Swap-in Replacement for D&D 5e?

[Wardsman]

So you are going to be blinded too?  Or are you going to need to hit the target to blind it? Also the burning is going to get stopped by just a bit of armor.

Take anything I say about 6th edition with a grain of salt as I am a 5th edition guy.

 

But Change environment is an area effect power (unless they changed that) that does not require you to hit the target normally neither does flash attack. Question why not use flash attack Cantriped?

[Lucius]

The problem with writing up a flaming sword in Hero as 1d6 Killing Physical plus 1d6 Killing Energy is that this is LESS effective than stacking up 2d6 Killing Physical or 2d6 Killing Energy.

 

Each of these attacks gets applied separately to a different defense. The target gets full benefit of BOTH their PD and their ED.

 

I would suggest using the Attack vs Alternate Defense Advantage, and define it as vs "Lower of Resistant PD or Resistant ED." You will also have to add another Advantage of "Does Body" because applying the Attack vs Alternate Defense automatically makes the attack STUN only. But, one advantage of this approach is that the target doesn't get their regular (non-resistant) defense against the STUN of the attack. Let me know if I need to clarify that.

 

And as for "dazzle" effect, yes, you should either use a Combat Skill Level or just buy DCV. To make it only apply to those in hand to hand combat with the swordsman, apply a Limitation; this is what the Limited Power Limitation is FOR. I would make it a very small Limitation although if this is not to be paid for with points it may not matter so much.

 

I'll probably post my own take on it in a moment.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

House of the Palindromedary

[Lucius]

Flaming Sword: (Total: 93 Active Cost, 38 Real Cost)

Blazing Blade : Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6+1, Attack Versus Alternate Defense (Resistant PD or ED, whichever is lower; +1/2), Does BODY (+1) (87 Active Points); OAF Durable (-1), -1 Decreased STUN Multiplier (-1/4), STR Minimum 8 (-1/4), Required Hands One-Handed (-0) (Real Cost: 35)

(NOTE: This attack is stopped by whichever is LOWER, Resistant PD or Resistant ED. It has an END cost of 9 PLUS the cost of the STR used, so END total cost is 11 - very very tiring. It is possible to use it at lesser power for lesser END.)

<b>plus</b> Dazzling : +1 DCV (5 Active Points); OAF Durable (-1), Linked (Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand; -1/2), Limited Power Only vs Melee, not Ranged attacks (-1/4) (Real Cost: 2)

<b>plus</b> Reach : Stretching 1m, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2); no Noncombat Stretching (-1/4), Limited Body Parts (-1/4) (Real Cost: 1)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary Enterprises

[Cantriped]

Take anything I say about 6th edition with a grain of salt as I am a 5th edition guy.

 

But Change environment is an area effect power (unless they changed that) that does not require you to hit the target normally neither does flash attack. Question why not use flash attack Cantriped?

Change Environment is a single target attack power, like Blast, unless you apply Area of Effect to it (which is how it is almost always used). I didn't use a Flash because "Being Blinded" was simply the special effect the original poster described for the sword imposing penalties on its victim.

 

 

The problem with writing up a flaming sword in Hero as 1d6 Killing Physical plus 1d6 Killing Energy is that this is LESS effective than stacking up 2d6 Killing Physical or 2d6 Killing Energy.

 

Each of these attacks gets applied separately to a different defense. The target gets full benefit of BOTH their PD and their ED.

Buying the HKA (Energy) Linked to the first is no different than applying Reduced Penetration to the power construct in terms of cost.

 

 

I would suggest using the Attack vs Alternate Defense Advantage, and define it as vs "Lower of Resistant PD or Resistant ED." You will also have to add another Advantage of "Does Body" because applying the Attack vs Alternate Defense automatically makes the attack STUN only. But, one advantage of this approach is that the target doesn't get their regular (non-resistant) defense against the STUN of the attack. Let me know if I need to clarify that.

