Earlier vs. Current Editions of Champions

[Sketchpad]

32 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 It's becoming apparent in this thread  that what would work is a 3rd. Edition Hero book with modern layout and formatting. Even while Duke has had success with 2nd edition with his youth group, a "powered by Hero" type game with 3rd edition rules (Low complexity, low page count), and a simultaneous release of a minimum of two adventure books (magazines ala Adventure paths?), seems to be the Optimal path.  Anything after 3rd edition is pushing the page count  too high.  Leave the toolbox approach to the core rules that already exist, and incluse only what the genre requires.

What sorts of games?  Well Champions of course as it's the most active. Fantasy could work.  Modern Action would work. It basically become a "Streaming Television game". What else might work, if one remembers that we can have no licenses, and no large page counts?  Try to think about what would sell to people that game on line and don't have a lot of time for prep, rather than your "favorite" genre.  Also how wide or narrow does one go for the genre? No tool box, but a little flexibility might be nice.

 

As a big fan of 4th ed., I don't know if 3rd ed. is where I would start, Scott. But it is a great base. I would also add a solid space opera kind of game. Keep it a bit tool box, but make it more like a hand held one rather than a giant roller box. 

 

Something else that would be handy are some threads for regular builds. Much like having a thread that keeps a consistent superhero theme (characters built in the same manner, or even an expanded Champions Powers thread), maybe have something with a living grimoire, or starship bay where people could deposit the same ideas that follow the same build concepts. Like making spells with a "Spell (-1/2)" limitation that defines specifics that could be combined (like requires spell components, or requires studying). A resource like that would be incredibly handy for players old and new. 

[steriaca]

A low level "psionic vs hi-tech normal" world (like GURPS Psionics) could work.

 

Western Champions (low level old west superhero campaign).

 

A mecha campaign much in the vein of Mobile Suit Gundam. No aliens, no outrageous space empires. Just corporations, mecha, pirates, and asteroid miners.

 

Horror Hero. Power limited to NPC monsters.

[Jhamin]

44 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 It's becoming apparent in this thread  that what would work is a 3rd. Edition Hero book with modern layout and formatting. 

 

I... disagree.  I started with 4e just fine & what I see of 3rd doesn't make me want to go back.  I've introduced players to 5 and to 6, and both are fine.

 

What I do hear a lot of from people trying to get into Hero is that they are super confused by what books they should actually use.  Champions?  Champions Complete?  6e?  (Is that the same as Champions Complete?  Sorta....)

I 100% think its a presentation issue, but I don't think its a rules issue.  In 2022 new players aren't turning away from Hero because of how END is calculated and going to an older formula isn't going to make them all come running back.  I think we need to make it easier to know where to start, know how to start a game, etc. Less toolkit and more "here, do this"

 

"Champions Begins" was a really great place to start.  How did that go?

[Christopher R Taylor]

I have no sales info on Champions Begins, but I'll ask and see if I can't get some info.  I believe Champions Begins needs a followup simple campaign with "how to build characters" in it.  Just a campaign arc of say, 5 adventures with a couple of basic adaptable character story adventures offered as well to weave in.  The easiest way to do that would be to have adventures out that people can then grab and drop into their game as the campaign directs.

[steriaca]

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I have no sales info on Champions Begins, but I'll ask and see if I can't get some info.  I believe Champions Begins needs a followup simple campaign with "how to build characters" in it.  Just a campaign arc of say, 5 adventures with a couple of basic adaptable character story adventures offered as well to weave in.  The easiest way to do that would be to have adventures out that people can then grab and drop into their game as the campaign directs.

Seems like someone should write it.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Well it takes a bit of setup; creating adventures or rebuilding adventures to 6th edition so there's content to build a campaign around.  Then the campaign can be built using them as a chain of stories to a finale.

[assault]

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 Then the campaign can be built using them as a chain of stories to a finale.

 

Including enough options that it's not a railroad.

 

Railroads are actually good for some purposes - a GM who genuinely doesn't have much time or experience - but the term is derogatory for a reason.

