Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

[Titan59]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

What do I like about 3.5?

 

Its fast. In one recent session we played out 12 combat encounters in the space of an evening. I could not do that with Fantasy Hero-well not without a lot of fudging anyway. If you want a fast playing system that lets you get on with playing out your story efficiently there are far worse systems than D&D. I dont particularly like the magic system, and all the rules exceptions make planning an adventure a real dog, but all my players know the rules and it is easy to teach newcomers.

 

OTOH- with Hero you get excellent cinematic combats. They may take longer but the players feel like they are in a movie or a comic book. They have lots of combat options, all the options make sense, and they give you a real sense of having some control over your characters destiny. You are not just rolling dice. And, I can improvise encounters on the fly, simply because I know x points worth of power in a spell is balanced against this particular group of players. I find that all the rules exceptions make this difficult to do in D&D. I suppose if I memorise all the rules this would not be a problem but who has time?

 

At the moment, I am playing Eberron, and I confess I am enjoying it. I would enjoy it more if we were using the Hero rules but the players may take some persuading to shift.

[proditor]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I'm trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong...

 

I've been running D&D since the red boxed set and up through 3.5. I helped DM on a MUX for 3.0. My game was every week, 8 hours, guaranteed for 2 years. I still can't get 3.0/3.5 combat anywhere near as fast as some folk seem to be able to get it. I was a legend on the MUX for running some of the fastest most efficient combats online, and still, I could never ever get 12 party equal CR encounters in one evening unless they ALL consisted of a single monster each. Preferably a human fighter each time.

 

I dunno, obviously YMMV, but I can whip out HERO combat in the same amount of time as 3.5 combat when all things are "equal". IE: Rough parity on power level of PC's and enemies, same number of targets.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I run FH. Almost all my gaming is in HERO. But D&D is the first game I played (way back in '77 you whippersnappers) so I have a serious sense of nostalgia. When 3e and the whole d20 movement came along HERO was still in limbo, and I got seriously into the game, getting virtually everything out for a year or so - getting my game books at cost helped that a lot.

That being said, if you decide you need a class/level system, d20 is the best one I have ever seen. But I would likely never play it in a group setting. I have serious nostalgia for older characters and my wife runs me solo D&D3.5, and I am going to run 3.5 versions of her old long played 1st ed characters (started play sometime in 1986 and get played here and there since then). But in a gaming group, I would run or play FH.

 

D&D makes a nice "after dinner mint" for my primary gaming of HERO.

 

What I like about d20 - (and this is coming from someone who skipped 2nd edition entirely) - every houserule we had for 1st ed D&D was included in the rules, or by the nature of the rules made them moot. It's quick and easy in initial character creation (although going up requires much more work than HERO), less work for the GM; there is an implied setting built into the rules, so unlike FH I don't have to work to run the world, it's sort of generic cool fantasy. Lastly nostalgia, and this just might be the strongest reason of all.

[Cpt.Storm]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I am playing both in Hero and in D&D 3.0 and I just had to create a new character in D&D. Wow! I had been away from Hero for a few years but recently got back into it. After playing Hero for about six months and then having to create a D&D character I felt so limited!

 

I found that I really missed the flexibility of Hero and it felt so canned. Oh well, I will still have a good time playing D&D (I've been playing since 1979) but it won't be the same after playing Hero.

[Reneshat]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

To some degree comparing D20 and Hero is like comparing apples and oranges. The limits to the D20 system make combat a breeze (if you are used to it), and is definately designed for a combat heavy game. You can't play the old huge dungeons like you could in Classic D&D because it would take a good deal longer, but the system is created to give you plenty of options in creating an individual, (or a group) to deal out death to all they come into contact with. Hero most obviously gives you much more room, but also tends to lend you to flesh out your characters a good deal more in the creation, limiting their combat potential. A first level D20 and a 75/75 character should start out about the same (roughly). Down the road a few months though, your D20 characters will be fighting enemies more comparable in power to the enemies of a Champions game, while your more story heavy Hero game will be fighting enemies that are much weaker. Now, I have to say, AD&D is still the way Dungeons and Dragons should be played, and I am not a fan of D20 Dungeons and Dragons. I still think that the D20 system is a good system (if not as versatile and option offering as other systems) and is a great system to play other games in (like the game based off of the Jordan books). The rules aren't that difficult either, I don't find the need to consult a book, then again, I'm the only one I know that is able to keep track of all of it in their head. Really though, they are completely different, and have conflicting strengths and weaknesses.

