4th edition vs 5th edition??

[GrimJesta]

I have a question. Me and my posse are playing the 4th edition rules. Granted, I changed SOME of the things to its 5th edition rule counterpart, like the cost of eiditic memory. But Im wondering how drastically different 5th edition is. Since I have a decent ammount of 4th edition Hero suppliments, it would have to be completely worth it for me to switch to 5th edition.

 

The reason I ask is because not every new edition is better (like D&D 3e IMHO), but sometimes its WAAAAY better (like Talislanta 5th edition).

 

So... should I grab me 5th edition because its superior in every which way to 4th edition, or is it just different, or only slightly better (and thus warranting only one person getting it and the rest of the group using it)??

 

-=Grim=-

[Agent X]

Re: 4th edition vs 5th edition??

 

Originally posted by GrimJesta

I have a question. Me and my posse are playing the 4th edition rules. Granted, I changed SOME of the things to its 5th edition rule counterpart, like the cost of eiditic memory. But Im wondering how drastically different 5th edition is. Since I have a decent ammount of 4th edition Hero suppliments, it would have to be completely worth it for me to switch to 5th edition.

 

The reason I ask is because not every new edition is better (like D&D 3e IMHO), but sometimes its WAAAAY better (like Talislanta 5th edition).

 

So... should I grab me 5th edition because its superior in every which way to 4th edition, or is it just different, or only slightly better (and thus warranting only one person getting it and the rest of the group using it)??

 

-=Grim=-

The combat rules would be easy to slap in but I think both editions have their advantages there. I love what they have done to Change Environment and hate what they have done to Aid, Regeneration, Damage Shield, and Instant Change, although the Regeneration adders are a nice touch. They've done a better job with luck and they've opened up some new options in skills. I think you can do more with 5th Edition but there are a few changes I would ignore and keep some 4th Edition elements that were scrapped by Long and Co.

[Monolith]

I personally feel that 5e is much better than 4e. Over half of the powers in the book have enough changes to broaden their appeal and make for much more interesting characters. Some of the things which have really been changed (Change Enviromen, for example) are really interesting powers. Stretching is also an actual interesting power now. Plus the newer combat options such as Multiple-Powers Attacks really broaden the abilities of characters in combat.

 

The biggest gripes I have seen about 5e are as follows:

Regeneration now being part of healing.

Shapeshift now being more of a sensor affecting power.

Damage Shield now requiring an extra Advantage.

 

Considering the size of the book, that is not too much in the way of what most people consider problems. On the good side, things like the Great Linked Debate are settled in 5e, and with the FAQ and Rules Questions there is very little left that is not covered by the rules in some fashion.

 

If you really like 4e, you will like 5e much more, if for no other reason that all the additional options available to the characters.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith

I personally feel that 5e is much better than 4e. Over half of the powers in the book have enough changes to broaden their appeal and make for much more interesting characters. Some of the things which have really been changed (Change Enviromen, for example) are really interesting powers. Stretching is also an actual interesting power now. Plus the newer combat options such as Multiple-Powers Attacks really broaden the abilities of characters in combat.

 

The biggest gripes I have seen about 5e are as follows:

Regeneration now being part of healing.

Shapeshift now being more of a sensor affecting power.

Damage Shield now requiring an extra Advantage.

 

Considering the size of the book, that is not too much in the way of what most people consider problems. On the good side, things like the Great Linked Debate are settled in 5e, and with the FAQ and Rules Questions there is very little left that is not covered by the rules in some fashion.

 

If you really like 4e, you will like 5e much more, if for no other reason that all the additional options available to the characters.

Yeah, I liked what they did with stretching. I don't really have a problem with the changes to Shapeshift. I've played a character with the power and it worked fine. I didn't like this junk about needing a special advantage to pick up water though. I haven't seen many telekinetics who don't have that advantage.

[Lord Liaden]

If you'd like to see a summary of the changes from 4E to 5E (not detailed enough to use in play, but enough to give you a good idea of the scale of change), TheEmerged has compiled a quite thorough one, along with interesting personal commentary on the changes:

 

http://theemerged.blogspot.com/HERO425.htm

[Jhamin]

Just one more thing.

 

Apparently, Hero was always meant to allow you to throw as many powers as you want in one action as long as you are shooting them at the same target.

 

Problem is, while none of the previous editions said that you couldn't, 5th was the first version of the rules to explicitly say you can. Alot of people (like over 90%) had always understood that one phase = one attack power.

 

When the rules said otherwise, people freaked. I know I did. While not really a change, it was in effect a heckof a change for most of us. Once you get used to it it opens up a whole new arena of combat and character creation.

