HERO System Vehicles

[zornwil]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

No, I don't have a template as such. Perhaps your thinking of some moving characters from another game system. I'm just updating 4th edition (and 3rd, and 2nd, and 1st...) write-ups to 5th.

 

I have certain standards I go by, but they are only workable for my own campaign- it's why I don't publish characters here. They don't match CU or anyone's work but our own.

Whoops, okay, I thought you meant you were moving some from an actual Marvel game.

 

As Emily what's-her-name (Latella? sp), Gilda Rader's SNL character, would say, "Oh, that's very different! Never mind."

 

BTW, you should publish characters anyway if you like. I think a LOT of people's here don't match CU or HERO's general approach. I surely don't.

[Fox1]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

BTW' date=' you should publish characters anyway if you like. I think a LOT of people's here don't match CU or HERO's general approach. I surely don't.[/quote']

 

I can't imagine a bigger waste of time.

 

In fact, I only barely put up the current House Rule information. It's really only intended for my own gamers.

 

I added it to my sig as a result of a early firearms debate I had here in the hopes it would clear some stuff up about how I approached things, it hasn't. I'll likely remove it soon.

[zornwil]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

I can't imagine a bigger waste of time.

 

In fact, I only barely put up the current House Rule information. It's really only intended for my own gamers.

 

I added it to my sig as a result of a early firearms debate I had here in the hopes it would clear some stuff up about how I approached things, it hasn't. I'll likely remove it soon.

I find a lot of people get ideas or reuse others' characters. I don't know why people wouldn't be interested in yours. But c'est la vie, just a suggestion. Anyway, the core thing is that a lot of people don't design characers as done in CU.

[Dust Raven]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

I can't imagine a bigger waste of time.

 

In fact, I only barely put up the current House Rule information. It's really only intended for my own gamers.

 

I added it to my sig as a result of a early firearms debate I had here in the hopes it would clear some stuff up about how I approached things, it hasn't. I'll likely remove it soon.

 

I kinda liked seeing it in your sig. I also agree with Zornwil that providing an everpresent link to such a valuable source of Hero material sould be displayed. I used to do the same with my site, but a lot of the useful info isn't there anymore and it's currently under (re)construction.

[CraterMaker]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

It seems a lot of people are interested in a Hero version of Car wars around here.. I'm one of them, certainly. Now, Car Wars would require a genre specific vehicle creation system.. But such a system might be broad enough to embrace other genres, too. Just look at what SJ extrapolated from the simple pocket book sized car rules - Tanks, hovercraft, airplanes, blimps, boats, off road vehicles, giant robots, semi trucks.. It would be easy enough to scale the Car Wars vehicle creation rules to spacecraft as well, I'd think.

 

So what does a vehicle creation system have to cover? I like the idea of having some sort of Tech Level stat, where a higher or lower tech level affects an items weight and size.. So a Chassis and Crossbow engine (think Mad Max for you uninitiated) would be a monstrous contraption, compared to the elegant electric engines in the cars of 2045..

 

I'd certainly be interested in seeing ANY adaptations or original vehicle creation systems.. As has been said, earlier, the current vehicle design rules are adequate for quite a few of the genres Hero System covers, but Hero is all about multiple approaches to a problem.

 

I don't think there can be ONE vehicle creation system to cover all genres - It's like saying there is only ONE way to model a power, or ONE way to create a character.. But if we could amass severel different vehicle design systems, you could choose which is most appropriate to your own game (and how much work you want to put into it).

 

-CraterMaker

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

It seems a lot of people are interested in a Hero version of Car wars around here.. I'm one of them, certainly. Now, Car Wars would require a genre specific vehicle creation system.. But such a system might be broad enough to embrace other genres, too. Just look at what SJ extrapolated from the simple pocket book sized car rules - Tanks, hovercraft, airplanes, blimps, boats, off road vehicles, giant robots, semi trucks.. It would be easy enough to scale the Car Wars vehicle creation rules to spacecraft as well, I'd think.

 

So what does a vehicle creation system have to cover? I like the idea of having some sort of Tech Level stat, where a higher or lower tech level affects an items weight and size.. So a Chassis and Crossbow engine (think Mad Max for you uninitiated) would be a monstrous contraption, compared to the elegant electric engines in the cars of 2045..

