zslane Posted November 18, 2017 Report Share Posted November 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, DreadDomain said: In all fairness, this statement boils down to a general resistance to change and if we would always judge the validity of a change on your above statement, nothing would ever change. Well, the way I see it, it boils down to a general resistance to fixing that which isn't actually broken. Who gets to decide what is or isn't broken? Well in this case it was Steve Long and a bunch of like-minded players whose design instincts I don't feel pointed true north. And lest you think I dislike all change, I will point out that there have been plenty of changes to the game between editions that were quite sound--and even necessary in some cases--but IMO very few of them are to be found in 6E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadDomain Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 1 hour ago, zslane said: Well, the way I see it, it boils down to a general resistance to fixing that which isn't actually broken. Who gets to decide what is or isn't broken? Well in this case it was Steve Long and a bunch of like-minded players whose design instincts I don't feel pointed true north. And yet, those who had to make the decision clearly had a different opinion. Those who didn't have to decide, like you and I, can only revel into the comfortable luxury of being back bencher critiques. I simply happen to believe that despite all my reservations and the fact that they did not address all my personal pet peeves and did address stuff I thought was not a problem, they have done a darn fine job and made HERO 6th an excellent game. 1 hour ago, zslane said: And lest you think I dislike all change, I will point out that there have been plenty of changes to the game between editions that were quite sound--and even necessary in some cases--but IMO very few of them are to be found in 6E. Ah no, not at all. I do not know you and I couldn't simply jump to the conclusion that you generally dislike change. My understanding is that your objection rest on the removal of COM, to which I was replying. I don't recall you making a reference to any other change you felt offensive so I was not making any other assumption. My point was that if change would be stopped every time someone (not specifically only you) opposes it, because he finds it unnecessary or otherwise, nothing would change. You would have passionately opposed the removal of COM, I would have opposed the removal of Figured Characteristics, someone else would have opposed the change to the Variable Power Pool, etc. In every case, we would have pleaded that there was no need to fix what was not broken. My objection to your objection is not about the removal of COM (I totally get that) but rather on how you frame the impact of the removal of COM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 58 minutes ago, DreadDomain said: And yet, those who had to make the decision clearly had a different opinion. There seems to be a recurring theme here which insists that these decisions and changes in 6E had to be made at all. Since I don't agree with that basic premise, the debate is pretty much dead before it even starts. What 6E needed to be, in my view, was a massive presentation revamp (ala Champions Complete), not a campaign to eradicate pet peeves and make pet tweaks and house rules official. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 6E was created by a small group of people exposed to a lot of fan feedback. Every edition of Champions/Hero since the first was written the same way. Every person has their preferences, their likes and dislikes, which other people don't necessarily share. I've heard the exact same changes between editions praised by some, panned by others. Someone has to decide which of those preferences get to be official rules. I like 5E. It's still my system iteration of choice overall. I didn't feel a need to create another edition. But even when I played 5E I preferred some elements from 4E, and kept them in my 5E games. I don't usually play 6E, but I like some of the things changed for that edition. Some changes from one edition to the next I get the rationale for, even if I don't personally like or agree with them. But I'm always wary of conflating my subjective likes and dislikes with any objective assessment of "better" or "worse." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadDomain Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 1 hour ago, zslane said: There seems to be a recurring theme here which insists that these decisions and changes in 6E had to be made at all. Since I don't agree with that basic premise, the debate is pretty much dead before it even starts. What 6E needed to be, in my view, was a massive presentation revamp (ala Champions Complete), not a campaign to eradicate pet peeves and make pet tweaks and house rules official. Yes, there is no doubt that decisions regarding a potential new rulebook for HERO had to be made but I am nowhere implying these decisions could only lead to rule changes. Same rule, new presentation could have been an option. Those in charge felt HERO needed more. This debate as you say was dead from the start because I do not believe you wanted a debate. It is clear by now that you keep dancing around whatever I say to avoid the real objection I had with your position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadDomain Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 16 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said: 6E was created by a small group of people exposed to a lot of fan feedback. Every edition of Champions/Hero since the first was written the same way. Every person has their preferences, their likes and dislikes, which other people don't necessarily share. I've heard the exact same changes between editions praised by some, panned by others. Someone has to decide which of those preferences get to be official rules. I like 5E. It's still my system iteration of choice overall. I didn't feel a need to create another edition. But even when I played 5E I preferred some elements from 4E, and kept them in my 5E games. I don't usually play 6E, but I like some of the things changed for that edition. Some changes from one edition to the next I get the rationale for, even if I don't personally like or agree with them. But I'm always wary of conflating my subjective likes and dislikes with any objective assessment of "better" or "worse." To bring this back on topic, would you like to elaborate on what makes 5E (and by that do you mean 5E or 5ER?) a better iteration than 6E in your opinion? I have listed a few things that I liked better