[arcady]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

You can't play the old huge dungeons like you could in Classic D&D because it would take a good deal longer' date='[/quote']I would disagree with this. d20 does the super dungeon crawl better than any other version of DnD ever did.

 

With d20, it is finally fun to play mindless 'adventure gaming.'

 

It still breaks apart with any other style of gaming, just as all versions of DnD have. It is playable with them for once, something no other version of DnD was for me at least, but it shows its limits if you know other options well - and thus breaks down for the gamer with a wide exposure who is not so limited in their paradigms.

 

Now' date=' I have to say, AD&D is still the way Dungeons and Dragons should be played, and I am not a fan of D20 Dungeons and Dragons.[/quote']ADnD just frustrates, even in the most simple and archetyped dungeon crawl. d20 on the other hand excels in that format - giving relatively balanced play wherein all the classes are roughly equal in viability (such that player skill ends up being what counts), challenges are easy to construct to desired difficulty, the rules are consistant and predictable - thus lessoning lookup time, and the tactical options make the 'plot-thin dungeon format' really shine.

 

Move to thicker stories and plots however, and the archetypal nature of all versions of DnD starts to show its limits - but it is less severe in d20 than in past.

[Chimpira]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

 

ADnD just frustrates, even in the most simple and archetyped dungeon crawl. d20 on the other hand excels in that format - giving relatively balanced play wherein all the classes are roughly equal in viability (such that player skill ends up being what counts), challenges are easy to construct to desired difficulty, the rules are consistant and predictable - thus lessoning lookup time, and the tactical options make the 'plot-thin dungeon format' really shine.

 

QUOTE]

I'm glad that it worked for you but I spent more time looking up rules in d20 than I ever did in AD&D. Overall I liked a lot of the stuff from D20 but I felt the need to use a map to make sure everything flowed right, something I never needed in AD&D. Maybe I just got to focused on the rules but the game play slowed considerably for my group. I switched out to Hero after about 3 years of D20 and now the games fly by faster and everyone is having a more enjoyable time. It was probably more about my style than anything else. D20 was just not a good fit with me.

[arcady]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

See my post on page one. d20 isn't really a fit for me either.

 

I'm just saying it works better than ADnD.

 

Consider if you did not already know ADnD very well - if you had to learn both from the ground up, d20 would more than likely be quicker.

 

It has a consistant rules structure - everything works roughly the same using roughly the same rule format over and over. Playing with a mat helps combat visualization - any Hero player should know that - and d20 works with that. The options are more varied, especially for tactical / adventuring styles of play. The whole thing integrates in better with itself.

 

I was never able to 'unlock' the arcane secret that is ADnD, and after about 3 years (april 82- dec 84) I found Hero and moved on (while I also had the GURPS of the day: Melee and Wizard, it was not yet a full RPG). So my experience with ADnD is similar in length to my experience with d20 (2000-pres).

 

That said, while I still can't quote all the spells and feats of d20 to you, and never could of ADnD, I can tell you how a spell will work, and how a feat will work, and how a skill will work - and I figured that out in the first month because it is the same every time and with every one of them.

 

d20 is more tactically minded - which means you will feel the challenges more. Player choice counts. Dice still overpower choices in d20, but they don't dominate them like they did with past versions. The wide variety of tactical options also allows players to get into the strategy and develop a 'skill' at playing the game well - as opposed to 'roleplaying well' (a skill you want to master in Hero what with the disads - you can be a master DnD player and never ever learn how to act in character, try that in Hero and you will be a sidelined player in many groups). Given the consistant famework once you understand it play will go at a consistant and decently fast pace - with little rule lookup getting in the way. Thus it is ideal for the dungeon crawl.