Buying it as HKA 2d6+1 AVAD (rED or rPD, whichever is higher; -1/2), Does BODY (+1) would add 45 APs to the power, which I don't think its really giving back enough benefit to justify... Nor does it fit the special effect of what the original poster described. We aren't talking about a sword that is either physical or flaming, it is both simultaneously and should be treated as such.

 

 

And as for "dazzle" effect, yes, you should either use a Combat Skill Level or just buy DCV. To make it only apply to those in hand to hand combat with the swordsman, apply a Limitation; this is what the Limited Power Limitation is FOR. I would make it a very small Limitation although if this is not to be paid for with points it may not matter so much.

Yes, it could be built as a bonus to DCV with the Focus modifier, but that didn't seem like as much fun as what I wrote. The change environment version afflicts the enemy in a way that benefits both you and your allies.

[Scott Baker]

I don't like Complications. Or to be more accurate, I don't like them today. I've enjoyed such systems in other games, e.g. Shadowrun and think they can really add a lot to a game. But in this instance I very much want all such things to be handled as a result of character decisions in game. I have clear ideas from what I want from this campaign, I am fanatically Watsonian in my approach to gaming, to the degree that at this point I don't want in-universe story events / circumstances to be balancing factors for outside game reasons. Story has supreme primacy to me and I cannot allow an exchange rate between it and mechanical advantages, no more than I can could agree to give a player +1 to hit for showing up with cake. It's an invalid exchange to me. At least for this campaign. I recognize that I may appear like a person showing up at a fancy restaurant and then asking for ketchup with my beautifully prepared meal, but I'm afraid I am such a barbarian. From my reading, I can ditch complications without any game balance effects, yes? It's essentially just a bribe from the GM to the player to give extra points for actually engaging with the world or adding some depth to their PCs, yes?

Then don't require them to take any. I wouldn't choose this route myself. The complications are back-story/personal traits that really can give the GM hooks for the character, and provide a starting point to help the players role-play the character. At the lower point levels for Heroic characters (especially if you start out even lower), the required complications total will be low (to non-existent). If you're worried about something like Hunted when you want the characters to be unknowns at the start of the campaign, just say, "No." Same for any Complication, Power, Talent, etc. that doesn't fit the campaign.

 

Remember, anything that comes up during gameplay is just that. The characters don't magically get more points because they pissed off the King's Guard during an adventure and are now hunted on sight by them. 

[Chris Goodwin]

FYI, Change Environment is Area of Effect in 5e, single target in 6e.  
 

So: A flaming longsword. It has two effects - firstly it does additional fire damage to those it strikes. Secondly, the brightness of it dazzles (not blinds) those in close combat with the wielder. However, wielding such powerful magics drains the stamina of the one who does so. As you can see, there are a lot of complications (small 'c') in this. But here is what I have so far:

Long Sword
 
(Val -1/4)  Focus, (Obvious Accessible, Easily Movable, Not Expended, Durable, Universal)
(Val -1/4)  Str Minimum 8
(Val -0)     Required Hands
(Val -1/4)  Real Weapon
(Val +1/2)  Reduced Endurance (0 END)
(1 CP)       Reach +1m
(20 CP)     1d6+1 HKA


The character must have Weapon Familiarity (Longsword) to wield or suffer -3 OCV.
 
Active Points = 21 x 1.5 = 31.5 AP
Real Cost = 31.5AP /  0.25 = 7.75 CP. (I'm guessing I round up to 8CP).

 

On Limitations you ignore the negative sign.  Also, the Limitation value for Focus would be -1.  And also, though this isn't made very clear, Object Reach is already built with its own set of Advantages and Limitations, so it's a separate Power and doesn't add to the base cost of the HKA.  For what you've got written up so far you'd have: 

 

Sword:  HKA 1d6+1 (20 Base Points).  0 END Cost (+1/2) (30 Active Points)  OAF: Sword (-1), STR Minimum 8 (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4) (Total cost: 12 points) plus 1m Reach (1 point).  

