What we like about HERO

[00Machado]

I know I'm preaching to the choir in terms of liking HERO, but I thought I'd throw out some thoughts on why I like it.

 

Maybe this info, and feedback that others contribute to the thread can be useful is how DoJ positions the HERO tool kit in their advertising and discussions of how fans use the rule set, and, if not, just interesting for all of us to read why HERO "clicks" with others.

 

For me, I don't think it's the tool kit aspect. I'm not so much a tinker. The draw for me is the creative freedom that I don't feel other games offer.

 

I want my reliance on a single system for multi genre and anything I make up on my own to be an enabler of my creativity, not a hinderance.

Examples:

HERO - if you can imagine it, you can built it, often multiple ways. Sort of like the way I've heard George Lucas describe the evolution of special effects technology enabling him to put what he imagined on screen, instead of having to compromise due to technical limitations of achieving what he envisions. HERO system enables me to wrap rule mechanics around what's in my imagination, rather than...

GURPS - Nice concept in some cases (i.e point based characters, characters with strongly developed sets of skills for when you want that level of complexity), but if it doesn't already exist with a point cost, you have to make it up. Also, I'm sure plenty of people can make it more cinematic, but it's not something I can do, at least not easily enough that I'm willing to spend time on it. Now, with HERO, I can template on realism with things like killing attacks, etc. or template it off. No hassles. If it weren't for the back catalog of books published that already have new ideas priced out in terms of point cost for you, the system might even be stifling for creativity, as is the case with...

d20 - I like the mechanic of the difficulty class increasing, and requiring a roll high instead of a roll low. This is perhaps my major gripe with hero. Simply put, I like roll high for success, not roll low. In plenty of cases, I even like the idea of sudden and discrete gains in power as provided for by feats, hit points, etc. But that's not my point. My point in bringing up d20 is... if there's not a prestige class for it, a spell that already exists, a core class that fits a role, etc. you have to make it up. Now, depending on my mood and at various points in my gaming experience, I have been more or less comfortable just making stuff up for a game. I realize that a lack of a prestige class doesn't prevent me from making up my own, but will mine be any good? Will it be balanced? And besides, I want to make up ideas really, not rules. So, I could make the Sun Lord prestige class and try and express my ideas in d20 rule mechanic terms, or I could use HERO to just apply in-game effects that I'm very familiar with, and that are already built into the system, to my Sun Lord idea. Whereas d20 doesn't stop me from making stuff up, I know I have a mental barrier that often sends me to look for a rule widget (feat, prestige class, equipment, etc) that has already been made up to fill my need. It's just my personality, and I know I'm not the only one with that particular mental hurdle. Whatever, That's not so important. What is important is that d20 doean't facilitate breaking out of that way of thinking. HERO, at least for me, does. I can go digging through a genre book to see how it's been implemented, and then whenever I want to try to do something similar, I'll remember. And I've progressed beyond learning a rule, to learning how to re-apply that rule to any similar situation. In all honesty, I know I could swipe lightsabers from Star Wars d20, insert them into my fantasy genre game as light swords, mental energy blades, etc, but, what if there was no Star Wars d20. Would I make it up? Would I say it does the same damage as a great sword? The Hand Attack effect in HERO, on the other hand, is always there and ready to grab for my lightsaber, and then my mental sword, and then the next idea that comes along. And any of the power modifiers needed to give it just the right feel are there too.

You might say that HERO is a state of mind that lends itself to me not self editing my ideas to the mechanical components that I've come across.

 

The down side that I see to HERO.

I've played a fair amount of 4E, but haven't yet run a 5 or 5ER game (you might say I've been returning to the fold lately), and even with my experience, HERO just appears complicated in some ways. Combats using the speed chart and segments seem to take longer than combat in d20 rounds. Even if they don't, I have the impression that they take longer. Also, the roll under your target number mechanic is more difficult for me vs the roll high mechanic which just rests in my brain as being easier, whether or not it really is.

 

end

[Fox1]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

A most liked/most disliked thread.