 

By contrast in ADnD every single thing you did had a completely different unconnected rule and until you reached a level of book memorization you would need to be constantly looking things up. In addition play tended to merely involve no more than pick target and roll dice. No options or tactical manuevering involved - thus it was actually a poor play match to it's chosen style of the challenge based dungeon crawl (adventure gaming).

 

I suppose if I had been playing ADnD throughout the whole period since 82, I would be an expert at it. But if one is new to both, it is easy to see that d20 is easier, allows for a wider spectrum of play, and does the style ADnD did even better (the dungeon crawl).

[paigeoliver]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

The issues with both AD&D and D20 D&D can both be solved by simply using the old Classic D&D which had simple rules, is compatible with all the pre d20 material, and doesn't have a zillion things bogging it down.

 

Classic D&D has no feats, no kits, the races ARE classes for nonhumans, there are no weapon speeds, no specialist mages, no casting times, no spell components, no complicated ability score modifiers (problems with AD&D 1st and 2nd edition), no psionics, no two weapon fighting, no real combat manuevers other than hit person with weapon, no proficiencies (in most versions), no weapon types vs. armor types, no bards, no assassins, no multi-class, no Drow, no Gnomes, no spell types, no real specialty priests, and no shortage of cheap material for the system.

 

One suggestion when playing classic D&D, as I am about to adopt this rule in my own campaign, let thieves apply their dexterity as a level modifier for their theives skills, so a thief with a 13-15 dex has thieves skills at one level higher, 16-17 dex at 2 levels higher, and 18 dex at 3 levels higher.

 

That way at least it is remote possibly to have a low level thief find a trap, or move silently, or pick a lock, or a pocket. With the original rules they were wall climbing freaks and could do almost nothing else until higher levels.

[arcady]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

Basic DnD does however, lack any tactical aspect to it - thus making it a lesser game to d20. You might as well just roll craps dice for a few hours - you'll have about as much control over the flow of play in that as in basic DnD.

 

It is somewhat like the difference between tri-stat and Hero, only more so. Basic DnD is ultra simple with no play options and very little use for player skill. d20 is more complex, but its consistant nature will make it simpler than basic once you know its core norms - and player skill can become a major aspect of play.

 

In both you have no need to ever bother with roleplay. You can if you want, but you don't have to if you just want a game, and both are tailored towards the players who bypass roleplay.

 

If I had zero time to prep a game, with the players at the door, knowing both systems I would use d20 - I could get through character gen in the same time in both - the greater options of d20 are matched by the inconsistant rules of basic, and I could pull out npcs in the same time in both. Making a random dungeon is a universal process to any RPG, and playing though would actually be faster in d20 as no rule will ever conflict another and I will rarely trigger a need to consult a book.

 

I won't need book lookup as much in basic as I will in ADnD, but I will need it anytimg I do -anything-, as there is no universal rule to the system.

 

By contrast there are very few things I would need to look up in d20. Even half the spell descriptions can be skipped.

 

So perhaps, while basic DnD appears to be more simple because it is smaller, I find it actually more complex because it lacks a consistant hand. Which is actually similar once again to the difference between tri-stat and Hero...

[Reneshat]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

My AD&D being the way that D&D needs to be played is almost entirely the fact that D20 just doesn't "feel" like D&D. I like the system, it just isn't D&D. D&D was always so, well so unmovable. Now D20 isn't exactly going to when in fexibility contests, but it seems to break all the rigid class structures that were so much a part of the D&D world.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

When playtesting Narosia for d20 (2 weekly 6 hour campaigns by 2 GMs) the net result was the same in both cases. While some combats were fast, others were tediously slow. This is a generalization from both campaigns. One encounter of equal CR at higher level and 6 combatants per side took 4 hours and wasn't all that fun. Nobody died but the bad guys and nothing terribly heroic happened. That was the straw that broke the camels back. We all said that if we were going to spend 4 hours in combat we'd rather play GURPS or HERO where at least we can enjoy the actions we take other than simply watching the dice roll and tallying damage.