[Old Man]

I could go either way. To me 5th just introduced about the same number of problems that it fixed. I like 4th just because it's less wordy and you can get all of Champions in one book, but you'll probably want to go up to 5th eventually if you want to keep current.

[Rebar]

The best thing about 5E - and a reason for buying it even if for no other reason!

 

The index!

[TheEmerged]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

If you'd like to see a summary of the changes from 4E to 5E (not detailed enough to use in play, but enough to give you a good idea of the scale of change), TheEmerged has compiled a quite thorough one, along with interesting personal commentary on the changes:

 

http://theemerged.blogspot.com/HERO425.htm

 

Just a quick note: there's a reason the list isn't detailed enough to use in play. When I emailed Steve Long to ask him about posting that article, that was one of maybe three things he mentioned -- that "It shouldn't be detailed enough to serve as a substitute for buying 5th Edition" (paraphased).

 

So there are areas where I'm purposefully vague. For example the changes to Summon were difficult to discuss without getting specific.

 

If anyone has any comments, either post them here or use the email link. I make a point of creditting people who correct me

 

Originally posted by Jhamin

Just one more thing.

 

Apparently, Hero was always meant to allow you to throw as many powers as you want in one action as long as you are shooting them at the same target.

 

Problem is, while none of the previous editions said that you couldn't, 5th was the first version of the rules to explicitly say you can. Alot of people (like over 90%) had always understood that one phase = one attack power.

 

When the rules said otherwise, people freaked. I know I did. While not really a change, it was in effect a heckof a change for most of us. Once you get used to it it opens up a whole new arena of combat and character creation.

 

I dislike talking about "intent", and frankly only 1 of the example characters in the BBB (4th Edition) was built in a way that even implied multiple-power attacks (MPA) -- Dragonfly. I can't say I've done an exhaustive search but I can't think of a single other writeup in a 4th Edition product that backs it.

 

However, MPA's are the law now -- and the change is growing on me. I do have to state that the rules for making an MPA are more stringent than you suggest, though.

 

What have MPA's changed?

• Variable slots ("m" slots) in multipowers are viable now, and at least in my own campaign more popular. Also, while I've allowed the "Booster Gold Exception" for a while now (allowing a multipower's pool to exceed the active point limitation as long as none of the sltos do) I suspect people are going to be using it more often.
  
• Because of the above, "secondary effect" powers like Flash and Drain are more popular now that you don't have to spend an entire attack to use them. "Why blind them when I can hurt them?" vs "Why not do both?"
  
• END is a bit more of a factor than before, because expenditures tend to be higher. Under 4th Edition a 150 END reserve was almost overkill -- I've seen them drained under 5th.
  

 

RE: "Almost as many bad changes as good ones." I disagree -- respectively, but very strongly.

 

There *are* bad changes...

• Suppress is now "cumulative" -- more complicated than I care to go into right now, please read that link for the detail.
  
• A change to Damage Shield that makes it worth less than it costs, especially if your campaign uses active point limitations.
  
• A change to multiform that *will* be abused unless the GM intervenes -- and in my opinion the veto power of a GM is no excuse for a hole in the rules.
  
• The one thing that most needed changing (costs of attributes and/or the formula for figured attributes) wasn't even touched.
  

 

but they are *far* outweighed.

• Change Environment has been expanded into its rightful place on the list of "How Do I..." powers alongside Transform and Mind Control -- in particular, making "debuff" and "aura" type powers worth their cost.
  
• Transform is now cumulative by default.
  
• Megascale, while not perfect, is a wonderful tool for certain situations.
  
• The Sense related and affecting powers have been made more consistent and costed more appropriately. While some disagree with me, making Shape Shift a sense-affecting power is an improvement.
  
• Thanks to a change in cost determination, there aren't any 3, 8, or 13 point disadvantages anymore.
  
• RSR abd Side Effects were greatly expanded, making them even more useful for handling effects.
  
• Several powers -- most notably Duplication -- were changed in ways to make them work closer to the way they do in genre fiction.
  
• That index!
  

[Guest Keneton]

Overall 5th is so much better than 4th. I do have a few gripes.

 

1. The null phase thing when holding is dumb.

2. The rules for taking stun negating a recovery from being stunned (throw the stunned guy in a pool and he dies!)

3. Overal levels adding to find weakness and other characteristics rules.

4. Silly designation between levels that add to sweep or those that add to rapid attack.

5. Some issues wih multiple power attacks.

6. Blazing away!!! (dumb)

7. Full move martial arts and teleport.

 

These are a few. Oveall as I said the game is better. It is more offensive in general and you'll find that your bricks ALWAYS SWEEP.

 

Regeneration is more complucated. Contrary to an earlier poster, aid is better at the higher cost and does not cost end.