 

It won't help martketing, if this goes for any length all it will show is that what some people like what others hate. One would need to do a real marketing study if they wanted something rational to act on

 

But it's still fun

 

Since I came to the game with the original boxed edition, part of my continued use of HERO is simply because it worked for me then and continues to work for me now. It would take a lot to make me move to another system.

 

 

Likes:

 

The split between body/stun, PD & ED split from resistant defenses and each other. Back in the day, this was big- and it was THE road to playing Superheroes. Other games of the time used the traditional damage approach with results of dead and dying characters at the end of each supposed comic book battle.

 

Love the wargame like combat system. It handles Superheroes wonderfully and it's more than acceptable for heroic action in modern and sci-fi settings as well.

 

While I do have to use house rules, none of them are major changes to the system. That is frankly amazing.

 

The construction system allows one to create a vast array of characters tailored to the exact style of game you're going for.

 

The 5th edition book containing almost all the rules in one place.

 

 

 

 

Dislikes: These are minor compared to like, but do exist.

 

HERO does Fantasy extremely poorly. Just as well, I have another fantasy game system I can use.

 

Most of the additonal books (Ultimate Brick and Ultimate Martial Artist excepted). The rest have been a waste of money and I've stopped buying them.

 

Most of the 5th edition changes. Ick.

 

5th Revised STILL not including Piercing in it's power list.

 

Vehicles. Sorry, vehicles still suck.

 

The lack of adventures modules.

[nexus]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Apparently, we like very little.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

The lack of adventures modules.

We've been told several times by Darren & Steve that modules don't sell well and aren't a good investment of DOJ's resources.

[Fox1]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

We've been told several times by Darren & Steve that modules don't sell well and aren't a good investment of DOJ's resources.

 

I know. And they may well be right.

 

Doesn't mean I have to like it does it?

[TheEmerged]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

For me, the toolkit aspect is the #1 charm. Unlike the original poster I *am* a Class A1 tinker And tinker I have, quite a bit and repeatedly. And tinker I shall continue to do... Anytime I see something that doesn't work the way I think it should, you can bet I'm gonna work on it.

 

Thing is, unlike other systems, HERO gives you a backdrop to balance against. To use an unfair d20 example, under d20 I know spells should do about d6 per level... But why are some area effect spells d4 per level and others not? Is the automatic-hit aspect of magic missile really balanced against its half damage?

 

I'll be the first to tell you there are some places HERO breaks down -- the lower-point levels and in campaigns in which PC's have normal characteristic maxima by default being the key one. There are solutions to this, some of which are more radical (altering the figured attribute formulas -- or eliminating them) than others (changing the NCM cap to 25 instead of 20), and some require a certain mindset to work right (changing the skill base from 9+attribute/5 to 6+attribute/5)...

 

...but the toolkit aspect allows me to tinker with a better idea of what I'm doing. That framework gives me something to look at when I try to do radical things like creating a magic system with only skills (no powers or frameworks).

[Hyper-Man]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Besides all the freeform adaptable construction advantages that HERO has I really like the simplicity of experience awards and character advancement (if used, some posters have had success with essentially 0 xp supers). The players can go whatever direction they wish (within reason and campaign limits) without having to be a prestige rules accountant. Heck, the rules even suggest ways of allowing complete rewrites of super character powers via the radiation accident.

 

HM

[David Blue]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Things I like:

 

a) A minimum number of (good!) resolution mechanics handle everything. It's consistent and thus easy to play and to run in ways that even many otherwise good systems like dungeons and dragons aren’t and can't be. Also, you can play it largely from memory, without tables.

 

It handles superheroes and a lot of modern action really well. Fox1 is right about all that. The difference in "feel" is tremendous, and if you like superheroes (and hex maps) all in Champions' favour.* STUN, what a concept!

 

c) It's remained pretty much what it is, so that everything I've ever bought is still of some use to me, with no more changes than I routinely make when adjusting villains and other writeups to the heroes and the scenario. I expect Hero will continue to be backwards compatible. That makes Hero products exceptionally good value.