 

There are numerous ways to speed up HERO combat, if you feel the need, and many of them capture the heroic element that is often missing from d20 combat. d20 is a great game, and can be a lot of fun to play, but it is what it is. 12 equal CR combats in a single 6 hour session doesn't sound all that fun. That's one combat per half hour without any accounting for breaks, etc. I question how rewarding those 12 combats would be beyond,"Yay, we win".

 

I want characters teetering on the edges of cliffs, characters stunned at the worst time forcing players to dive for cover and take the "killing blow" on them, characters falling down mountains forcing mages to improvise force walls to stop them before they plummet to their dooms. That stuff is fun and never happens in d20 without bizarre house rules, which isn't the point is it.

 

It's all about what you expect out of the game and what kind of experience you want. I like to talk about the actual events of the combat instead of the simple victory in the abstract.

 

Reneshat mentioned a 1st level character and a 150 pt HERO character being equal. That is another argument entirely, but I'll put my 2 cents in and say I respectfully disagree. I put 1st level characters at 25 pts, +10 pts per level. This makes 10th level characters about 225 pts and relative to a 25pt militiaman seems about right. Experts/Merchants/Sig. NPCs are usually around 35-65 pts and I start a "1st level game" at 75 total points. That doesn't seem like much but you can define a character very well and have an enjoyable "1st level" experience at that level, assuming your adversaries are typically 25pt gobbos and such. This brings the game down to an earthy level and makes 150pt character "Heroes" in the very real sense.

[paigeoliver]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

Point value of a 1st level D&D character is an extremely subjective thing. I could easily see some characters being the equivalent of a zero point hero character (basic D&D level one fighter with no ability score bonuses), while others (a weapon specialized elven paladin with high ability scores and the beast rider kit) could easily go beyond 75+75.

 

In designing my last D&D adventure, (which I will spring on my players this weekend), I made it combat light, and thinking heavy, while still staying within the classic dungeon setting.l

 

Another major "feel" difference is the fact that Hero doesn't have nearly the range of "body" that a character might have.

 

A group of moderate (50+50) Fantasy Hero characters will likely all have between 12 and 20 body, with the most powerful common attacks doing 2d6 body with armor lowering the amount of damage.

 

While that same group of moderate D&D characters is probably going to have characters with 5 hit points (2nd level mage with no con bonus), fighting alongside characters with 30 (3rd and 4th level fighters with a con bonus). With most attacks doing 1-8 damage and armor not lowering the damage.

 

Notice that none of the Hero characters are in any real danger of death from a single hit (and heck, Hero wizards can wear armor), while the moderate D&D mages can and will die from a single blow.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

A first level D20 and a 75/75 character should start out about the same (roughly).

 

I don't have any experience with actually playing with d20 rules, and I'll concede that they do have a lot more for 1st level characters than they used to, but it seems to me that a 75/75 Hero is way more effective than a 1st level D&Der. Even 25/25 isn't necessarily equivalent to a 1st level character. First level d20 characters seem little better than Hero standard normals, and not quite as powerful as a skilled normal. The only reason they get that good a rating is because d20 characters have no Disads to deal with.

[Titan59]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

Have to say that my experience is that 1st level D&D characters seem about as powerful as 25+25 FH characters. I have even run a couple of 25+25 campaigns for that very reason. (I like low level D&D.)

 

In one case the players had just come off a 3 year twice a week Champions campaign with all the XP that implies. It was a shock to the system, I can tell you.

[Nevenall]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

Basic DnD does however, lack any tactical aspect to it - thus making it a lesser game to d20. You might as well just roll craps dice for a few hours - you'll have about as much control over the flow of play in that as in basic DnD.

 

My friend Ben, "Why not just make one save vs death and then go on to the next module?"

[Old Man]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

while the moderate D&D mages can and will die from a single blow.

 

I never saw this as being a good thing. Especially when they require more experience in order to level.