 

I'd certainly be interested in seeing ANY adaptations or original vehicle creation systems.. As has been said, earlier, the current vehicle design rules are adequate for quite a few of the genres Hero System covers, but Hero is all about multiple approaches to a problem.

 

I don't think there can be ONE vehicle creation system to cover all genres - It's like saying there is only ONE way to model a power, or ONE way to create a character.. But if we could amass severel different vehicle design systems, you could choose which is most appropriate to your own game (and how much work you want to put into it).

 

-CraterMaker

 

We're right on the same page here, except I think that it may be still be possible to come up with a single system... granting that by default there need to be a whole host of options to sim different Genres. I've been thinking about the Tech level idea a bit as well... I figure it'd be similar to the Real Weapon limitation and Str minimums. I think us old Car Wars geeks are probably looking at the vehicle rules from a different angle than most of the other HERO players

I think I'm gonna go get TUV today now that I have a bit of extra fundage.

[CraterMaker]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Car Wars fans probably do come from a different vantage point.. As a gamer, I've allways been in awe of their vehicle creation system. Spoiled, I suppose, to have someone do all that front end work for me.

 

But this is why I think the only solution can be multiple approaches: Take the Batman movies.. The Batmobile is essentially a plot/drama device that is immune to everything except plot concerns .. Only a major villain can effect it, and it doesnt really enhance the character (in other words, Batman can still take on 20 thugs just as easily without it, and it doesn't really make him faster than his swingline).

 

In Car Wars, the Vehicle is as important as the character, and needs to be complexly modeled. Vehicles have to be damaged slowly, in order to have drama throughout a vehicle duel. You have to have tradeoffs that are balanced - I'm going to have a car that handles like a whale so I can afford that targeting computer to make me more accurate.

 

In Starfire, with the masses of ships battling each other, weapons either do one point of damage or two, and vehicles are written up as a string of letters for ease of use ( like AALCPEECS - armor armor laser cargo personnell engine engine cargo sensors) weapons do damage to vehicles from left to right, except for some exotic ones which don't. Allmost more important than the weapons is how long the craft can stay out in open space, it's speed, and it's range..

 

For a Mech game, the bot's can just as easily written up as characters instead of vehicles.. You'll see a battlemech doing flying leg kicks and kung fu punches just as often as lettling loose a barrage of missiles or laser fire..

 

I don't know, though, I've been wrong before. Hey, you gonna do the bullet points? (nudge nudge)?

 

.. I think the first step I might take would be to just transcribe the Car Wars system direct to Hero, and see what that suggests as far as a vehicle design system. I have a lot of loose ideas floating around my head, but no idea of their practicality. And, since I'm interested in the Car Wars Hero idea, I know I'm leaning towards their interpretation in my thinking..

 

-CraterMaker

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Being able to do Car Wars Hero is certainly one of my motivating factors too.

I'll tackle the bullet points after I get back... I'm off to go get TUV.

See Y'all in an hour or so.

[Payback]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Wow almost an hour of reading a ton of beefing. I have to say a lot of you really held it together and made it worth slogging though all this flame and beef.

 

I have to say IMO, and most likely no one cares but me, but it makes me feel good to say so I will.

 

I think that of all the systems Hero has the best overall multi genera adaptability. Vehicles included. Sure we need to tinker.

 

20/30 Abrams.

Could the extra (And I know it has been 3 years since this was posted in) 10 points on the Abrams be slanted armour and not affected by punches?

That is how it would work in my game when I Gm.

 

 

I also like ... can't even recall who but the full phase max damage 1/2 DCV option.

 

Well back to making my own damage charts for my Heavy Gears.

 

Payback.....

[Captain Obvious]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Wow almost an hour of reading a ton of beefing. I have to say a lot of you really held it together and made it worth slogging though all this flame and beef.

 

Yeah, that's the way we roll around here (pun intended).

 

I have to say IMO, and most likely no one cares but me, but it makes me feel good to say so I will.

 

I think that of all the systems Hero has the best overall multi genera adaptability. Vehicles included. Sure we need to tinker.