 

d) I can translate anything into it - often poorly, but I can do it. Whatever I see that inspires me, in any genre or in the news, becomes Hero fodder. And that's just keen.

 

e) Apart from the art, which can be a turn-off, Hero just puts out good products. The rules are well-written and make sense. The physical product isn't too flimsy. (Fuzion never happened ...) The layout is good. I'm finding it hard to sum it up, but if you look at something like VIPER, this is just so obviously worth my gaming dollar, I'll buy it on the assumption either a use for it will arise or I'll create the opportunity to use it - and it won't fall apart in the meantime.

 

f) Character sheets can be simple and straightforward to build and understand. Critically, this can be true with bricks. So you can sit a totally new player down, and often what he wants is someone like Ajax (classical Greek) or Orion (DC) or Doc Sampson (Marvel), and with Hero you just go here you are, this is what this means, and this is what this means, and let's play. Beautiful!

 

g) It scales OK for different-sized playing groups. By comparison, if you get a lot of TORG characters together, just because of all the cards they'll put down, the game is out of harmony. A lot of games have a similar problem. But with Hero you can run one player or as many as will fit in your living room, and yes the combats get tedious, but it works.

 

h) No "hero points". (Related to the previous point. Also, I find not having to decide when and how many hero points to award makes it easier for me to just let the player characters to take a side turn and do what they want.)

 

* I learned to roleplay from Superworld, which I still love, but where "hit self, do critical, impale, die" was a very possible way for a superhero to die. When I hooked up with some Champions players, I was amazed and delighted at all the unnecessary and dubious-for-genre rules that they - didn't - have. Cool!! I think Champions has lost some of that highly-desirable rules-lightness, but not too much.

[CSgeekHero]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

First, let me say what I've discovered about other systems and to me there are only three of note: d20, Gurps, and (of course) Hero.

 

d20. This actually is not one unified system, but three seperate system thinly vailed as one. There is D&D 3/3.5 edition or AD&D lite. Second, there is Star Wars d20. Its decent, but rigid to the license. While, that's understandable, it is almost completely unusable with anything else. Then, there is d20 Modern. The problem is there are supplements out there are based on the D&D rulebooks so you'll have to throw out half of a book if you want to use it with Modern. The Modern direct line produced by WotC is, well, crap.

I got an idea...Let's throw all of the d20 rules out

 

GURPS. Generic Uni..., well, generic is all you need to know. The game mechanic felt thin 15 years ago and it seems like nothing's changed. It doesn't work very well at high powers. It just makes you feel uncomfortable looking at the obvious weakness of the character attributes. That doesn't include the fact that the basic 3rd ed. book has become the basic 4th ed. books in order to give someone the basic amount of skills and talents needed to play a basic game. Let the wind blow it away.

 

HERO! The best balance when it comes to low powered or high powered adventuring. The system doesn't break down. The core rulebook is "The One to Rule Them All." What I mean is that when I change genres I don't have to throw anything out or modify the rules. Hero does a great job of incorporating everything under one roof and giving a lot , I mean A LOT, of information that has never left me without some idea of how to accomplish something, or create a way to accomplish it. The book includes many sample gadgets and several ways to build ones that aren't there without having to buy other books(although, I do because they're good stuff). All you need is your imagination, because just about any rule you need is there in the book. And if not, the system actually gives guidelines for building special rules.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

I know. And they may well be right.

 

Doesn't mean I have to like it does it?

Never said you had to like it; just commenting on why it's not being done, is all.

[archermoo]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

I honestly can't think of anything about HERO that I don't like. Which isn't to say that I don't use hose rules. I do. Frequently. Some are to keep things from earlier versions of the rules that I like (I still use the -1 for a 1/2 move rule), and some are just because I like to tinker. But that is part of what the HERO system is all about. When you get down to it, the different genre books are just the official "house rules".

 

Personally I disagree with Fox1 on how well HERO does Fantasy. But then again, I think it does ALL genre very well. I've played a LOT of different Fantasy RPGs, but the only one that comes close to HERO (IMNSHO) is Rolemaster. But I'd still rather play HERO, especially with the 5th edition rules.