[arcady]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

Point value of a 1st level D&D character is an extremely subjective thing. I could easily see some characters being the equivalent of a zero point hero character (basic D&D level one fighter with no ability score bonuses)' date=' while others (a weapon specialized elven paladin with high ability scores and the beast rider kit) could easily go beyond 75+75.[/quote']Beast rider what?

 

A 1st level DnD character:

 

build using the standard array, as that is what the game is balanced off of and assumes in official product - it also assumes that the 4d6 roll out method will average out to the array (also known as 25 point buy) but there is some rather heated debate as to the accuracy of this.

 

15 14 13 12 10 8 are the stats you use. This really means +2, +2, +1, +1, +0, -1 - and it is those +/- relations that count in a conversion to some systems, but to Hero the numbers almost map over straight as they are. Note that if you use an edition other than 3.x you will need to use the bonuses and not the actual stats, map them over to the 3.x (who's stats have a benchmark similar to Hero) and then convert from there.

 

 

Built with the munchkin's option you want a human rogue, a human fighter, or an orc barbarian. Most DnD forums recognize the Rogue as the power gamer option for at least level one, if not beyond as well. We'll use that assumption - it also tends to be the most expensive in Hero (due to Dex).

 

I'd presume those would have the highest point costs.

 

Two feats will cost from 3 to 6 points each.

 

The human rogue with int at 13 (15 dex, 14 str, 12 con, 10 cha, 8 wis) will have 40 skill points [(8 rogue + 1 int + 1 human)*4].

 

Lets assume they take 10 skills to max - the simplist formula, and what a power gamer might choose. Their dex based skills would now be at +6. Given that the average DC in DnD is 15 or 20 (17.5) this is roughly equal to having a 10- roll in 10 skills.

 

That is not even having spent 3 points on each of those skills in Hero...

You can't buy a 10- though, so we do the closest thing:

 

1. Spend 10 points and get 5 skills at 11-

2. Spend 5 more points to get familiarity (8-) in 5 skills.

 

That will give us half of skills as if they had the dc20, and half as if they had the dc15... roughly speaking, not exactly.

 

We've spent:

skills 15

feats: 12 max

stats: dex:15, str:4, Con:6, Per:0, Ego:-4) 21 points

 

Speed is 2. Even if Dex was 20, we would HAVE TO buy down speed to 2 (which might not be possible under the legit rules of Hero). In DnD all characters move no faster than a commoner until they get a +6 BaB...

 

So far we spent 48 points.

 

But now we need to buy the class abilities:

 

weapon familiarity with only the most basic class of common weapons - provided it includes both ultra common melee and missile.

 

Trap Sense is moot in Hero - all characters have it. What we do here if we want to give it to this rogue is require all non rogues take a physical disad against being able to notice traps no matter how good perception.

 

Evasion - I forget off hand what it does at level 1 (or if it comes in yet), but I will assume a 3 point skill level will handle it.

 

Sneak Attack - handled by the 3 point version of Deadly Blow I believe.

 

So I'm seeing another 8 to 10 points.

 

Disads: DnD characters do not have any beyond alignment save for a very few classes - such as druids and metal armor.

 

Call alignment a 15 point psych disad.

 

The most powerful level 1 DnD character thus converts over to a 56 to 58 point Hero character.

 

45+15 character is what I'm seeing. More than I thought it would be to be honest.

[Napalm]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I played ADnD for many, many years - I grew tired of it after a long long while due to the many constraints and 50 million books that came out that helped you "Customize" yer character but really did nothing but make the game more convoluted - please don't get me wrong, when I was playing it I loved it...I just wanted something a little more streamlined and more flexibility. Enter DnD 3e.

 

I was kinda iffy about it when I first heard about it, then I was asked to help play test it - I fell in love with it from 1999 thru 2003 I played the hell out of it - I was a walking d20 rules cyclopedia, I broke up the monotony by playin' other games (mainly Sillohoutte System games), but always came back to d20- then Conan came out and I was ready to jump back into it!