[Christopher R Taylor]

While I agree, I think for "baby's first campaign" its okay to be a bit more linear than you usually want.  Honestly I have never played Pathfinder and know only theory about how they built their campaigns, but what they did seems popular and well-received.

[carmachu]

On 7/5/2022 at 10:48 PM, steriaca said:

Then what can be done to tell management to change? Also, even if the management wants to change, how can they afford to change?

 

The older we get, the closer we go to retirement age, where a lot of time opens up. I'm 51 myself and looking forward to retirement in 15 years. But we are creeping into death. And new people entering our favorite rpg system? It doesn't look promising. 

 

We can say "do this" and "do that" till our faces are blue. That won't change anything till management decides to do it. And they have to balance attracting new players with not upsetting old players. I personally say screw it...we are litterly dieting, focus on attracting new players.

 

But I can't say how. I don't know how. I've been without a gaming group for so long.

 

I'm just going to do my own thing, honestly. Yes the focus is on attaching newer players because otherwise, to put coldly? Its a dead game in the eyes of the public and way harder to go anywhere.

 

I buy whatever title folks publish as long as I can get it pod, but otherwise I don't expect much anymore

[Christopher R Taylor]

I think its overstated to say that Hero Games is "dead" for a couple of reasons, not the least of which is that games like this never die (I mean, there are people still playing Empire of the Petal Throne).  But its a bit dormant and being forgotten after being an industry leader and major force at shops and conventions.

 

I think that could easily turn around, but its going to take effort on the part of fans and players to get that to happen.  Running games at shops, at conventions, at college campuses etc all would be a big help just to raise awareness.  Ideally Hero could get a group of famous, or internet-famous people to start playing a campaign.

 

There have been a couple of youtube games people have run and recorded but they are lower profile than some of the D&D games.

[Joe Walsh]

I can only dream of something like the folks behind Chivalry and Sorcery were able to achieve. Stunning products, true to the game, with an ever-expanding roster of new content. If HERO could do something like that it would be a good start. And I don't see any reason C&S would have an advantage over HERO in terms of the ability to do things like that.

 

[Sketchpad]

3 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I think its overstated to say that Hero Games is "dead" for a couple of reasons, not the least of which is that games like this never die (I mean, there are people still playing Empire of the Petal Throne).  But its a bit dormant and being forgotten after being an industry leader and major force at shops and conventions.

 

I think that could easily turn around, but its going to take effort on the part of fans and players to get that to happen.  Running games at shops, at conventions, at college campuses etc all would be a big help just to raise awareness.  Ideally Hero could get a group of famous, or internet-famous people to start playing a campaign.

 

There have been a couple of youtube games people have run and recorded but they are lower profile than some of the D&D games.

 

Sure, technically any game isn't truly "dead." I mean, even FATAL has fans. And I definitely think that folks running the game in public places would bring in people. But, IMHO, the game needs a refresher before that happens. It needs to be attractive to new players, and be able to pull in old players. 

 

2 hours ago, GM Joe said:

I can only dream of something like the folks behind Chivalry and Sorcery were able to achieve. Stunning products, true to the game, with an ever-expanding roster of new content. If HERO could do something like that it would be a good start. And I don't see any reason C&S would have an advantage over HERO in terms of the ability to do things like that.

 

Totally agree. The redesign of C&S is a step in the right direction.

[steriaca]

It might be easier to just scrub 6ed and go to 7th edition, with 7ed merely being 6ed with a fresh coat of paint, and prehaps adding some new stuff from the APGs. But what 7ed needs before being published?

 

Everything written in a compact, everyday language way.

 

Fresh color artwork, with only a minimum (if any) recycled artwork. And NO BLACK AND WHITE PIECES.

 

A great world created for this edition. 

 

Commitment to publishing adventures and world building. 

 

The commitment to having something new once per month, even if it is a one page electronic newsletter. 

 

Of course, this will probably not happen in my lifetime. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

It would take investors to do it, or a huge kickstarter.  And please I would really rather not do another edition   

[Grailknight]

I could see a Kickstarter for a 7th Edition but it would have be a loss leader. That way all the die-hard grognards(us) can get the material(at least character creation) at cost and profit would come from sales of the GM book,  NPC compendiums and Adventures.