[Dragonblade]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

d20 - I like the mechanic of the difficulty class increasing, and requiring a roll high instead of a roll low. This is perhaps my major gripe with hero. Simply put, I like roll high for success, not roll low. In plenty of cases, I even like the idea of sudden and discrete gains in power as provided for by feats, hit points, etc. But that's not my point. My point in bringing up d20 is... if there's not a prestige class for it, a spell that already exists, a core class that fits a role, etc. you have to make it up.

 

Now, depending on my mood and at various points in my gaming experience, I have been more or less comfortable just making stuff up for a game. I realize that a lack of a prestige class doesn't prevent me from making up my own, but will mine be any good? Will it be balanced? And besides, I want to make up ideas really, not rules.

 

So, I could make the Sun Lord prestige class and try and express my ideas in d20 rule mechanic terms, or I could use HERO to just apply in-game effects that I'm very familiar with, and that are already built into the system, to my Sun Lord idea. Whereas d20 doesn't stop me from making stuff up, I know I have a mental barrier that often sends me to look for a rule widget (feat, prestige class, equipment, etc) that has already been made up to fill my need.

 

It's just my personality, and I know I'm not the only one with that particular mental hurdle. Whatever, That's not so important. What is important is that d20 doean't facilitate breaking out of that way of thinking. HERO, at least for me, does. I can go digging through a genre book to see how it's been implemented, and then whenever I want to try to do something similar, I'll remember. And I've progressed beyond learning a rule, to learning how to re-apply that rule to any similar situation.

 

In all honesty, I know I could swipe lightsabers from Star Wars d20, insert them into my fantasy genre game as light swords, mental energy blades, etc, but, what if there was no Star Wars d20. Would I make it up? Would I say it does the same damage as a great sword? The Hand Attack effect in HERO, on the other hand, is always there and ready to grab for my lightsaber, and then my mental sword, and then the next idea that comes along. And any of the power modifiers needed to give it just the right feel are there too.

You might say that HERO is a state of mind that lends itself to me not self editing my ideas to the mechanical components that I've come across.

 

Excellent observations of d20. I do enjoy the d20 system and play it more than HERO simply because thats what all my friends play. However, you have hit the nail on the head with exactly why I prefer HERO to d20.

[archermoo]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Oh, and I guess I'm just a freak, since one of the things I have always liked about HERO is that sometimes it is good to roll high, and sometimes it is good to roll low. I've just never understood why some people seem to have so much problem with it/dislike it so much.

 

I'll also point out that craps is about the oldest dice game extant, and you automatically lose if you roll the highest possible result on the first roll...

 

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Which isn't to say that I don't use hose rules. I do.

Which page are those on? I can't find them. Or are they one of the things that got added for 5ER?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

( )

[archermoo]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Which page are those on? I can't find them. Or are they one of the things that got added for 5ER?

 

Ba-dum-BUMP!

 

You a very bad man!!!

 

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

You a very bad man!!!

So I'm frequently told.

[stu2000]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

My favorite game is Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes. There were several adventures produced with stats for both MSPE and Espionage!. So I checked out Espionage! and thought it was pretty cool, but wondered why they had all those numbers. Eventually, I started running into gamers that wanted to know exactly what happened in every round of HtH combat, and were clearly a little insecure about leaving all those details up to me. So with the devil-may-care gamers, I like MSPE. With the detail-oriented folks, I like Hero.

 

I like initiativeless combat. I like stun/kill damage. I like the detailed character sheet, with plenty of stats. I like the clearly-defined special effects. I like the scalability. Good stuff.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

What I like -

 

Complete freedom in character creation - when I discovered Champions waaayyy back in '85, no dice rolling in chargen was unheard of.

Combat and damage resolution - I love the roll to hit, roll damage, subtract defences - again something that was unique at the time I played it. Also the split between Stun and Body.

