What should be DROPPED from HERO?

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I agree to what you've got in bold, but not necessarily the rest. Personally, I find nothing "difficult" about 5E's method for Regen or Instant Change. If anything, it makes those abilities more flexible, and allows you to simulate the effects with a variety of other Powers (Shape Shift could just as easily be use for Instant Change, and allows for a different mechanic and result for the same effect for example).

 

I would also disagree that "easy" equals "playability". The original D&D was easy... that didn't make it playable.

Maybe not "difficult", but "inelegant," particularly re Regen, less so Instant Change (moreso I think that got unduly overcosted). At this point I guess I'm beating a dead horse, though I thought I should at least qualify my thoughts here as to elegance. The "Extra Time (1 Turn)" which is then hand-waved to post-12 - even if you took the wound in segment 12 - represents a real blow to elegance in the system, introducing an inconsistency not present before (since as a Power it was allowed to be linked to Recovery (edited here, corrected a poor statement)). PS - and an inconsistency which then really begs a world of hurt in my opinion in game interpretation. No sir, this was a flat-out bad way to handle it. A real step backwards.

[simplygnome]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

While I am an old time gamer, I only joined the HERO crowd with the introduction of FRED, so I don't really know the old Instant Change, or regeneration.

 

What I do note is an odd incosistancy in Regen (actually, in healing all together) that does not appear elsewhere in the system. It just appears...."clunky".

 

I dont really see any needed change to the other mentioned abilites, but perhaps because I have not seen an alternative.

 

My observation is as such: I play with what I'm given, and toolkit out what I don't like (ala the Intel. based PER...I dont like it at all..It doesnt sit well with me in concept, and I think INT. does enough in my Fantasy Hero games for its 1pt cost , so its 11- for me, with PER being a 3rp per roll adder that four races get as bonus abilites [elves, half-es, kobolds, homunculoids])

 

There are a few points that I think really need some reworking, because of its inability to flow smoothly, but all in all, there hasnt been anything that I couldn't easily manipulate to serve my ends... *evil GM laughter.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

While I am an old time gamer, I only joined the HERO crowd with the introduction of FRED, so I don't really know the old Instant Change, or regeneration.

 

What I do note is an odd incosistancy in Regen (actually, in healing all together) that does not appear elsewhere in the system. It just appears...."clunky".

 

I dont really see any needed change to the other mentioned abilites, but perhaps because I have not seen an alternative.

 

My observation is as such: I play with what I'm given, and toolkit out what I don't like (ala the Intel. based PER...I dont like it at all..It doesnt sit well with me in concept, and I think INT. does enough in my Fantasy Hero games for its 1pt cost , so its 11- for me, with PER being a 3rp per roll adder that four races get as bonus abilites [elves, half-es, kobolds, homunculoids])

 

There are a few points that I think really need some reworking, because of its inability to flow smoothly, but all in all, there hasnt been anything that I couldn't easily manipulate to serve my ends... *evil GM laughter.

As a newbie, I think your comment is even more salient re Regen.

 

Yes, this is my way of sticking my tongue out at the opposition. : ( )

 

But in all seriousness, simplygnome, I actually am posting in reply for a reason. I don't think it's inappropriate to "give away" that in 4th Edition the power Regeneration was a flat 10 points per 1 BOD recovered post-12, FYI. I still run it that way. I bring this because given your comments I felt you might want to as well.

 

PS - I think Healing is a bit clunky as well, unfortunately, I think it always has been. I think a fundamental rewrite of Adjustment Powers in general is warranted, but I admit I'm not the man to do it, though I also haven't given it a whole lot of thought. Maybe someday...when I write HERO Version 7...

[Kristopher]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

My beef with Adjustment powers...

 

Unless you instate a house rule, you actually have to construct a wierd compound power to simulate a character that is restored to the starting value in something via a non-Healing adjustment power.