 

The basic sword would be a total of 31 Active Points and 13 Real Points.  

 

 

Now I want to make it magic!
 
So first, I try to add the blinding effect. I look at Image Create Light and I look at the Blind effect. But one does too little and the other too much. So I settle on modelling it as a Characteristic bonus to DCV. I don't want to make this a game-changer. It's a thematic nice-to-have. At first, I try to simulate it with a Characteristic effect increasing DCV by 1 for 5CP. But I run into trouble when I try to make it apply to only those in HTH with the wielder. So I take another look at all this and realise I should probably be using Drain. So I add it as Drain (OCV) with an area effect. I'm not really sure about this. 1d6 is a Hell of a lot and all I really want to do is the equivalent of "-1 to hit" you might see in other game systems. Flash and Darkness also don't really seem appropriate.

 

Just as an aside, 1d6 of Drain would drain 1d6 Active Points worth of OCV, not 1d6 OCV.    That would make it ridiculously effective for the cost of 1d6 of Drain.  As Cantriped mentions, the Change Environment would probably be a better way to model what you're thinking of, and I'd probably do it that way.  

 

 

Aaaaaand at this point I realise I need to build this as a framework because I've got different points and I think that I need to figure out which limitations apply to both powers, which only to one, and then figure out how to build this as a... Multipower Framework? And I also realise that it's seriously late. So I'm going to post this here because I don't want to leave a half-written post of this length in the browser and trust it will still be there in the morning.

 

 

No need for a Framework; in this case you'd use what's called a Compound Power (or, what I did with the bolded and italicized "plus" above).  Think of it as building each Power separately; each Power has its own default behavior, so will use a slightly different set of Advantages and Limitations.  You could make each one its own line item on the character sheet if you wanted, or you could combine them all in one with the plus notation.

 

As an aside, I might make the burning part Constant (+1/2); see FHC p. 52 for how that would work.  Essentially, you'd hit with the sword, and could then continue to burn the target on every one of your Phases just by spending the END cost every Phase.  Adding Constant to the burning HKA would make just that portion of it 22.5 Active and 11 Real Points, and would cost 2 END per Phase to keep burning the target.  My build would be thus:

 

Demon Sword:   HKA 1d6+1, vs. PD (20 Base Points).  0 END Cost (+1/2) (30 Active Points)  OAF: Sword (-1), STR Minimum 8 (-1/4) (Real Cost: 13 points) plus HKA 1d6, vs. ED (Fire) (15 Base Points).  Constant (+1/2) (22 Active Points)  OAF: Sword (-1), No STR Bonus (-1/2) (Real Cost: 9 points) plus  Change Environment (-1 Sight Group PER, -1 OCV) (6 Base Points)  0 END Cost (+1/2) (9 Active Points)  No Range (-1/2), Linked to HKA 1d6 vs. ED (-1/2) (Real Cost: 4 points) plus 1m Reach (Real Cost: 1 point).  

 

The total cost for my version, assuming I've done all my math right, would be 28 points.  Note that the Fire HKA part is not 0 END Cost; you could just swing the sword for 1d6+1 HKA and no END above the STR cost to swing it, or you could spend the 2 extra END and burn the target now, or you could keep spending 2 END per Phase after that and keep burning them!  The entire thing would be a total of 62 Active Points.  I've removed Real Weapon from it because it's a magic sword, right?  Real Weapon means you have to clean it and sharpen it and it's subject to rust and bending and whatnot; it would act like a real sword, in other words.  

 

Am I on the right track? The system is impressive, but it's also seems rather complicated to, for example, do what is effectively the following: "This sword does an extra 1d6 damage and imposes a -1 penalty to hit on anyone trying to hit you in melee". Plus a set amount of endurance drain per phase. However, I'm sure this will get easier. I accept that I haven't really read through it all properly yet!

 

You're doing pretty well so far!  