The "generic" powers that you define SFX for. I remember putting characters together for DC heroes and Marvel and if the power wasn't in the list, you couldn't do it (without tinkering). Gurps was the same way. So if you came up with a character concept that the designer never considered you are SOL.

 

These things are what sold me on HERO way back when. Now other, newer, systems have those things, but I have yet to find any that don't have something I don't like about them.

 

The Toolkit approach has been a strong thing for me as time goes on. I have a fantasy campaign world I am working on, and, for some unknown reason, I have always loved the flavor of Rolemaster's magic system. So I duplicated it in HERO terms. Keeps the feel, is still HERO.

 

Add to the fact that I am a superhero junkie - and HEROs biggest line has always been Champions; well you could say I am sold for life.

 

Things I dislike -

Nothing about the system proper - mostly recent stuff. I find the CU somewhat bland (although as more books come out an fill it in it helps) and I hate the timeline. I dislike the metasetting, enough so that I don't use it in any of my games (although having all the Star Hero settings in one timeline is really cool - you could run a nice extended generational game or a time hopping game with it no sweat - now if we could just get the Galactic Fed and the Solar Exploration sourcebooks out).

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Things I like about HERO:

 

--The Speed Chart: During my quest to find the One Game to Rule them All, one of the deciding factors I determined was going to be how the game dealt with the speeds of the combatants involved. I didn't want a game where the characters made initiative rolls then everyone got one action in descending order. I wanted there to be a significant difference between those who were Really Fast and those who were Agonizingly Slow. At that point, the only game where I had experienced that in an adequate level was Shadowrun. (and to a lesser degree, Palladium System) However when I finally got the chance to play Hero, the SPD Chart really stood out to me. I finally found a game where an Augmented human could really outshine an untrained normal in the reflexes department. In fact, I love the SPD Chart so much, I will refuse to play in a Hero game where its been abolished. As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have the SPD Chart, it ain't Hero anymore...

 

--The Powers: Again, during my quest to find the One True Game, originally I wanted a system that could handle Psionic powers very well. But I also wanted a game with an excellent Magic system. At that point the only game I could think of that had both systems in place to my satisfaction was Rolemaster/Spacemaster (where the psionic and Magic systems were simply variations on the same theme) Most games either had a lackluster Psionics system or their Magic System was unworkable, or worse still, Powers were glossed over altogether. Hero solved this problem completely by allowing me to design a characters Powers and Abilities from scratch using a Tool-kit type system, which allowed me to excersize my imagination to its fullest. I also experimented with GURPS during this period, which had a good Psionics system and an O.K. magic system, but the system for superpowers in general was lacking in comparison to HERO. This (and the Speed thing) was essentially the determining factor on choosing HERO over GURPS.

 

--The Combat: The combat rules in Hero are the most diverse in all of RPGdom. It allows you to fight as cinematically as you want and encourages the use of flashy and unrealistic maneuvers, which is the kind of combat I like to portray in my games. With Hero, I can easily mimick the combat scenes from any one of hundreds of Anime tittles that I've seen with near-perfect precision, and this is probably my #1 reason that I've stayed with HERO for as long as I have. Only a few other RPG's on the market can compete with Hero on this level and they were specifically designed with this type of combat in mind (Feng Shui, Exalted etc) with Hero, you can scale the combat to the desired level. Gritty, realistic Fantasy? Doable (Hit locations, Impairing and Disabling and bleeding rules, critical hits) Superpowered Martial Arts? Doable (Knockback rules, Stunning and wounding rules) 4-color Superheros? Very Doable! Hero can handle it all at any power level (no matter what you naysayers like to believe)

 

--The Martial Arts: What I considered the second most important aspect of my Master RPG was going to be how it handled Martial Arts. Being a huge Martial Arts/Kung Fu movie/Anime fanboy, how my RPG handles martial combat is of great concern to me. Of all the games on the market (that I personally tested...which was most of them at the time) only HERO, GURPS and Palladium (using the Ninjas and Superspies supplement) handled Martial arts to my satisfaction. And of course, Hero handled them the best, because of how well it handled Combat in general. The Ninja Hero and Ultimate Martial Artist books are some of the best supplements available for HERO. Yet another reason why Hero remains a favorite and I find it difficult to move to other RPG systems. (note: Storyteller isn't bad at Martial Arts either, though its not as good as HERO. The COMBAT! supplement for Storyteller also happened to be written by our own Steve Long, so it makes sense)