 

We protest but 90% of us would buy a 7th edition( know I would) but there is understandably some buyer fatigue in the market. Yeah you're going to have to take a loss on the initial Kickstarter but building goodwill from the start is a good step for a new venture. 

[Scott Ruggels]

Anything as a follow on would be a horrible, if not fatal move for Hero. IF you have a game where you need a separate piece of paid software to create a character, it would be classed as a failure in most other contexts. This is why I am advocating stepping back to 3rd, and a limited 3rd at that. taking into account limited attention spans, limited time, stepping back towards Hero's original simplicity, and having the book as a game and NOT a toolkit seems to be the direction that should be taken.

Re-label 6th edition as "advanced Hero" and the 3rd, as just "Herosystem" if you need to, but keep the toolkit and the decoupled characteristics away from the new users, and include just the genre appropriate information within the book.

 

In a post above, Jhamin advocated for 6e, but said "Introduced" to the new players. That is all find for his friends and acquaintances, but what it is NOT fine for are those people finding the system for the first time, and passing it over as too crunchy or complex. The "new" books need to be written for people that have not played before. The game is no longer an industry leader, like it was in the late 80s and early 90s.  Editorially, it needs to be aimed at a new audience, who can pick this up and run it  from scratch without outside help or advocacy, and the existence of Hero Designer rules out any use of 6th edition for this task.

 

Thin rule books, with an informative, conversational style, and 4 adventures, should be the model.

[Sketchpad]

29 minutes ago, steriaca said:

It might be easier to just scrub 6ed and go to 7th edition, with 7ed merely being 6ed with a fresh coat of paint, and prehaps adding some new stuff from the APGs. But what 7ed needs before being published?

 

Everything written in a compact, everyday language way.

 

Fresh color artwork, with only a minimum (if any) recycled artwork. And NO BLACK AND WHITE PIECES.

 

A great world created for this edition. 

 

Commitment to publishing adventures and world building. 

 

The commitment to having something new once per month, even if it is a one page electronic newsletter. 

 

Of course, this will probably not happen in my lifetime. 

 

I wouldn't mind a 7th ed, but I'd really like to see them do what 5th ed D&D did as far as the rules go. Not an evolution of 6e, but rather taking the previous 6 editions, determining what worked, what didn't and making a better game from that. Yes to new color artwork, but also good layout and clean pages that are easy to read, and easy to navigate quickly. I don't think we need monthly releases, but I would LOVE to see Adventurer's Club return as an e-zine (and as print collections). 

I also think it's important to see "easy entry" books released, like a starter set or a theme set for specific events. A great example is to make a boxed set that has the rules, barebones experience, and player-navigation sheets to help them play the game (along with some other fun stuff). Recruit demo teams to help run as well. 

 

12 minutes ago, Grailknight said:

I could see a Kickstarter for a 7th Edition but it would have be a loss leader. That way all the die-hard grognards(us) can get the material(at least character creation) at cost and profit would come from sales of the GM book,  NPC compendiums and Adventures.

 

We protest but 90% of us would buy a 7th edition( know I would) but there is understandably some buyer fatigue in the market. Yeah you're going to have to take a loss on the initial Kickstarter but building goodwill from the start is a good step for a new venture. 

 

The buyer fatigue has a lot to do with shoving editions out every five years, as well as a glut of material that still has yet to come out. One of the most important things to remember is to have the books at the printer before announcing anything. 

[Hugh Neilson]

13 hours ago, steriaca said:

It might be easier to just scrub 6ed and go to 7th edition, with 7ed merely being 6ed with a fresh coat of paint, and prehaps adding some new stuff from the APGs. But what 7ed needs before being published?

 

Everything written in a compact, everyday language way.

 

Fresh color artwork, with only a minimum (if any) recycled artwork. And NO BLACK AND WHITE PIECES.