[Chris Goodwin]

I don't like Complications. Or to be more accurate, I don't like them today. I've enjoyed such systems in other games, e.g. Shadowrun and think they can really add a lot to a game. But in this instance I very much want all such things to be handled as a result of character decisions in game. I have clear ideas from what I want from this campaign, I am fanatically Watsonian in my approach to gaming, to the degree that at this point I don't want in-universe story events / circumstances to be balancing factors for outside game reasons. Story has supreme primacy to me and I cannot allow an exchange rate between it and mechanical advantages, no more than I can could agree to give a player +1 to hit for showing up with cake. It's an invalid exchange to me. At least for this campaign. I recognize that I may appear like a person showing up at a fancy restaurant and then asking for ketchup with my beautifully prepared meal, but I'm afraid I am such a barbarian. From my reading, I can ditch complications without any game balance effects, yes? It's essentially just a bribe from the GM to the player to give extra points for actually engaging with the world or adding some depth to their PCs, yes?

Yes, but that's why they get points for them.  The points are there for that reason, but characters can forgo them and not get the points for them.  Plus they have their own separate values, so a character with 50 points worth of Psychological Complications is going to look a bit different from one with 20 points of Psychological, 15 points of Hunted, 10 points of Social, and 1d6 Unluck, and they'll both look different from a character who didn't take any Matching Complications at all and is built on 50 points less.

 

no more than I can could agree to give a player +1 to hit for showing up with cake

 

The cake really would be meta.  Complications are there to be used in the game and as part of the story.  They started out as, and for five editions were called, Disadvantages.  When the HERO System started as Champions, their purpose was to model all of the various weaknesses that superheroes were saddled with; not just the mental things, but the weaknesses to glowing green meteorites (Susceptibility) and the secret identities (Social) and the nemeses (Hunted).  They ran on a system of diminishing returns; the first two of a single type were full value, the next two of a type were half value, the next two one quarter, and the rest zero.  So you could make it a balancing act; do I want to saddle this guy down with mental problems out the wazoo, or do I want to make him a little more balanced, or do I want to forgo a few points of power and not be a basket case?  

[Lucius]

Buying the HKA (Energy) Linked to the first is no different than applying Reduced Penetration to the power construct in terms of cost.

I see your point now; arguable one could just take Reduced Penetration and note "one half goes against ED and one half against PD" but that's a handwave that your build avoids. The more I look at your blade, the better I like it.

 

Buying it as HKA 2d6+1 AVAD (rED or rPD, whichever is higher; -1/2), Does BODY (+1) would add 45 APs to the power, which I don't think its really giving back enough benefit to justify... Nor does it fit the special effect of what the original poster described. We aren't talking about a sword that is either physical or flaming, it is both simultaneously and should be treated as such.

My build does treat it as such.

 

For equipment that the player is not paying points for, the Active Points matter only for things like Dispels.

 

And I am not so sure that the "cost" isn't justified. Your build goes against defenses twice, so something with both Resistant Defenses at 8 won't take any BODy damage at max damage; for my build, the Defenses must both be at 11, which is pretty high for heroic fantasy. At defenses of 4, which is what, chainmail? a target takes no BODy on an average roll from your blade, but to take no BODy damage from mine on an average damage roll the defense must be 8.  

 

 

 

Yes, it could be built as a bonus to DCV with the Focus modifier, but that didn't seem like as much fun as what I wrote. The change environment version afflicts the enemy in a way that benefits both you and your allies.

But that's specifically not what is being asked for:

 

 

I'm really looking for a way to make this affect enemies only whilst they are looking at the wielder. The moment they turn and attack someone else, they should have no penalty to their OCV.

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary would rather not get hit by my sword, but really doesn't want to be hit with swords at all.

[Lucius]

 

 

For some reason, the system is insisting on giving me grief here and arbitrarily not letting me neatly and smoothly cut up the post I'm quoting to organize my response.