in 5ER compared to 6E but I'm curious to know what other thinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Democracy Posted November 20, 2017 Report Share Posted November 20, 2017 I am in the camp of 6th edition being a better iteration of the game, even if the presentation was flawed by being too huge for most people. I understand why it is huge - the key demographic always wanted more explanations and examples and this gave them that in spades... For the game, I am a huge proponent of removing figured characteristics and would probably have gone even further. I think we could have separated out all of the characteristics into powers, skills and system numbers (STUN, END, BODY, CV etc). It would, however, have been a move to a more hardcore HERO which would not have expanded its horizons in any fashion. It would have addressed some of the issues such as STR and Blast costings and other little bits. It would also have made the system cleaner by removing more of the things that presume SFX from names of things. Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoloOfEarth Posted November 20, 2017 Report Share Posted November 20, 2017 I'm of the camp that there are some things I preferred about 5ER, and some things I prefer about 6E / CC. For instance, I prefer Transfer to Drain + Aid, but find Barrier vastly superior to Force Wall. Left to my own devices and if I had the time (and skill) to reprogram Creation Workshop to accommodate it, I would probably have used a combination of the two editions. As to COM / Striking Appearance, it's easy enough to convert one to the other based on points spent. 3 points for +1 / +1d6 Striking Appearance = +6 COM, and vice versa. Probably have to do some 1-2 point adjustments along the way, but really not a major deal IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrinku Posted November 20, 2017 Report Share Posted November 20, 2017 Is it just me, or does "Striking Appearance" make others think of this kind of thing: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cassandra Posted November 21, 2017 Report Share Posted November 21, 2017 21 hours ago, mrinku said: Is it just me, or does "Striking Appearance" make others think of this kind of thing: Followed by a Beauty Nap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimofpeace Posted November 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 On 11/16/2017 at 11:33 AM, zslane said: The revised edition is better than the original 5E edition in pretty much every way. There's no compelling reason to get the original version, IMO. After perusing 1st Edition, 4th Edition, 5th Edition, and 5th Edition Revised, I am going to have to agree with you. I am blown away by the amount of information in the Revised version and enjoy the fact that it corrected a lot of errata from the 5th Edition. Too bad it's hard to find a reasonable priced physical copy online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadDomain Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 On 21/11/2017 at 5:50 AM, BoloOfEarth said: I'm of the camp that there are some things I preferred about 5ER, and some things I prefer about 6E / CC. For instance, I prefer Transfer to Drain + Aid, but find Barrier vastly superior to Force Wall. Left to my own devices and if I had the time (and skill) to reprogram Creation Workshop to accommodate it, I would probably have used a combination of the two editions. As to COM / Striking Appearance, it's easy enough to convert one to the other based on points spent. 3 points for +1 / +1d6 Striking Appearance = +6 COM, and vice versa. Probably have to do some 1-2 point adjustments along the way, but really not a major deal IMO. Yes, I am in the same boat. Going through the changes highlighted in the 2-page character conversion document found in 6E p.20, 21. I would say: No More Hexes: The hexes never bothered me but I much prefer meters. Name Changes: I find these changes mostly positive and they are generally obvious so when you look at a 5ER or 6E character sheets, it’s not too confusing (well if you some name changed). I have a few caveats though. The most obvious are OMCV and DMCV. Acronyms and contractions are required but with it is more than 3 letters, it starts looking cumbersome and hermetic. Character Creation: The point total and fewer Complications don’t really bother me. They make sense within the context of the changes. Characteristics: This is where I believe 6E could have done better. I would have hoped for a solution to resolve the obvious 3 and 8 breakpoints but that could have required reworking the scale and diminish backward compatibility. At least each characteristic means something at each level (damage, initiative, resistance to stun, etc..) except INT which I still find annoying. I am also not convinced that DEX is worth 2 points. The big change was the removal of the figured characteristics which I was originally opposed to. In practice though, I found it liberating and simpler. Part of me still wish they would have kept them… In any case, I believe 6E suffers from the Wall of Characteristics syndrome when they are listed in a single list from STR to STUN. I am not sure OMCV and DMCV should have made it to the list if only because they are not generally useful for everyone. Comeliness: I have discussed already. I liked Comeliness but understand why it is gone. CSL, PSL, SL: Because I am not convinced DEX is worth 2 points, I am obviously not convinced Agility Skill levels are worth more than Intellect or Interaction skills. I believe they should have had the same cost. Skill Changes: I don’t have any issued with the changes but I would have preferred skills to be… skills. Whatever doesn’t work like a skill (9+CHAR/5), I would have moved to Talents. I have no problem with Languages and Weapon and Transport Familiarities being part of the skill list so it might only be force of habits based on previous editions. Perks and Talents Changes: All good in my opinion. Removed Powers: This is a mixed bag. I liked having Transfer, Gliding and Force Field. This is one level of deconstruction I would have avoided. An I would have kept Instant Change (in Talents if necessary) as well. Some of these changes make sense but they clutter the character sheet and make character creation more complex. Changed Powers: Generally good except I dislike that Growth in Champions Complete refers to the size templates at the back of the book. New Powers: Generally good 12 to 17 Removed, Changed and New Advantages and Limitations: Generally good except that ACV could have being simplified by assuming equal opportunities for Mental and Physical attacks (not too farfetched in Champions). 