 

IMO, Aid, Absorbtion, and Transfer should all be able to restore lost points to their starting value...and I'm not sure why Healing had to become a seperate power. I still forget that Succor is out there until I see it mentioned somewhere.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I would also disagree that "easy" equals "playability". The original D&D was easy... that didn't make it playable.

 

Yeah, there's no way that would ever catch on...

[simplygnome]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Yeah' date=' there's no way [i']that[/i] would ever catch on...

 

 

AHHH - The HOLIDAY SARCASM!!!

 



 

HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYONE!

[simplygnome]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

But in all seriousness' date=' simplygnome, I actually am posting in reply for a reason. I don't think it's inappropriate to "give away" that in 4th Edition the power Regeneration was a flat 10 points per 1 BOD recovered post-12, FYI. I still run it that way. I bring this because given your comments I felt you might want to as well.[/quote']

 

Interesting. I'll have to sit down with my friend FRED and look it over.

 

Thanks for the information, tongu-ing aside....

 

In the meantime, Im going to go play in the snow (in SOUTH TEXAS! Miracle down here...) and drink some hot chocolate:

 

[_]?

 

Good luck on writing H7ED =P Im going out to collect my 32million dollar lotto winnings now....

 

[Kristopher]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Yeah, there's no way that would ever catch on...

 

If the original D&D came out now, instead of 30 years ago, it would be an utter flop. In its day, it had no competition.

 

 

(Of course, if AD&D and the d20 system had no history, I think that even the current incarnation would be just another 3rd-tier also-ran if it came out today. There are far better alternatives on the market.)

[simplygnome]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

If the original D&D came out now, instead of 30 years ago, it would be an utter flop. In its day, it had no competition.

 

 

(Of course, if AD&D and the d20 system had no history, I think that even the current incarnation would be just another 3rd-tier also-ran if it came out today. There are far better alternatives on the market.)

 

There are also many better Internet mediums than AOL....but funny how a large marketing history and "consumer friendly" interfaces (ie, idiot-proof guardrails) tend to command societies market.

 

/end rant... lol

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Fine. All other things being equal, easier is better.

 

What opportunities did I lose out on concerning instant change and regeneration in 4th ed. that I have now? (If you bring up the regeneration adders, those are cool but you didn't have to do anything but add them to the 4th ed. description.)

Regen: The ability to heal or regen other Characteristics and Powers (that have been Drained or Transfered). A more balanced cost for Regen that requires concentration or END to use. A fair and balanced method of creating Regen that applies to a large group (AE without the Self Only Lim). Simple to write up "Regen" abilities basen on Transfer or Drain, where you steal the BODY of those around you to heal.

 

Instant Change: In this case, probably nothing. Though there is now a ruling on exactly what Instant Change does & how it does it. You have the option of writing it up using Transform, which will only change the character's clothing, or using Shape Shift, which will alter the character's apperance.

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Maybe not "difficult"' date=' but "inelegant," particularly re Regen, less so Instant Change (moreso I think that got unduly overcosted). At this point I guess I'm beating a dead horse, though I thought I should at least qualify my thoughts here as to elegance. The "Extra Time (1 Turn)" which is then hand-waved to post-12 - [b']even if you took the wound in segment 12[/b] - represents a real blow to elegance in the system, introducing an inconsistency not present before (since as a Power it was allowed to be linked to Recovery (edited here, corrected a poor statement)). PS - and an inconsistency which then really begs a world of hurt in my opinion in game interpretation. No sir, this was a flat-out bad way to handle it. A real step backwards.

And I suppose when I hand-wave the unconciousness of an agent level bad guy during a fight, instead of making the player roll to hit, then roll damage, then compair the damage rolled to the agent's DEF and STUN, that I'm being inconsistant with the system? Well, I suppose I am, but I don't think its a bad thing. The hand wave for Regen is there for ease of play. Granted you can keep track of which segment a would appears on, if you want the bookeeping, but it's easier to just say Post Segment 12, like with any Adjustment Power. In any case, there's no rules that says you have to hand-wave it. You can easily require than it starts to apply 12 Segments after a wound is gained.

