version is playing it "wrong". Only that they are playing a subset of the game in a fashion I can't really relate to. Maybe part of the problem is that the system is now so overburdened with cruft that players are looking around desperately for ways to simplify it. Back in my convention-going days, every Champions event used the same rules and everyone knew them forwards and backwards. It was amazing. I just don't think that is possible anymore.

[Lucius]

 

Actually, there seem to be a couple of other threads started on RPG net about Hero. If nothing else that's a sign that there's interest in the system.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Insert palindromedary tagline here

[Ninja-Bear]

Reminds of the occasional confused look I see on people's faces when I point out that Knockback is actually an Optional Rule... It's like removing aspects to better create genre simulation actively hurts them.

I remember talking about hit kocations being optional in heroic level games and that uproar.

[bigdamnhero]

The game I'm presently playing in treats RAW much like fundamentalists treat the Bible's text...

Must...resist..urge...to...snark...

[Surrealone]

Must...resist..urge...to...snark...

 

I know, right?!

[Christopher R Taylor]

I think presenting the system as a basic super stripped down core rules to players, then adding in options and choices for the game is the best approach.  Some obviously have a package (classic Champions: no hit locations, no bleeding, no disabling/impairing, uses knockback, etc) but if you start on that basis, you have a very simple, easy to learn game.  That's the approach we're trying with the Champions Begins project, start players out with absolute minimum info, then add bits in as each adventure session takes place, resulting in a sort of tutorial approach.

[Nolgroth]

As a complete aside (see what I did there?), has Hero games ever announced a title over at RPG.net? I'm looking at the number of active users over there and, on the average, they usually have far more people online. It doesn't mean that all of the posters at RPG.net will be interested, but there might be a higher chance of catching somebody's attention who may not have been interested or even known about Hero Games until such an announcement. Just a question and a thought.

[Nolgroth]

I think presenting the system as a basic super stripped down core rules to players, then adding in options and choices for the game is the best approach.  Some obviously have a package (classic Champions: no hit locations, no bleeding, no disabling/impairing, uses knockback, etc) but if you start on that basis, you have a very simple, easy to learn game.  That's the approach we're trying with the Champions Begins project, start players out with absolute minimum info, then add bits in as each adventure session takes place, resulting in a sort of tutorial approach.

 

Changing marketing and philosophy is going to require somebody who is really devoted to expanding the Hero System beyond the parameters that we've all grown accustomed to. I daresay that it will take a shift in management views that are very reminiscent of the energy that DoJ originally brought to the table when they purchased Hero Games and pushed out the 5th Edition. No offense to the caretaker(s) of Hero now, but I just don't see that energy or enthusiasm. I know money doesn't grow on trees, but there has been no real push to bring Hero Games up to modern times. Hero Designer, for instance, is an aging program. In this bold, new age of mobile devices, I am quite frankly shocked that there is not an official (or at least recognized unofficial) app for iOS/Android that does the same thing, There has been, instead, a dogged insistence that Hero Designer is the end all solution. And please don't get me wrong, Hero Designer is an awesome program. I use it quite frequently when I do dabble with Hero characters and power builds. It's just something that cannot run on smartphones or tablets and those two items are gaining an increasingly large share of the market. 

 

Then again, there is probably not the market share (for rpgs) that is needed to support innovation. Maybe RPGs are a young persons game. Maybe age and experience tamper that enthusiasm and sheer joy one gets from the act of creation. Maybe I'm just wandering through my own, twisted, stream of consciousness and we are where the market has brought us. Maybe all the competing factors I and others have mentioned before are just too insurmountable for anything to make a real difference. Obviously, a big enough budget to create all the fiddly bits like miniatures, color map posters, and marketing saturation can overcome these competing factors, but aside from Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast and Paizo, who has those kinds of resources just waiting to be spent?

 

All this trying to figure out the health of a beloved product and the company behind It is really frustrating. I don't have any answers and I am done rambling on about it.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I agree someone needs to build a couple of great Hero apps for the company: a dice roller/damage calculator, a character builder, a combat hit list manager, etc.  Those would all be quite welcome.  An official module for systems like Fantasy Grounds would also be good.  But, who's gonna pay for all this?

[Beast]

Has anybody checked out the Hero Lab or is it even out?(had heard about this see how it works w/ M&M characters )
For me a smart phone is too small to build a character on
I have 11.7" windows 10 net book and really that is about as small and still be useful and not have to pan/scroll to see the character
 

really using a phone means you are not prepared at all
and dice apps for me, only work online
not face to face

if you really only want to carry your phone
Build your character before hand and save as txt or pdf file
have copies of the hdc files so you can tweak them if nessessary

[Christopher R Taylor]

The point isn't whether this is great for you or terrifically functional in all situations, but rather whether it would be welcome to others, perceived as modern and up to date, and help Hero's business life.