 

One might also classify this as "6.5", much like D&D 3.5.  I note 3e was released in 2000, 3.5 in 2003, 4e announced in 2007 and released in 2008, and 5e announced in 2012, and released in 2014. 2021 saw an announcement of a 2024  "evolution".  That doesn't suggest Hero has historically rolled out new editions at breakneck speed.  A "new edition" aimed totally at presentation, with support in the form of real games, would be a decent strategy but, as has been noted, would require considerable financial support.

 

13 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Anything as a follow on would be a horrible, if not fatal move for Hero. IF you have a game where you need a separate piece of paid software to create a character, it would be classed as a failure in most other contexts. This is why I am advocating stepping back to 3rd, and a limited 3rd at that. taking into account limited attention spans, limited time, stepping back towards Hero's original simplicity, and having the book as a game and NOT a toolkit seems to be the direction that should be taken.

Re-label 6th edition as "advanced Hero" and the 3rd, as just "Herosystem" if you need to, but keep the toolkit and the decoupled characteristics away from the new users, and include just the genre appropriate information within the book.

 

In a post above, Jhamin advocated for 6e, but said "Introduced" to the new players. That is all find for his friends and acquaintances, but what it is NOT fine for are those people finding the system for the first time, and passing it over as too crunchy or complex. The "new" books need to be written for people that have not played before. The game is no longer an industry leader, like it was in the late 80s and early 90s.  Editorially, it needs to be aimed at a new audience, who can pick this up and run it  from scratch without outside help or advocacy, and the existence of Hero Designer rules out any use of 6th edition for this task.

 

Thin rule books, with an informative, conversational style, and 4 adventures, should be the model.

 

Why do we need a stripped-down "Hero System"?  3e was also the last edition to focus on games, rather than system.

 

Maintaining 6e as "the full game design system", but publishing stripped-down versions with Hero Games makes perfect sense to me.  Set the dials (only publish the base or optional rules that are used), leave out items not relevant to the genre, provide pre-built abilities (Fantasy or Alien races, equipment, spells, mutant powers, superpowers, whatever).

 

Where I would disagree is putting Figured back.  Keeping the system consistent should be a priority - not the sole priority, but if we find a need for some change of substance, that should typically end up in a "Full System" optional rule a la APG.  As I consider, maybe higher-priced characteristics with Figureds also becomes an Optional Rule.  6e did not proceed that way based on the simple conclusion that having higher-priced characteristics that provide Figured, and limitations if they lack Figured, was an added complexity that was not needed if the prices were already balanced.

 

For some genres, you could eliminate some Figureds.  Maybe this game does not use END.  Perhaps we set BOD recovery the same for everyone (relying on Healing spells) and STUN recovers only between combats or by abilities used in combat.  They need not all be presented as "characteristics" that you can purchase independently. Some could have an automatic PC baseline, and be enhanced only through ability purchases.  "Fast reactions" might be +1 SPD, while "shrugs off damage" might be +3 PD and +3 ED.  "Tough" might be +1 BOD and +4 STUN, and a "Crack Shot" gets +2 OCV.  That PC baseline might differ from mooks (maybe our Fantasy game gives the masses 2 SPD, but PCs get 4 SPD automatically, while some minions have 3 SPD).  You could do this with a lot of characteristics - maybe PRE or EGO are not all that crucial to the game in question, or perhaps CON gets relegated to "toughness" abilities, and the default is taking 10+ stun means you are STUNNED (maybe that is varied for normals, minions and PCs - behind the scenes, some of their points are spent on CON).  The option of weaknesses (e.g. "Slow - reduce SPD by 1" or "fragile - damage to be Stunned reduced by 5") would also exist.

[klecser]

I'm coming here completely raw to Champions, but a veteran of ttrpgs. I will fully admit that getting into Champions has been very confusing to me. It is in no way obvious what "current" versions of the game are. I bought Champions Complete simply because it seems to imply that has "everything" and is the most updated version of the game? But in reading this thread, there seems to be differences between 6E and ICONS and complete? It doesn't really matter to me what includes what, so long as I can play. I currently have: Champions Complete. Champions Powers, and Aaron Alston's Strike Force. And I love all three.