 

My 2 ep.

[lemming]

Originally posted by Jhamin

Apparently, Hero was always meant to allow you to throw as many powers as you want in one action as long as you are shooting them at the same target.

Depends on which designer you talked to. Which was one of the problems with pre-fifth in that the original writers played differently.

[lemming]

Originally posted by Keneton

1. The null phase thing when holding is dumb.

2. The rules for taking stun negating a recovery from being stunned (throw the stunned guy in a pool and he dies!)

3. Overal levels adding to find weakness and other characteristics rules.

 

 

Regeneration is more complucated. Contrary to an earlier poster, aid is better at the higher cost and does not cost end.

1. Hmm? I probably skimmed that change.

2. Yea, I tossed that one in the dumpster.

3. Thought that applied to 4th. or at least that's how we played it

 

I hate the new regen and instant change. What were wrong with a couple nice simple powers?

 

I didn't notice the no cost of END for Aid until recently. Kind of brings the cost back into line. Sort of makes it reasonable in that the AP work out somewhat better.

[GrimJesta]

Hrmmm, interesting replies. Im intrigued enough now to buy the book and read it, then decide if I want to make the change. Im sort of a rules-tweaker, so Ill probably wind up mixing the two. I especially want a better Change Environment" description. But somet things, like regeneration and Aid and what-not, Ill keep 4th ed. That article about the differences was very, very helpful...thanks.

 

I think the main thing not making me go 5th easily is that not only do I have all 4th ed suppliments (and too many bills to warrant spending mad loot again), but my friend thats getting into my Fantasy Hero game just bought the 4th ed book off Ebay... and he'd curb-stomp me if I suddenly switched.

 

 

Thanks again, folks.

 

-=Grim=-

[Insaniac99]

Originally posted by GrimJesta

Hrmmm, interesting replies. Im intrigued enough now to buy the book and read it, then decide if I want to make the change. Im sort of a rules-tweaker, so Ill probably wind up mixing the two. I especially want a better Change Environment" description. But somet things, like regeneration and Aid and what-not, Ill keep 4th ed. That article about the differences was very, very helpful...thanks.

 

I think the main thing not making me go 5th easily is that not only do I have all 4th ed suppliments (and too many bills to warrant spending mad loot again), but my friend thats getting into my Fantasy Hero game just bought the 4th ed book off Ebay... and he'd curb-stomp me if I suddenly switched.

 

 

Thanks again, folks.

 

-=Grim=-

 

 

in general 4th and 5th are compatable,the average character has minimal changes needed

[Solomon]

Originally posted by Insaniac99

in general 4th and 5th are compatable,the average character has minimal changes needed

 

I'll second that, except that adjustment powers actually changed quite a bit.

[zornwil]

For me, the difference between 4th and 5th is not a rules thing per se, although I will say that generally 5th made things more consistent, got a bit more genre-oriented (in terms of heroic fiction), while getting into tremendous detail in a few selectareas. I think the real difference is that 5th is sort of an internal running commentary, with more reflection and "tinkering" as it goes. It feels like an explication of the 4th's text, with some of the "fixes" or "enhancements" merely reading like the "this is how the philosophy of 4th plays out" explanation. But it's rather dry, at least compared to 4th.

 

Overall, a great work, and if you like HERO well worth having, whether you use the rules. Though I think you'll want to use the large majority of changes ultimately.

 

Regarding Multiform as raised above - yes it's a bit problematic. However, I'm running a campaign with a Multiform character converted straight (in points) to 5th rules. So we're seeing how it goes. It's still early to say, but I'm okay with it so far. Yes, it bears watching, but Multiform intrinsically does with its near open-endedness even in 4th. Remember, compare Multiform to Followers and Summons, and I think the key word here is consistency (particularly thinking what you can do with Followers for abuse, even under 4th).

[Dino]

back on topic...

 

I've never understood why people insist on playing old verions of games when new versions come out. It's one thing if you check out the new version and don't like the changes, but quite another to just refuse to change out of stubborness.

 

Hero 5th is in my opinion "4th ed revised", and that's a good thing. 4th had a lot of good rules and advantages scattered throughout various supplements, so that you needed to collect them all to make it a good game. 5th is "cleaner". It feels alot like 4th, but is more internally consistent and complete. I particularly like the way the genre books provide how to advice on a setting without adding unnessary rules, and the ulitmate series which add nothing but rules for the thing they cover.

 

In the end it's worth it to go with 5th ed just so you can use all the swell new product that is being churned out, and maybe even play a game (or share ideas) with someone who doesn't know your particular group's house rules...