 

So I am forced to do this as a series of posts, since I can't seem to get it all in one post.

 

 

 

More excellent replies. This is all incredibly helpful. I've been hanging out on the Enworld 5e forum and I can't tell you the number of "you're playing it wrong" posts I kept reading.   You're all being really helpful in guiding me to achieve what I actually want.

 

MrKinster - that was a superb primer on the system and highlight the transition and comparisons from D&D.

 

So... I have purchased FCH. I'm not 100% convinced it counts as complete having read the weapons section, but for the price I can't complain and it's helped me understand the system, most certainly. It's very interesting. I've seen RPGs that are complex and have lots of detail, I've seen RPGs that are simple and don't have a lot of detail. I don't think I have ever seen a system that is so simple yet at the same time has so much detail. The blend of minutiae with elegance is a combination I've never seen to such a degree before. It's like looking at a fractal - some basic rules expanding ever outwards into ever more facts and structure without ever losing the basic pattern. It's most certainly impressive. I also have my first rules question - in the actions table where it lists Soliliquy as "No Time", that indicates cannot completed in a single turn, yes?

We already know how great Hero System is - go out and tell everyone else!

 

Continued.....

[Lucius]

...continuing

 

 

Anyway, there is a lot to like about this system. I like that it has hit locations, I like that those locations can be separately armoured and that armour reduces damage rather than makes one harder to hit. That alone simplifies away a lot of odd exception rules you get in systems like D&D. It feels a little like Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 1st edition (to this day one of my favourite RPGs). Some downsides I know that one of my players will balk at having to do subtraction again and again every time she wants to hit something.

Do what I did - make a table with numbers 3 to 18 across one side or the top saying "My roll on 3d6 is...." and then across the top or down the side numbers from 0 to whatever you think highest possible OCV will be saying "My OCV is...." and then they can cross reference and find the highest DCV they would hit. "I hit if its DCV is 8 or less!"

 

Remember to fill in 18 row with "Miss" all the way across.

 

Don't make the table just one line with the character's base OCV; lots of things such as maneuvers, being blinded, having to pick up a new unfamiliar weapon in the heat of combat, etc. can change OCV.

 

 

continued....

[Lucius]

....continuing

 

It will also be a little annoying to have to roll for location after every hit. The most streamlined approach to this I ever saw was a percentage based system (indeed this was the WHFRP 1st ed. I mentioned earlier, iirc) where after checking the d% to see if you hit, then simply swapped the numbers around to see which location you hit. I.e. if you needed to score 67% to hit and you rolled 54%, then you immediately knew that not only had you landed a blow but that you had struck them in location 45. I might see if I can come up with something equivalent for this. Maybe with different coloured dice or something.

My suggestion: Don't use Hit Locations unless

- Someone specifically aims at a given Location and takes the OCV penalty to hit where they want,

- Someone rolls really well on the to hit roll - maybe if they make it by 10 you let them pick a location, or

- Someone rolls well enough on damage that you know an impairing or disabling wound is possible (assuming you want to use those rules)

 

 

continued...

[Lucius]

 

 

I don't like Complications. Or to be more accurate, I don't like them today. I've enjoyed such systems in other games, e.g. Shadowrun and think they can really add a lot to a game. But in this instance I very much want all such things to be handled as a result of character decisions in game. I have clear ideas from what I want from this campaign, I am fanatically Watsonian in my approach to gaming, to the degree that at this point I don't want in-universe story events / circumstances to be balancing factors for outside game reasons. Story has supreme primacy to me and I cannot allow an exchange rate between it and mechanical advantages,



I bolded something because you have articulated a point that's been gone over on these boards.

 

But I must point out that in some cases, the "exchange rate" really is NOT about story in the sense you mean and IS all about mechanics.

 

Unluck is literally equal and opposite to Luck. If Luck is worth paying points for, Unluck is worth gaining points for.