18. Power Frameworks: I liked EC… but they had to go. VPP works better now. 19. Complications: No problem really. 20. No More DEF: This could have gone both way to be honest. I suppose it was simply easier to keep PD and ED. Going through this makes me realize that the only thing I really hope would be better designed in HERO (any edition) are the characteristics and they only thing I wish they would not have done is get rid of some powers. Still, now I have the urge to reread 5Er… which is in a box in Canada… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 I wonder how much of a pain would it have been to change light from illusions to change environment? The way CE changed in 5th, it seems more natural to put light there than keeping it with illusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 I might have missed them in 5th but in 6th there seems to be more adders which allow you to avoid pesky rules that some GMs enforce. Off the top of my head is the adder to instantly increase or decrease combat velocity. (Which I like fwiw) I still am not a fan of the those limitations for stretching just to make a weapon longer. (Personally, I see those as minor limits already defined by focus and Sfx) At least in 6th it became an example of custom adder and is less cumbersome on the sheet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadDomain Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 6 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said: I wonder how much of a pain would it have been to change light from illusions to change environment? The way CE changed in 5th, it seems more natural to put light there than keeping it with illusions. Good point. Some applications of the rules remain counter intuitive. Creating light is one of them. The other example is the ability to run super fast on water or to the side of building. Logic dictates the base power should be Running, not Flight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 I'm surprised 6E doesn't have a completely deconstructed Move power that you then have to build into super running, super jumping, super swimming, and flight based on other modifiers. After all, players want to build everything for their game themselves with the RPG equivalent of quarks, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cassandra Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 For those who prefer the 5th Edition 250 Points Superheroes please see my various threads for Characteristics and Templates. Comment Welcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrinku Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 I'm generally on board with DreadDomain's post, but I found the merging of Gliding and Flight (Gliding was NOT removed!) a good thing. The power allows you to have one or the other easily enough, but having Glide as an option for a Flyer by default works for me. I used to basically build all my winged characters that way anyway, with both (sometimes in a multipower). IMHO Instant Change should have been formally merged with Shapeshift. You can still construct it using that power (Persistent with the Instant Change adder) and probably get a custom limitation on it if the change of clothes doesn't change your identity. Derek the Super-Model's ability to instantly change into any fashionable ensemble is probably worth a -1 or more; being able to instantly go from Barry Allen to Flash is a normal Shapechange identity change and wouldn't qualify for a limitation. Ironically, high speed characters probably don't need to bother with it, since they'll likely have a spare phase to change clothes under the standard rule. The changes to starting points and complications/disadvantages don't concern me. I didn't agree with the 5e changes to those defaults and am setting my own numbers (losing figured characteristics does need a 50-100 point increase for superheroic). Always worth keeping in mind that those have only ever been suggestions. Even 3e (as far back as I can reliably go) talked about changing the base points to suit the campaign and taste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 16 hours ago, Cassandra said: For those who prefer the 5th Edition 250 Points Superheroes please see my various threads for Characteristics and Templates. Comment Welcome. I still like your builds. You aren’t going to send the Game Police after me if I borrow and adapt them for 6th? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 I'm sure if we really tried, we could reduce the powers list to only a few, each with dozens of official modifiers with which to construct complete abilities/spells/gadgets/whatever. E.g: Move, Damage, Protect, Change, Sense, Control, etc. Heck, I bet "Change" could cover 90% of the game all by itself; after all, doing damage is really just Changing someone's BODY/STUN scores, moving is really just Changing one's position in space, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cassandra Posted November 24, 2017 Report Share Posted November 24, 2017 There is one flaw to the Hero System. They should not have a separate Vehicle building system. They should have used Growth instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Impudite Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 On 11/16/2017 at 10:57 AM, jimofpeace said: Hello, everyone. I just bought the Hero System 5th Edition and am looking forward to running a Champions campaign. Is anybody still using Fifth Edition? I will probably be coming here asking for a lot of help, so hopefully some of you are experienced with this older system. Thank you for any help you can give me in the future. You're in good company, Jim. Many of us chose to continue using 5th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimofpeace Posted November 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, Marcus Impudite said: You're in good company, Jim. Many of us chose to continue using 5th. Thanks, Marcus. I really love 5th Edition so far. I am reading both the original 5th Edition and the 5th Edition Revised to see what they updated. So far, I love both of them and really enjoy reading this system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 One change I dislike in 6th is that Damage resistance is now an advantage, sorry but it makes some math wonky for me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cassandra Posted December 2, 2017 Report Share Posted December 2, 2017 On 11/23/2017 at 4:48 AM, Ninja-Bear said: I still like your builds. You aren’t going to send the Game Police after me if I borrow and adapt them for 6th? I consider it flattery. Like Shakespeare translated into English from the original Klingon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.