 

I think so too. There are some weird glitches here and there when using vehicles in Hero, but overall, the rules work well, IMO.

 

Welcome to the boards.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

No, he's right.

 

Vehicle system sucks. But I'm not going to try and rewrite the damn thing myself. He's spot on with a LOT of his complaints, and they're nearly identical to ones I raised long ago -- vehicles don't feel like vehicles, mecha CERTAINLY don't feel like mecha, and the big series of issues for me that surround it all are that there is no dedicated rules set for it. Something I've said over and over again.

 

Vehicles must have their own rules & construction subset. Yes, we can build all the flash attacks and ranged attacks and what have you we want, but to do vehicles properly, they do need to be governed by their own mechanics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

What?

[shadowcat1313]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

we cant really do a complete re-write of the vehicles system really, but when I worked up the starship construction system for Traveller Hero, I tried to modularize things as much as possible.

 

the biggest problem I've always had with the vehicles system being that theres currently no rules for mass/displacement etc. and thats something thats badly needed, at least have it an as optional rule, it was covered in Champions 2, then lost to the ages apparently.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

This is part & parcel of what I'm saying. It makes designing ships really, really questionable.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

The instant you put a rule for "so many AP equals so much mass", you've lost the universal aspect of Hero.

 

It's fine to work it out on a genre by genre basis...Traveller Hero looks like it will absolutely rock, for Traveller Hero. The same rules for Star Wars Hero would be a pretty bad fit. Ditto for Star Trek Hero, Lensman Hero, Honor Harrington Hero, or Lt Leary Hero.

 

IMO, the best thing to do when this will matter is to use another game's construction system and convert the product to Hero. It's way easier to convert a finished Car Wars vehicle to Hero than it is to try to figure out how a light suspension affects your combat speed, and then to have a workable all-Hero system to accurately capture the proper feel when you put radial tires on that same car.

 

If you're exploring all new ground -- a home brew or a conversion that doesn't already have a construction system for an RPG -- it's a lot more difficult, but you can start with another game's system and work it from there.

 

But to try to make a one-size-fits-all universal vehicle system just ain't gonna work. GURPS Vehicles is a very well done vehicle construction system, and it seems to accurately portray most real world vehicles, but it breaks down a lot. I've not been able to build a birchbark canoe that does what a real birchbark canoe can do...it just doesn't allow that strength to weight ratio for a stone age construction. GURPS Vehicles won't allow you to make a fantasy style airship either, and I highly doubt you could build a Space: 1889 ether flyer.

 

I'll take "too freeform" over "too restrictive" any day in re: vehicle construction.

 

On a related topic, since Thia brought it up, what in your opinion would make vehicles feel more like vehicles in game play? I've never had an issue with them, and the Hero vehicle rules work way better IMO than many other game systems I've played.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

On a related topic' date=' since Thia brought it up, what in your opinion would make vehicles feel more like vehicles in game play? I've never had an issue with them, and the Hero vehicle rules work way better IMO than many other game systems I've played.[/quote']

 

For me it would be:

 

* They should move in segments.

 

* Stats that represent things about how a vehicle works. I mentioned this upthread, way before the necro, but vehicles should have stats for, among other things, acceleration, deceleration, fuel economy, handling, and so forth. Instead, we get DEX and SPD and phased movement. There's a "one true way" feeling about the vehicle rules that says you have to use character stats to represent them that, frankly, bites.

 

* Some way to modularize components. As it is, you have a vehicle's STR and its mass; its mass abstracts away all of the things that in most vehicle design systems are specified (weight of engine, tires, armor, chassis, weapons, etc.).

[Captain Obvious]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

I remember you mentioning most of these before, but I don't remember any background "why"s. If it's not beating the dead horse too severely, I'll ask the whys now...

 

* They should move in segments.

What is it about vehicles, as opposed to characters, that makes moving them in every segment a plus? For most characters, even on a normals level, you can break down their per-turn movement rate into nice segmented chunks, but to do so, IMO and I think you'll agree, would slow combat down to the levels it's already rumored to be at.