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Yeah' date=' there's no way [i']that[/i] would ever catch on...

As Kristopher said, it had no competition. It also got immediate adjustments, revisions and updates (well, immediate for an era without personal computers in nearly every home). That and the original set worked more like a cooperative board game than what I'd consider an RPG. Nothing wrong with an cooperative board game, but there's only so much you can do with it.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

As Kristopher said' date=' it had no competition. It also got immediate adjustments, revisions and updates...[/quote']

 

Oh, first edition D&D had vast amounts of room for improvement, to be sure. But to say it was not playable is, I think, a contradiction of recorded history.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Regen: The ability to heal or regen other Characteristics and Powers (that have been Drained or Transfered). A more balanced cost for Regen that requires concentration or END to use. A fair and balanced method of creating Regen that applies to a large group (AE without the Self Only Lim). Simple to write up "Regen" abilities basen on Transfer or Drain' date=' where you steal the BODY of those around you to heal.[/quote']

 

Actually, coming back to my view that Transfer is just Aid and Drain combined, this could also apply to other adjuistment powers. Absorbtion is Aid with a limitation.

 

Why not alow a player to define his Transfer or Absorb as having "Heal" instead of "Aid"? Instead of boosting the ability beyond its normal maximum, the power simply restores lost points.

 

In my view, the advantages/limitations needed to turn Heal into Aid, or vice versa, should be part of the Adjustment Power rules.

 

Aid, not beyond starting points (-1/2), Costs End (-1/2), Points to starting max don't fade (+1-extrapolated) = 10 points per die healing.

 

Heal, 0 END (+1/2), Increase beyond starting max (+1/2), all points fade (-1) = 10 points per 1d6 Aid

 

Therefore, Aid, points below starting max don't fade would be 20 points per die, and cost no END.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Am I too late to get in on this topic? Been away for a week and we've got 13 pages of posts

 

Back on topic, things to drop:

 

1 Hand Attack

2 The statement "There is no Temperature Level 0"

3 The separate construct for Languages - let them work like other background skills

4 DEF for objects - let them have PD, ED, rPD, rED like people, after all sledgehammer vs. rock is not the same as flamethrower vs. rock, likewise punch vs pillow is not the same as pen knife vs. pillow.

5 Transform - OK, you still need it for some things, so you can't drop it completely, but still, I'd like to drop it as much as possible.

 

BTW:

Blazing Away is useful for Imperial Stormtroopers shooting down a narrow corridor while completely missing the two droids slowly waddling in front of them.

 

In any genre, an animal could use its teeth and claws at the same time (MPA).

[Killer Shrike]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Has anyone mentioned dropping intelligence as the base for perception? Quite a few intelligent people aren't that perceptive when it comes to noticing just any old thing. It would be quite simple to give everyone a base 11 or less and modify with enhanced perception.

Actually, INT is mostly just a base for PER. Check out the INT ratings of some Animals.

 

The real key is that a high INT doesnt necessarily = intelligence and vice versa, a low INT doesnt necessarily represent a lack of intelligence.

 

Yes, it is efficient for a character with intellect skills to buy their PER up, but it isnt a requirement.

 

The stat would be better labled as "Wits" or "Alertness", which would more closely represent its real function.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Isn't Standard Effect 3 ?

 

That would make the average on 15d6 with standard effect 45 STUN,

whereas the average on a normal 15d6 is 52.5 STUN.

 

(The average on 1d6 is 3.5, not 3)

Yes. As noted under Standard Effect, being slightly below true average is the penalty for being totally consistent.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Actually, coming back to my view that Transfer is just Aid and Drain combined, this could also apply to other adjuistment powers. Absorbtion is Aid with a limitation.

 

Why not alow a player to define his Transfer or Absorb as having "Heal" instead of "Aid"? Instead of boosting the ability beyond its normal maximum, the power simply restores lost points.