 

"I'm still new to this fighting Goblins and monsters business" is a story element, but if you take this:

 

"Still new to all this" Vulnerability: 2 x Effect PREsence Attacks from monsters (Common)(20 pts)

 

The character is accepting a mechanical penalty (check out the PRE attack rules) in exchange for those points. And they'll often be hesitating and losing phases or half phases in combat until they "buy off" this penalty with experience.

 

Sometimes you also need Complications to build monsters properly:

 

Physical Complication: Undead: Subject to Necromancy, can be "Turned" by clerical characters, can't heal damage naturally, etc. (Frequently; Greatly Impairing)

 

But that's less relevant to their use by player characters.

 

You can certainly forbid any Complications that you don't see as legitimate "mechanical" Disadvantages; if so, you may also want to not require points to be paid for some Perks, for the same reasons. If being Hunted by the City Guard is not worth points, then neither is being good friends with the Captain of the Guard. If having Dependent Non Player Character: Incompetent apprentice is not worth points, should you charge points for Follower: Competent apprentice?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary declares that this concludes what SHOULD have been a single post.

[Lucius]

Okay, I'm not trying to monopolize the thread but I find I do want to say something about classes.

 

One of the good things in Hero is that if you want to mimic classes, you can pick and choose not only how to do so but exactly what you do and don't want. In D&D you HAVE to have a cleric as such, or no one gets any healing.

 

You can either let magic-users have healing spells, and/or permit anyone who wants to spend the points and can justify it have a NON MAGICAL Healing ability with Required Skill Roll: First Aid (See "Paramedic" - another thing you may want to do is rename some Skills)

 

Of course, if you WANT clerics as they exist in D&D, you can do that too; I'm just pointing it out as an example of something you don't NEED to do.

 

 

What do probably DO need to do is decide what being "a member of a Class" actually MEANS.

 

My suggestion is to try restricting certain game elements to certain classes.

 

Spellcasters: Have exclusive access to Multipowers. (I'm assuming you do NOT want to recreate D&D's "Vancian" magic system, which I can't imagine anyone wanting to recreate if they have a choice.) Multipower is a great way to have access to a number of spells affordably. Don't forget that things like Incantations and Gestures are Limitations and you can require some or all spells to have these. Have exclusive access to the END Reserve Power, which they use as a "mana pool" to fuel spells. Have non-exclusive access to the Scholar Skill Enhancer which allows them to be good with lots of Lore type Skills. Permitted to buy INT, EGO, and PRE up beyond whatever limits are set for other characters.(you get to set the limits)

 

Warriors/Fighter: Have exclusive access to Martial Arts (and you might consider getting Ultimate Martial Artist or some other product that has the actual "build maneuvers from scratch" rules, which are unfortunately not in the core rules)(Please understand that "Martial Arts" doesn't have to mean kung fu or karate, it can be any kind of fighting technique or special move.) This gives them a distinct mechanical advantage in combat. Have non-exclusive access to the Weapon Familiarities for Common Melee Weapons and Monnon Missiel Weapons (so a spellcaster could try to get all those weapon familiarities but has to buy one at a time not as a group) Have exclusive access to the Weaponmaster Talent. Permitted to buy STR, CON, and OCV beyond limits imposed on other characters.

 

"Other" (thief, bard, etc) : Have non exclusive access to the Scholar Skill enhancer and exclusive access to all other Skill Enhancers. Have exclusive access to certain pre-built Power builds meant especially for them such as Backstab (bought as Deadly Blow) and Scale Sheer Wall (bought as limited Clinging.) Permitted to buy DEX OR PRE (not both) above limits imposed on other characters.

 

You might also consider limiting most to SPD of 3 but letting warriors go to SPD 4.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is kicking me off the computer now....

[bluesguy]

Complications: 

 

When someone wants to play in my campaign I always ask them to come up with a backstory that fits the campaign world (after providing them some history about the campaign world).  From that backstory we build their character.  We talk about physical abilities, skills, talents, perks, powers (when appropriate) and complications.