 

A big part of the reason why I came here though is because Champions Begins got nominated for an eNnie. I downloaded it and like what I see. However, I don't want to waste time printing the Player's and GM's books if they are basically a rehash of rules from Champions Complete. On the other hand, if it is more explanatory about the rules, it would be worth reading. Veteran thoughts on this? I recognize that I could just read all of the mentioned and know. I don't have that kind of time. A quick summary of the distinctions would be helpful. Other games don't have the problem of convolution of Champions, as some of you have lamented. So, a good way to combat that is with concise summaries of key differences. Your help is appreciated!

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

 

Maintaining 6e as "the full game design system", but publishing stripped-down versions with Hero Games makes perfect sense to me. 

 

 

I agree, it would be a mistake, in my opinion, to strip away the "anything" aspect of Hero.  That said, the first releases should be popular genres, not a generic rule set.

 

If anything, Hero should lean into the "you can play anything" deal; put out a cross-genre concept setting like Rifts but better, showing off how you can literally walk the same character between any genre.

[fdw3773]

In the meantime, I'll be simplifying my previous 5th/6th Edition Hero System game materials to try generate interest in new players at the Extra Life game event scheduled for November 5, 2022, starting with 3rd Edition Champions and Fantasy Hero as my base and drawing from the 5th Edition source books as needed (e.g. Book of Dragons). Below is an example of what I mean by simplifying previous character write-ups I posted  with Green Lantern (Hal Jordan) and Warduke (e.g. minimal to no Perks & Talents and extraneous acronyms like OIF, OAF, listing only main skills a character vs. a massive skill list that covers every minute detail, etc.) and going with a more visually pleasing layout even if that will take up more ink from my printer. 😉

[Scott Ruggels]

2 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Why do we need a stripped-down "Hero System"?  3e was also the last edition to focus on games, rather than system.

 

That is precisely "it".   Separate things back out into separate games (but keep the base mechanics nearly identical).  Using figured characteristics keeps things in the same bands of capabilities within the "game", and keeping the amount of points down so as not to aggravate math anxiety, or necessitate the need and use of Hero Designer.  Before budget necessities  had Hero adopt the square (perfect) bound spines for game books, they were saddle bound and came in a book with accessory materials, and a set of tiny blue dice.  I am not sure books are the way to go in the current market, but if so, having the rules and two adventures, and a paper map, inside might be the way to go.  Like this?

 

3rd was well supported back then:

 

 

The problems I see that are an anathema to young gamers is the tool kit approach, the amount of reading, and the lack of  Adventures.  have to keep things simple, even pencil and paper simple. So, low page counts and Adventure Path style adventures.

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Using figured characteristics keeps things in the same bands of capabilities within the "game", and keeping the amount of points down so as not to aggravate math anxiety, or necessitate the need and use of Hero Designer. 

 

Quoting this because it is the only real point of disagreement.

 

How many characters just stick to the Figured Characteristics?  Speed was always rounded up, if not increased, regardless of genre (and a breakpoint every 10 DEX would be painful if you could not).

 

PD and ED are typically raised, in my experience anyway.

 

Especially outside Supers, you could likely get by with Figured STUN, END and REC.

 

However, we could also get by with a base character for, let's say, a Fantasy game having:

 

STR, DEX, INT, EGO, PRE starting at 10 and purchased as stats.

 

CON and BOD are 15; STUN and END are 30; PD and ED are 5 each; SPD is 3 - unless you buy a pre-built ability to increase them (for example, "Sturdy" - +5 STUN Threshold (which might as well be what we call CON)), or "Will to live - +5 BOD", or "Tough as Nails" - +10 STUN, +2 PD, +2 ED, +3 BOD and +3 CON or "tireless - +10 END and +5 REC" or "Fast Reactions" - +1 SPD).  Maybe we have weaknesses as well, such as "Wimp - minus 3 BOD and CON" or "Fragile -2 PD, -2 ED, -5 STUN, -1 REC" or "Slow to react - minus 1 SPD".