 

--The Vehicles: What made me debate between Hero and GURPS for so long was that I'm a big fan of Mecha and Sci/Fi role playing. Vehicles are very important in the Sci-Fi genre and even moreso in the Mecha sub-genre. GURPS has quite possibly the best vehicles supplement on the market. It was very tough to choose based on that alone. However, once I began to wrap my mind around creating vehicles in Hero, I discovered that because of Hero's toolkit approach, I could design vehicles more accurately in Hero than in GURPS Vehicles. Now with the release of the 5th edition and the availability of the Ultimate Vehicle, that fact has been reinforced. With Hero, I'm in Mecha designing heaven and find that I can more accurately portray whatever mecha I'm trying to simulate, rather sticking to the incredibly complexe but still ultimately limited vehicle design system in GURPS. (yes, I'm aware of GURPS Mecha, but I found it slightly dissapointing. You can pretty much simulate whatever kind of mecha you want with it, but there are some things that are difficult to achieve with that system. I've found I have fewer problems with The Ultimate Vehicle)

 

hmm...is that it? Actually, there are a lot of other things I like about Hero such as the Damage Scale, how OCV and DCV determine chance to hit. The Block and Dodge mechanics are just about perfect (but all of that falls into the category of Hero Combat, which I mentioned)

 

What I dislike?

 

The only thing I can think of is that HERO isn't as popular as DnD and it should be...it should be MORE popular. Thats the only "negative" aspect that I can find about Hero. No, really. I like it that much.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Things I like about HERO:

 

--The Speed Chart:

 

I forgot to mention that one. Yeah, that is one of the great beauties of the system, and in the tactical side of combat, and it helps really differentiate different character types.

[DreadDomain]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Not that I do it conciously but generally I judge a RPG according to three main factors :

 

• Completedness/Adaptability
  
• Consistency
  
• Realism of genre
  

 

Completedness/Adaptability : Like it is discussed in another thread, completedness is in my opinion a huge asset. If the rules cover it all in one single book, that's great. In order to do that, a RPG *has* to be a toolkit otherwise it would be impossible to cram everything in a book. I couldn't imagine a book including a complete super power list, a complete spell list, complete gear lists from different epoch, etc... Good examples of the Completedness approach are Hero, Gurps and to lesser degrees Tri-Stat and Action!. Hero is in my opinion the most complete game on the market. Gurps 4 comes close but falls definitely short on the powers aspect. Hero is still the king of the hill in this aspect mainly because of its yet unmatched construction system.

 

A game could be incomplete (not covering everything you could come up with every genre) but be so adaptable that you can easily tweak it to make it work. While the "complete" games are generally rule heavy, the "adaptable" games are generally narrativist. The best examp,e I can think of is HeroQuest by Issaries. This game was created for Glorantha but it screams "try me with anything you want". Games like Rolemaster or d20 are just not flexible/intuitive enough to easily adapt to everything. The key word here is *easily*. Sure I can take d20 and play in a super game but I will have basically to create rules are the basics to make it work. Look at M&M. It is a good super game loosely based on d20 but you can barely recognize d20 behind it.

 

Consistency : There is not much I hate more in a game that inconsistency of the rules. I like it when very simple concepts are applied along the rules to keep the system solidly rooted. An example of this is the famous +5 active points doubles the effect. While quite simple, it helps making the game works at any level. In Hero, any kind of effect is handled the same way may it be Flashes, Drains, Physical Damage, Mental Attacks. You roll a number of dice according to your effect, you substract the defense if any, you tally up against a resisting stat (Body, Ego, etc...). A game like HeroQuest is very consistent in its resolution system as well. Gurps is mainly consistent but sometime the resolution works like in Hero, sometime you have to figure out the outcome using a contest of skills/stats. This kind of dual system doesn't help keeping balance along the power levels of play.