 

Complications explain all kinds of things about a character and their motivation.  For instance in my campaigns:

• Mage killed the character's cousin in an unfair magical duel.  Character became a bounty hunter to find said mage.  He was 'hunting' the mage.  The character was also a mage and was in a country where magic was outlawed.  So he had a complication because of that.  He was 7' tall and his skin (like most of his people) the deepest color of black you could imagine.  More complications.
• Another character was running away from an arranged marriage that was going to stick her with some old guy and be forced to do 'noblewomen things'.  So she ran away.  She was a rebel (complication).  Had a 'noble' attitude (complication).  Being 'hunted' by her family.  Because she was an expert with a sword she was often challenged in the street for a duel (rivalry - complication).
• Another character was a 'priestess' who didn't believe in the gods and treated as a big sham (Psychological complication).  Later she bought it off after the gods made their presence known to her in a dramatic and terrifying way.  She had been a circus performer before being a priestess and she was always putting on a big show (complication).  Had to be the center of attention (complication)

One of the things that you will find in creating characters in Hero is that creating a deep backstory makes it easier to create the character and role-play that character.  One of the biggest drawbacks (IMO) for any system that essentially guides (limits) you based on some dice rolls and your initial class selection is that you don't have to even think about a backstory and therefore it is easier to roll-play vs. role-play.

[Cantriped]

In D&D, the Alignment system serves a similar function to Complications (especially Psychological Complications); except that in HERO, the GM actually has a mechanical framework within which to require players roleplay their alignment.

[Chris Goodwin]

Some downsides I know that one of my players will balk at having to do subtraction again and again every time she wants to hit something. 

 

Ah, I wanted to address this bit and forgot to do so.  Mathematically, 3d6 <= 11 + OCV - DCV is the same, probability-wise, as 3d6 + OCV >= 10 + DCV.  The same formula as in D&D, and if you're coming from a D&D background you'll be used to it.  It's a bit harder to do Skills with roll high but not impossible.  

 

You could also make a "basic combat roll" which is 11 + OCV.  Roll against that, and the amount by which you make it is the highest DCV you hit.  

[Wardsman]

In D&D, the Alignment system serves a similar function to Complications (especially Psychological Complications); except that in HERO, the GM actually has a mechanical framework within which to require players roleplay their alignment.

That is an interesting way of looking at it.

 

From a AD&D perspective I find that people either read too much or not enough in alignment.

We actually forbade you to tell other players your alignment. You had to roleplay it in character.

We had to cut the paladin some slack when hanging with possible neutrals because of that rule.

 

Alignment was one of those game balance things I felt didn't really work well in D&D.

I have no problems with religious based Limitations on powers like (require deity's favor) but I would not worry too much other than that.

 

One possibility is having clerics and paladin powers tied to either a END reserve  or charges that only recharge when the character performs rituals to his god or only on holy ground. Say when party rests the cleric may need sanctify an area to his god and pray so he can recharge.

[Wardsman]

My suggestion is to try restricting certain game elements to certain classes.

 

Spellcasters: Have exclusive access to Multipowers. (I'm assuming you do NOT want to recreate D&D's "Vancian" magic system, which I can't imagine anyone wanting to recreate if they have a choice.) 

You would be surprised. And yes there are Vancian rebuilds in Hero.

 

I disagree about giving multipowers only to mages. I tend not to use frameworks for magic. But if I do I believe you should let the other "classes" take advantage of that construct as well if they are allowed.

 

I know 6th Edition did away with EC's but I could see a ranger EC or MP for a higher power level campaign.

Or just fighter moves in general.

[Christopher R Taylor]

At least for a heroic game like Fantasy I wouldn't worry too much about the cost of the basic equipment.  A sword is just a sword, don't bother buying it with points.  Its like a rock or a chair; it just is.  You can add points to it with powers, but just let it be a device on its own.  If someone wants to use a dispel or drain to destroy it, give it a point level you figure is good enough and wing it, or check the 6th edition equipment guide for what Steve ended up with.