 

In my view, the advantages/limitations needed to turn Heal into Aid, or vice versa, should be part of the Adjustment Power rules.

 

Aid, not beyond starting points (-1/2), Costs End (-1/2), Points to starting max don't fade (+1-extrapolated) = 10 points per die healing.

 

Heal, 0 END (+1/2), Increase beyond starting max (+1/2), all points fade (-1) = 10 points per 1d6 Aid

 

Therefore, Aid, points below starting max don't fade would be 20 points per die, and cost no END.

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3480

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

And I suppose when I hand-wave the unconciousness of an agent level bad guy during a fight' date=' instead of making the player roll to hit, then roll damage, then compair the damage rolled to the agent's DEF and STUN, that I'm being inconsistant with the system? Well, I suppose I am, but I don't think its a bad thing. The hand wave for Regen is there for ease of play. Granted you can keep track of which segment a would appears on, if you want the bookeeping, but it's easier to just say Post Segment 12, like with any Adjustment Power. In any case, there's no rules that says you have to hand-wave it. You can easily require than it starts to apply 12 Segments after a wound is gained.[/quote']

I think there's a substantial difference, as one is a useful precedent and the other is not - obviously IMHO and here's where I think the only recourse is to agree to disagree.

 

I do like your point about Regen for other chars and such though.

 

I do think in the end the Adjustment powers just need some "cleansing" but I don't have any bright ideas and if I'm going to spend time on refining HERO in any serious way I'm interested in creating a more clean Framework ability.

 

PS - to be clear, my concern is the way the official rules hand-wave and create it AS an official rule which now can be extended into all sorts of places - and in this case I don't see the value.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Oh' date=' first edition D&D had vast amounts of room for improvement, to be sure. But to say it was not playable is, I think, a contradiction of recorded history.[/quote']

For the record, I'd have to agree I think we say it's "not playable" through today's lens, with scads of innovation and increased game design acumen. To say it was "broken" in many ways is perhaps the fairer assessment. I don't recall (probably never even knew) enough to comment on early D&D, but given how it got patched in everyone's games, I tend to think it was probaby a reasonably coherent system and thus playable, and thus, finally, relatively easily fixable for where it was broken. Which to me is a fine enough system - like Champions first edition.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Am I too late to get in on this topic? Been away for a week and we've got 13 pages of posts

 

Back on topic, things to drop:

 

1 Hand Attack

2 The statement "There is no Temperature Level 0"

3 The separate construct for Languages - let them work like other background skills

4 DEF for objects - let them have PD, ED, rPD, rED like people, after all sledgehammer vs. rock is not the same as flamethrower vs. rock, likewise punch vs pillow is not the same as pen knife vs. pillow.

5 Transform - OK, you still need it for some things, so you can't drop it completely, but still, I'd like to drop it as much as possible.

 

BTW:

Blazing Away is useful for Imperial Stormtroopers shooting down a narrow corridor while completely missing the two droids slowly waddling in front of them.

 

In any genre, an animal could use its teeth and claws at the same time (MPA).

Not too late at all, not that I agree with much there, but I like seeing these ideas, particularly to move on from the ones we're probably beating to death now!

[Killer Shrike]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

A few points:

 

A) MPA's work for me. They are a good addition to the game. I think the main problem is many people dont read the fine print on what they can and can't do. I do think there should probably be a small OCV penalty for it's use, perhaps -1 OCV per extra power used.

 

Their main use, as I stated in a previous thread, is to help balance characters that bought their powers either completely or partially outside of frameworks, that avoided the "one big generic MP just to save points" model, that took more Martial Manuevers than they really "need", have a lot of CSL's to burn, and so forth.