 

Then I quickly evolved as a gamer thru the trials of that game and not being pleased with the system in general, I like some of the rules they used, but I wasn't happy with the lack of flexibility I so began to crave one more - again, don't get me wrong there's more flexibility in Conan d20 than in d20 Proper but I hungered for something even more.

 

So after my wife bought Dark Champions (I love the hell outta that cover), I started to delve a little deeper into the Hero System (wife picked me up Champions and Sidekick) and decided I'm gonna convert the Conan stuff into Fantasy Hero and give it a go - I'm quite sure I'll be very happy with it for I see this game have almost everything I now crave in a game: Felxibility, Streamlined rules (mostly - once you get the hang of it) and minimal books to buy to do what you want.

 

Although, I'm swearing off d20 for a while, I will still be running HackMaster for those in my group that want to play 'DnD'....

[Guest joen00b]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I only played 3.0 sparingly, and haven't touched 3.5. My initial reaction was it was like a cheap HERO system without checks and balances. I made a Human Rogue and carried my party through the adventure because I could do most everything!

 

It felt really lopsided. A warrior in our group traded classes like 5 times throughout the adventure, and I'm not sure why, he seemed weaker than the rest of us, and up until I bowed out of the camaign, I was the most powerful person in the party. /shrug

[Archangel Gabri]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I'm playing a Cleric of a Nature God in a D20 game right now. it's gone on forever, and I just got to 12th level. For the last 5 levels I've been the heavy artillery piece for the group. The Cleric flexibility is ridiculously unbalanced. With prep time I could wipe out the entire party.

I hate that kind of imbalance, so I play with a hamstrung sort of approach, but it's just impossible not to occasionally cast WindWalk and take the party cross-country in one day.

All hail the well balanced rules of Hero!!

[garadan]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

We use D&D and D20 for background especially the magic system and the background from many other rpg's (Dragonlance, Mystara, shadow World to name a few), but when you compare D&D to the hero system there is no comparison. It allows us to truly bring a character to life while keeping the game in balance.

 

Ok you may not have a shrink wrapped magic system that is very good (Cosmic Power pools ever time), but you can convert from other systems. I personally I hate level based systems, very few Gm's do the level transition with any degree of finess and I find that Character creation leaves a lot to be desired.

 

I also think that the hero system encourages good backgrounds from the players and a far more rounded experience.

 

If you want to go down the nostaglia road how about ROlemaster, or pendragon. Two great systems with a lot of great background material to offer the hero system.

[Wolven]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

I just picked up the FH books a few weeks ago, and plan on trying my hand at GMing a group of four players. We are using basic DnD 3.0 background info, in a Hero rules setting. I am planning on taking them through the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil module. Which I need to convert over, which shouldnt be to hard... I hope. I am looking forward to GMing this game, but at the same time I am a bit nervous when it comes to the rules. I have played Champions quite a bit, but no one in the group has played any FH. I am hoping that the group will be willing to learn as we go. I am basically having them convert around 4th level characters over to Hero. I have played all the various incantations of DnD. From Basic, to Advanced, to 2nd edition and now to 3rd edition. So I am familiar with DnD and the feel of it. And so are my players. Should be a fun time.

Any advice on converting DnD modules over to Hero? I am just going to Convert the NPCs, monsters, magic items, and Traps over. And thanks to the FH books some of the writeups have been done for the monsters. I figure the background info is done well enough.

 

Good Topic.

[tgaptte]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

Advice? Check out Killer Shrike's site: http://www.killershrike.com/

 

Tim

[TheQuestionMan]

Re: Playing 3.5 after Fantasy Hero

 

This is an interesting thread, because I finished a Dragon Lance 3.5 campaign a short while ago. Even starting characters can be munchie. I used a Druid character who could summon Wolves and during the final conflict used all my spell points??? to summon a pack of 30. They tore the enemy apart and left the party with little to do save a Finishing Blow from our Ranger/Archer.

 

I guess I have been playing GURPS Fantasy too long. I resisted Fantasy HERO games because I still equated it with Superheroes. Since 5th Edition I have lost that resistance and gone for full blown enthusiam for anything HERO.

 

I am a born again HERO

 

QM