 

Realism of genre : What I call "Realism of genre" is the ability of a game to reproduce the specific feel of a genre. Some games are very effective in a very specific niche but are not very good at anything else. D&D and Warhammer come to mind. Obviously, the wider the range of a game, the better. While it is very difficult to cover it all, if not impossible, some games have a very wide repertoire. Some people believe Hero is very poor in the low, gritty end (to which I disagree) and excellent in the medium to high power range (to which I agree) but nevertheless, I cannot see a game with a wider range than Hero. For example, Gurps is excellent in the low to medium range of power but generally becomes much predictable in the high range. That is understandable because Gurps was built with "realism" in mind. In contrast, Hero was built with "effect" in mind.

 

Where am I going with that? Well, I mostly like broad concepts in games not specific little things. I love Hero because it scores very well in all three aspects described above and because I don't think another game succeeds better than Hero on all three account. In short, I love Hero because it is the most complete game around, built consistently all around and capable of reproducing the genre of a very broad category of style.

 

In contrast, what I do not like in games are often the little things.

 

I don't like that Gurps has only 4 stats. I don't like how throwing distances are calculated in Gurps, etc...

 

There is honestly not much I don't like about Hero. I would prefer better balanced and better defined primary chracteristics. I mean what the heck is Comeliness all about? Why noy replace it by a fourth, useful mental stats?

 

I don't like how the throwing distance is calculated in Hero (hmmm is there a trend there?). Or, to be more precise, I don't like that throwing distances, as claculated in the rulebooks are losing fast any sense of realism once we get in the high end of Strength. I mean, I understand why it is done like this but I just cannot bring myselk to like it. At least there is the realistic throwing rules in The Ultimate Brick.

 

While I like the Bleeding or the Endurance and the LTE rules, I find them a little bit to tenuous to bookeep.

 

I like pretty much everything else but speaking of little things, I really, really love the speed chart and the languages chart. I admire the power system (well ok, it is not such a *little* thing). I love the freedom players have to design there characters. I love the stun concept, I love that there is not automatism in Hero (you know, like in Gurps every warrior type have Combat Reflexes). On the whole though, what I really love about Hero are the broad concepts.

 

Make no mistake, I do love Gurps has well but Hero is still on top from my point of view.

[Southern Cross]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

Same here.While I prefer the color artwork in GURPS 4e to the black & white art of the Hero System,GURPS 4e is lacking in the powers constuction department.

(My bugbear is the Alternative Attacks rule that was published in GURPS Characters.Essentially,it's an ultra Multipower that only consists of attacks.

Why did they have to wait until GURPS Powers to publish the Alternative Ability rules?)

[tesuji]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

For me the biggest thing currently is the nostalgic feel.

 

While many of the games i played way back when are still around, most of them have significantly and even fundamentally changed. DnD certainly isn't the AD&D i played, nor is Traveller D20 the black book traveller i played so much.

 

But HERO, despite all its ownership woes and issues, remains fundamentally unchanged. A little polish and some new paint on the trim, but I gotta say i wouldn't be surprised is whole sections weren't pratically verbatim or very close to the BBB from what... 21 years ago?

 

The WW RPG revolution came and went and the wax/wane of mechanics/stuff vs story/style seemed to affect most every RPg on the market, but HERO remains as it was before any of that happened.

 

Of course, all things old become new again, or so they say.

 

I did buy last year reprints of the classic black book travellers (happy happy joy joy) and some have said the hackmaster or castle and crusades are like unto reprints of the classic AD&D, so maybe old is new again and what "was" is becoming the new what's "in."

 

Who knows?

[HewhoisMatt]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

I like how cool all the books look sitting in a row on my shelves.

 

I also like how heavy the books are. They work very well for pressing flowers.

[Susano]

Re: What we like about HERO

 

The fact I can build anything I can think of. And then some.