 

In other words, rather than using some stats to guide other stats, just set baselines for some stats, with exceptions being exceptional, not standard character builds.  Much like D&D characters with bonus movement, or damage reduction, or energy resistance, or natural armour are possible, but are not the norm.

 

Like D&D, Hero basically got out of Adventures in the early 2000s/late '90s (they were not revenue drivers; D&D published Dungeon Magazine as a substitute, and Adventurers Club had a few adventures).  Paizo proved adventures could sell, and basically created the Adventure Path as a "campaign in a box", now much more universal.  That, in my view, was the huge appeal - DIY adventures were no longer needed.  Inexperienced gamers didn't have to figure out balance, and experienced gamers didn't have to spend the time to craft these from whole cloth.  Hero was, by then, much less prolific, and never got on the Adventure Path track.

 

Picture a package with Superhero rules, dials set, typical DCs, defenses, etc. set, some characteristics standardized, and powers selected from a pre-fab list (maybe in increments allowing for +2d6; maybe with, say, an 8 DC, 10 DC and 12 DC variation to choose from, and those are your choices, period, done).  It comes bundled with an adventure including some brief city descriptions, a few key NPCs, the start of a plot and maybe half a dozen encounters, including a "Gathering the Heroes" encounter.

 

The next volume of the AP introduces some more locations (in the context of being part of the adventure), some more NPCs (ditto) [that is, building the world slowly], expands  the plot and maybe provides some new pre-fabs, focusing on expanding the earlier pre-fabs for more powerful, experienced heroes.  If 6 volumes can take D&D characters from L1 to L18-20, 6 volumes of Hero AP should see similar growth (at least at the non-Super level; Supers might scale up slower).

 

This starting AP, and rules set, could exclude some elements.  Maybe it does not allow for VPPs (the first thing I would cut) or maybe they appear in AP Vol 5, with suggestions on how especially versatile characters could be re-built at this stage of their character growth to shift to a VPP. Maybe it leaves out Killing Attacks and Resistant defenses entirely (make claws with Armor Piercing; bullets can be Blasts - it's four-colour so people are durable). Sure, the broader "anything you can imagine" Hero system would allow for these options, but this specific Hero-Powered game does not.  For a Modern Age game (cops or spies or mercenaries), maybe we leave out END entirely. 

 

You might buy the Full System (2 volume 6e + APGs) if you really want to tinker and customize the game(s) you bought, or if you want to design your own.  But I think experience shows that the marketplace is not filled with demand for such added complexity, no matter how much we might love "build anything you can imagine" in theory.

[Grailknight]

Good point Hugh. One of the things that the Paizo model does that seems foreign to Hero is that each Adventure Path uses a new set of characters, generated at the beginning and advancing to the conclusion. Perhaps Hero should adopt this model. Then after 3-5 paths make a "Crisis" type module that would start at the level the basics finished so older characters can be used. Hero scales better that almost any game out there so consistent writing would be the biggest obstacle.

[Scott Ruggels]

38 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

How many characters just stick to the Figured Characteristics?  Speed was always rounded up, if not increased, regardless of genre (and a breakpoint every 10 DEX would be painful if you could not).

 

PD and ED are typically raised, in my experience anyway.

 

Especially outside Supers, you could likely get by with Figured STUN, END and REC.

 

Well for "Heroic" level, it should work. 

 

38 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

However, we could also get by with a base character for, let's say, a Fantasy game having:

 

STR, DEX, INT, EGO, PRE starting at 10 and purchased as stats.

 

CON and BOD are 15; STUN and END are 30; PD and ED are 5 each; SPD is 3 - unless you buy a pre-built ability to increase them (for example, "Sturdy" - +5 STUN Threshold (which might as well be what we call CON)), or "Will to live - +5 BOD", or "Tough as Nails" - +10 STUN, +2 PD, +2 ED, +3 BOD and +3 CON or "tireless - +10 END and +5 REC" or "Fast Reactions" - +1 SPD).  Maybe we have weaknesses as well, such as "Wimp - minus 3 BOD and CON" or "Fragile -2 PD, -2 ED, -5 STUN, -1 REC" or "Slow to react - minus 1 SPD".