 

It's excellent for doing things like Bite + Claw routines, characters like Iron Man that have multiple Blasters, multiple MP's on the same character that represent distinct items/weapons, a swashbuckler's disarm + strike (and similar), a martial artists Take Away + buttstroke (and many many many other combinations), a sneaky choke + shiv to the back, a Mechwarrior's Alpha Strike and many more combinations.

 

Two Weapon Fighting is not broken; if anything it's overpriced. It has been established that it's cost is based upon the "default" status of Sweep as being Optional; essentially it purchases access to Sweep, offsets the Off Hand penalty, and grants +2 OCV to offset the first Sweep penalty. If Sweep is allowed (and IME it generally is), then TWF is a waste of points -- it's cheaper to buy PSL's against the off hand penalty for dual weilding and a couple of OCV levels.

 

There is a FAQ Entry on this, indicating that a GM that allows Sweep might consider allowing TWF reduce the 1/2 DCV of a Sweep to a -4 DCV instead to make it useful again.

 

As far as the real world ramification of who can make how many attacks with how many weapons in how much time, who cares? This is a cinematic resolution system. Whether it is possible or not, it's cool. The System doesnt claim to be a representation of real world physics and biomechanics, it promises to be a game of heroic action and adventure.

 

 

C) I think Healing has some issues when considered alongside Transfer, Absorption, and Aid powers, but I think it's easily fixed by allowing Players to determine if their Absorption or Transfer is "Aid Based" or "Heal Based" at character creation, and just go from there.

 

I do think the arbitrary cap on Healing effectiveness should be reduced to "Optional" status for use in genres where that is appropriate -- I think there are many cases where unlimited Healing is genre appropriate and that it should be open-ended by default; restricting it out of hand instead of leaving that option open the GM is heavy handed and Anti-HERO System IMO.

 

Regeneration is a bit of a hack, but on the other hand it does have some mechanical advantages inherent to it. For starters, it has a lower Real Cost than it used to, but higher Active Points -- very high in fact. This makes it resistant to Adjustment Powers. Also since Heal is an END costing power, it can be placed in an Elemental Control, old-Skool Regen could not; this works nicely with the high AP low RC nature of new-Skool Regen.

 

D) Instant Change was a nearly useless Power and Im glad it's gone; the only reason it was even used on most characters was due to common misconceptions regarding "Activation of Powers" and also OIHID. Very few characters have any need for such an ability in real terms; it is most useful to Shapeshifters, and shapeshifting itself can allow for wardrobe appearance any way.

 

 

Some of my own "drops" follow:

 

A) Ive already noted in other threads some redundant powers that I think should be coallesced, so I wont go into it again here.

 

I think a lot of all the old name labels are confusing and need to be dropped in favor of more generic labels. In short, I think Powers with a SFX in the label should be renamed -- such as "Energy" Blast and "Force" Field/ "Force" Wall and Darkness. Expressions like EB vs PD and Darkness vs Hearing are just silly, IMO, and indicate a classic case of overloading.

 

C) COM needs to either do something signifcant or get dropped.

 

D) "Super-Skills" needs to be dropped as a concept and rolled into Talents -- because that's what they are.

 

 

Im not going to go into "Changes" that I think should be made since that's OT to this thread.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I think a lot of all the old name labels are confusing and need to be dropped in favor of more generic labels. In short, I think Powers with a SFX in the label should be renamed -- such as "Energy" Blast and "Force" Field/ "Force" Wall and Darkness. Expressions like EB vs PD and Darkness vs Hearing are just silly, IMO, and indicate a classic case of overloading.

 

You had plenty of good points, but I thought I would just call this out - I think this is a "must do" because it helps newbies especially and besides definitely is good for just general system health.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Holding an Action and Dive For Cover (D4C):

 

Holding an Action is a critical part of the combat system. Without the option to Hold to see what everyone else is doing having a high DEX is a penalty, and very dangerous for lightly armored nimble types.

 

In most games it's practically always advantageous to go first -- strike first, strike hardest, strike again is a nearly foolproof idea in many game systems. In the HERO System however that is not necessarily the best idea for all characters or at all times -- and in fact is often a bad idea.