[Lucius]

 

 

 

You would be surprised. And yes there are Vancian rebuilds in Hero.

Of course it can be done. And has been done. I don't see a reason to do it.

 

 

I disagree about giving multipowers only to mages. I tend not to use frameworks for magic. But if I do I believe you should let the other "classes" take advantage of that construct as well if they are allowed.

 

I know 6th Edition did away with EC's but I could see a ranger EC or MP for a higher power level campaign.

Or just fighter moves in general.

The reason I proposed the limitations I did is because of things like this from the thread's originating post:

 

Does it / can it balance say some spell-casting wizard and a burly fighter all in the same party? And if so, does it do it in the same sort of way D&D 5e would do it where a fighter improves in core solid attributes like having extra hit points, harder to hit / damage, etc.? Or does it do it in a more D&D 4e way where the wizard has a room clearing ability called Fireball and the Fighter has a room clearing ability called "Barrage of Blows" but it all boils down to different flavours on the same thing. This is probably my biggest concern - I want to preserve differentiation between character types. E.g. fighter's progression is to become ever tougher and to hit people harder, magician gets more and more powerful spells and ability to control the environment, rogue gets faster and gets special ways to strike people, or dodge out of combat, etc. There was a game called Iron Heroes which I loved the class design of - you had barbarians, harriers, armigers - all of which played very differently. What I've read about Hero is that it is endlessly flexible in character development. I'm worried that this means I'll get fighters and wizards who play the same and are just described differently whereas I want very different character types. How does FH handle "classes", basically?K.

If you're accustomed to different categories of characters who interact with completely separate subsets of the rules system and want to recreate that, it may not be the usual Hero way of doing things or my preferred way, but it is something Hero can do.

 

It's also possible to have "fighters" and "wizards" who both use Multipowers and still play very differently, but for someone new to running Hero I think it might be easier to be more restrictive at first.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

multipalindromedary

[Killer Shrike]

Ah, I wanted to address this bit and forgot to do so.  Mathematically, 3d6 <= 11 + OCV - DCV is the same, probability-wise, as 3d6 + OCV >= 10 + DCV.  The same formula as in D&D, and if you're coming from a D&D background you'll be used to it.  It's a bit harder to do Skills with roll high but not impossible.  

 

You could also make a "basic combat roll" which is 11 + OCV.  Roll against that, and the amount by which you make it is the highest DCV you hit.  

 

 This is the way I often run it at the table. It also has the advantage that the players don't need to know the exact DCV they are trying to hit. They say what DCV they hit and I, knowing the current NPC DCV's, tell them if they hit or not. After a few go arounds it becomes pretty obvious what the number are, but it adds a little uncertainty to the first exchanges in a combat.

[Alcamtar]

3d6 + OCV - 10 = DCV hit is what I use.

 

When OCV = DCV (not uncommon), I use 3d6 >= 10.

[Chris Goodwin]

3d6 + OCV - 10 = DCV hit is what I use.

 

When OCV = DCV (not uncommon), I use 3d6 >= 10.

 

Oh, that's a good one.  Super easy to subtract 10 from something.  

[Christopher R Taylor]

This is the way I often run it at the table.

 

Same here, OCV+11 minus your roll, that gives you what you hit.  Players don't need to know DCV.

[Ndreare]

 

One system I have seen a lot of people use that is so easy my daughter could do it when she was 6 (last year) is to invert the numbers so rolling high is needed.

 

To hit a character you need to roll higher than the targets DCV+10, example Solomon has a DCV of 7 so all attacks of 17 or less miss.

Then the attacks OCV is simply added to the die roll. This makes the system a roll high system which seamed easier for my daughter.

A roll of 18 always succeeds

A roll of 3 always fails

 

The formula looks something like the following

If Roll+OCV > Target DCV+10 = Success