 

In other words, rather than using some stats to guide other stats, just set baselines for some stats, with exceptions being exceptional, not standard character builds.  Much like D&D characters with bonus movement, or damage reduction, or energy resistance, or natural armour are possible, but are not the norm.

 

It is not a bad idea, and I think it could be workable.

 

Though, I still think figured characteristics have their uses for new gamers.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Like D&D, Hero basically got out of Adventures in the early 2000s/late '90s (they were not revenue drivers; D&D published Dungeon Magazine as a substitute, and Adventurers Club had a few adventures).

 

It did, and Aaron Allston's Rogues Gallery would occasionally publish adventures.  I had a fairly complete selection of that APA, but I have not uncovered all of them from storage..

 

38 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

  Paizo proved adventures could sell, and basically created the Adventure Path as a "campaign in a box", now much more universal.  That, in my view, was the huge appeal - DIY adventures were no longer needed.  Inexperienced gamers didn't have to figure out balance, and experienced gamers didn't have to spend the time to craft these from whole cloth.  Hero was, by then, much less prolific, and never got on the Adventure Path track.

 

No and until recently was operating under the obsolete idea that Adventures did not sell. But looking at other company's products illustrates that it is no longer the case.  The difficulty of writing Adventure Path games for Hero characters is the incremental and often uneven progression of characters, Unless , such in the case of Pre-gens, they are up0dated for the next Chapter, or Book. Other than that,  having the Pathfinder "three track" approach* would make for a less railroad approach to module writing.

 

38 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Picture a package with Superhero rules, dials set, typical DCs, defenses, etc. set, some characteristics standardized, and powers selected from a pre-fab list (maybe in increments allowing for +2d6; maybe with, say, an 8 DC, 10 DC and 12 DC variation to choose from, and those are your choices, period, done).  It comes bundled with an adventure including some brief city descriptions, a few key NPCs, the start of a plot and maybe half a dozen encounters, including a "Gathering the Heroes" encounter.

 

The next volume of the AP introduces some more locations (in the context of being part of the adventure), some more NPCs (ditto) [that is, building the world slowly], expands  the plot and maybe provides some new pre-fabs, focusing on expanding the earlier pre-fabs for more powerful, experienced heroes.  If 6 volumes can take D&D characters from L1 to L18-20, 6 volumes of Hero AP should see similar growth (at least at the non-Super level; Supers might scale up slower).

 

This starting AP, and rules set, could exclude some elements.  Maybe it does not allow for VPPs (the first thing I would cut) or maybe they appear in AP Vol 5, with suggestions on how especially versatile characters could be re-built at this stage of their character growth to shift to a VPP. Maybe it leaves out Killing Attacks and Resistant defenses entirely (make claws with Armor Piercing; bullets can be Blasts - it's four-colour so people are durable). Sure, the broader "anything you can imagine" Hero system would allow for these options, but this specific Hero-Powered game does not.  For a Modern Age game (cops or spies or mercenaries), maybe we leave out END entirely. 

 

This is not a bad idea. Though you could do something similar, such as including a book of Templates, or a pared down subset of templates Both "The House of Ideas", and the "Distinguished Competition", to illustrate the expected "power levels" of the heroes. Toss in Hudson City, as the campaign city, mostly because of the maps and decent background?

 

38 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

You might buy the Full System (2 volume 6e + APGs) if you really want to tinker and customize the game(s) you bought, or if you want to design your own.  But I think experience shows that the marketplace is not filled with demand for such added complexity, no matter how much we might love "build anything you can imagine" in theory.

 

The Toolkit approach is an artifact of the lack of an internet when games were still in books. Having it arounds is a good idea, especially for the module writers, but the general Public would dry up and blow away in the wind when looking at those books too long.

 

 

*The Three Track Approach  has a few set pieces, but different sub-quests based upon if the team/party approaches with Stealth, Diplomacy, or firepower, and as such each track may have different locations and NPCs to interact with. No approach is inherently bad, but the outcomes might produce different results. It does make the writing a bit more difficult, but produces quite memorable, and often replay-able adventures.