 

Unlike most other games systems the HERO System allows for reactions to be made by your targets; this is a much more natural flow; action and reaction both are possible. It makes defensive strategies that would never work in many other games viable.

 

Coupled with a high DEX, this makes a character that holds rather than attack immediately adroit rather than being merely impetuous. It creates the opportunity for greater tactical nuance, an opportunity for back and forth action, an opportunity for give and take, an opportunity to lure your opponent into punching themselves out or overcommitting to an attack. It makes for a much more interesting combat resolution than the usual back and forth "I roll to hit. I roll for damage"...."he rolls to hit; damage" wood-hewing of many other "combat" systems.

 

A suprising number of HERO System players Ive encountered over the years seemingly have no experience with using the system for anything beyond strike strike strike. The only manuevers they seem aware of are Strike, Haymaker, and Move Thru. Hold? Dodge? Block? Pff. Who does that? I'm always boggled by it -- the entire combat system could be summed up on one page if used in only that fashion. And how boring, IMO.

 

 

D4C is an important manuever, and is very viable. It allows for the "I throw myself out of the way" manuever, which is both logical, common sensical, and genre appropriate for almost all genre's.

 

It comes with very stiff and very real penalties to offset it's effectiveness. Dropping to 1/2 DCV and having to waste a 1/2 Phase of your next non-Aborted action to stand up -- or else invest in a Skill to give you a chance to auto-stand -- are not inconsequential, most especially vs multiple opponents.

 

And it's not auto-successful either -- you have to make a DEX Roll and the penalties accrue quickly. You basically trade your next action for a CHANCE to get out of the way.

 

As far as the argument that a character with one higher SPD can D4C vs an attacker indefinitely, netting a 1/2 Phase Attack per TURN, I say so what? A Character with one higher SPD gets 1 more action than the other fella -- that's what they paid for. And the entire plan is disrupted if they miss a DEX roll or the slower chap has a buddy or three. Further, there is no guarantee that the faster character can even hit or hurt their opponent with their extra 1/2 Phase per TURN at any rate.

 

As far as the argument that a D4C should only be used vs AoE's, the obvious question is how do you know the incoming attack will be an AoE? Unless you've seen the exact same attack used before, you have no clue -- and even then thanks to the Heroism that is the "Multipower Gun", you still don't know for sure even then most of the time.

 

You have to declare your D4C or Dodge before the attacker rolls to hit, much less resolve the attack. So you dont know if it is an AoE or not unless your GM is a softie and tells you so.

 

Further, if it is only usable vs AoE, even presuming your character had some way either mechanical or table talk based to know that incoming attacks are AoE or not AoE, how does it make sense that they can jump away from a grenade because it blows up, but cant jump away from a machine gun or an axe because they dont blow up? Is the act of moving away so selective then? Of course not -- if the character can do it vs one kind of attack, then logically they can do it against any kind of attack.

 

Without abilities like D4C built in to the game, hyper-armored tanks who can just shrug hits and characters with evasion schemes like Desolid, or Invisible, or more esoteric power combo become very distilled as top of the heap characters -- if your only viable options are to be either guaranteed able to take a hit or not be hittable, then the game just gets a lot less interesting IMO. Combat resolution turns into either Tank Wars or Rock Paper Scissors style Cheese Of The Month builds.

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Oh' date=' first edition D&D had vast amounts of room for improvement, to be sure. But to say it was not playable is, I think, a contradiction of recorded history.[/quote']

When I say "not playable", please read like I just said the game Clue is not playable as an RPG, as RPGs are currently understood by today's RPG players. The original D&D game was an RPG.... just like Clue. Or maybe even Life. You played from a restricted set of characters that had nearly predefined abilities, and had objectives that came in the same box, rather than the DM's head. You can play it, but you're not really playing an RPG. You're playing a really, really complex board game. It was that simple.