 

My group played for years with a home brewed version of 3rd editon because we felt 4th was a little too "dumbed down" and poorly thought out. When 5th came out we finnally got exited about Hero again and switched over compleatly. It's really nice to have a definative guide and scale (even if you choose to modify it from there), and it's been a breeze to introduce new players too.

 

I reccomend it.

[TheEmerged]

Re: back on topic...

 

Originally posted by Deejmeister

I've never understood why people insist on playing old verions of games when new versions come out. It's one thing if you check out the new version and don't like the changes, but quite another to just refuse to change out of stubborness.

 

Speaking for myself, I tend to mix and match. In my current campaign for example I'm ignoring the Suppress change, using a house-ruled version of Damage Shield, continuing to use the "new" Flash rule (see below), and adopting a lot of the new material. I have temporarily disallowed the optional "initiative" manuevers pending the development of a working system.

 

It's not always stubborness -- sometimes the previous edition WAS superior (C:NM was the "new edition" at one time, after all).

 

*RE: Flash change. While *technically* new to 5th Edition, this change was announced well in advance of 5th's actual release. Our gaming group decided to experiment with it when we heard about it (about 2 years before 5th was published) and have been using it ever since. It's a valid argument that the new rule "hoses" high-SPD characters, but that's the very reason we like it.

[Rebar]

I've never understood why people insist on playing old verions of games when new versions come out. It's one thing if you check out the new version and don't like the changes, but quite another to just refuse to change out of stubborness.

 

A logic that confounds Microsoft as well.

 

"Why would people continue to use Windows 95, which does eveything they need, that they've finally figured out and are comfortable with, and eveyone else they work with is happy with too? Especially when they could give us money for the privilege of buying Windows StarDate3001, with all sorts of new things that they've gotten along without just fine up until now, that send them tumbling back down the learning curve, and that generally wipe out their enjoyment and productivity? Stupid customers. Don't they know what's best for us?"

 

To qualify: obviously there are just as many valid reasons to upgrade. But surely you grant that the decision is a personal one, and perfectly valid either way.

[Tom Carman]

In my gaming group, we mainly use the 5th edition rules. Regeneration still goes by the BBB rules (it's just simpler), and Healing has FREd costs, but BBB mechanics; ie. it's more-or-less Cumulative and the maximum can be increased.

[lemming]

Re: Re: back on topic...

 

Originally posted by TheEmerged

Speaking for myself, I tend to mix and match.

Me too. -1/3" is my 3rd edition rule I'll probably always keep.

[zornwil]

Re: Re: Re: back on topic...

 

Originally posted by lemming

Me too. -1/3" is my 3rd edition rule I'll probably always keep.

 

And as I am always compelled to say when lemming says, this, "me, too"!

 

Though I finally, just like a month ago, gave up and went to 1 END/10 AP, after having retained 1 END/5 base (which is really a house rule anyway, the original having been 1 END/5 AP or 5 active, can't recall now) up until then.

[DrFurious]

One of my gripes is the escalation in the number and variety of advantages - especially ones that are just specific to a single power. I prefer to make a minimalist approach with a limited number of advantages.

 

I find that the current approach in Hero is to throw advantages at things. I think this makes things more complicated - especially for new adopters to the system. One of the things I liked about the 4th rulesbook was that it was relatively small and concise. In 5th, there is a greater number of details and special cases for each power to remember.

 

If there is a logical extension to a power that doesn't fall under an existing advantage - then that is a signal that the advantage framework needs to be redesigned. I'd much rather interpret an existing advantage differently than make one up on the spot ad hoc.

 

!DrFURIOUS!

[Agent X]

Originally posted by DrFurious

One of my gripes is the escalation in the number and variety of advantages - especially ones that are just specific to a single power. I prefer to make a minimalist approach with a limited number of advantages.

 

I find that the current approach in Hero is to throw advantages at things. I think this makes things more complicated - especially for new adopters to the system. One of the things I liked about the 4th rulesbook was that it was relatively small and concise. In 5th, there is a greater number of details and special cases for each power to remember.

 

If there is a logical extension to a power that doesn't fall under an existing advantage - then that is a signal that the advantage framework needs to be redesigned. I'd much rather interpret an existing advantage differently than make one up on the spot ad hoc.

 

!DrFURIOUS!

I like the new advantages. Of course, I'm not a newbie. If was a newbie, I'd just bite off a few advantages at a time. Learning any system takes time. You aren't required to use every advantage to build a character so it really shouldn't have any impact, unless you are in competition with the other players or the GM is one of those guys who likes to "outbuild" his players. Then you've probably got more serious problems than too many advantages.

[AnotherSkip]

My brother is running a 4th campaign ( I left some of my books with him) so that is what he is doing....

Me i'd rather run 5th but hey I go with the flow.