 

I'll agree that there are nuances here and there where a vehicle can rear-end another one that's actually moving faster, but those are the situations where the GM can call BS and use segmented movement for a couple of phases to work past the weirdness. Moving in phases just helps to speed things along without sacrificing too much detail.

 

* Stats that represent things about how a vehicle works. I mentioned this upthread, way before the necro, but vehicles should have stats for, among other things, acceleration, deceleration, fuel economy, handling, and so forth. Instead, we get DEX and SPD and phased movement. There's a "one true way" feeling about the vehicle rules that says you have to use character stats to represent them that, frankly, bites.

 

Handling is handled in turn modes. Skill levels applied to turn modes give more granularity where needed, and Limited Maneuverability takes it away where needed.

 

Acceleration and deceleration are a little more abstracted in the current rules, and it makes it a little harder to convert real world vehicles into game world stats, but they're still there. It's fairly simple to add limitations to tweak accel and decel rates to fit.

 

As far as fuel economy goes, that will vary by genre, so that adding rules is adding a straitjacket to the game, as I discussed above.

 

Having the vehicles move in the same way as the characters makes them feel more integrated into the game, to my way of thinking. So many game systems have vehicles that just seem tacked on at the end, and there's no real guidance in the rules as to how to play them.

 

Say for example we have a group of characters running down a dock to jump onto a ship that's pulling away. Most games just have a movement rate for characters and a much higher movement rate for vehicles. You can have the vehicle go first, in which case the characters have no chance of catching it, or you can let the characters go first in which case there's no doubt that they will catch it. This may be a good situation for segmented movement, depending on how close it's going to be, but in most cases moving by phase has that element of doubt and moves the game along at the same time. EDIT: I don't even know what my point was here. I need to go to bed.

 

* Some way to modularize components. As it is, you have a vehicle's STR and its mass; its mass abstracts away all of the things that in most vehicle design systems are specified (weight of engine, tires, armor, chassis, weapons, etc.).

 

I've already discussed this above. Setting standards for mass, fuel economy, maximum DEF how many miles before you change the transmission fluid...any of that constrains the system as a whole.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think construction systems are awesome. I actually sit down and fiddle with GURPS Vehicles, cube roots and all. A construction system for a given genre is a great thing...as I said, Traveller Hero looks like it's going to be awesome, and as I haven't said in a while, your 5th Ed Robot Warriors conversion is also quite awesome. I myself have been tinkering with a post-apoc construction system for turning a Mazda Protege into an armored death machine, I've toyed with a steampunk construction system, I thought about converting the Car Wars system to Hero before deciding I'm way too lazy.

 

I guess why I'm posting, besides the fact that I can't sleep, is that I'd like to know what it is about these details that make them feel more like vehicles, aside perhaps from the legacy of Autoduel Champions and Champions II. And aside from the construction systems which, while cool, are not universal. And in particular, I'd like to know why Thia feels that giant, human-shaped mecha don't feel like mecha using the same rules that a giant, human-shaped human would use. I suppose I may not ever get an answer that I can fully understand, but I'll keep asking whenever it comes up until I do.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

I've got the 1989 version of Star Hero here and there is a mass for active point system. 10 active points gives .4 Kg mass normally and 25 Kg on starship devices mass doubles for every 10 active points. so a device with 100 active points would 200 kg. or 12.5 tons on a Starship. There's also a 1/4 advantage called miniaturization which reduces a device's mass to 1/4 of its base and can be bought multiple times. Volume is not mentioned but could probably be extrapolated.

I bet if Steve ever sat down and did something similar it would come out much cleaner.

[shadowcat1313]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Traveller Hero will be using traveller standard rules for displacement tonnage. and DT for all equipment.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Traveller Hero will be using traveller standard rules for displacement tonnage. and DT for all equipment.

 

 

I am so hungrily awaiting that!

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

* Some way to modularize components. As it is' date=' you have a vehicle's STR and its mass; its mass abstracts away all of the things that in most vehicle design systems are specified (weight of engine, tires, armor, chassis, weapons, etc.).[/quote']

 

I've already discussed this above. Setting standards for mass' date=' fuel economy, maximum DEF how many miles before you change the transmission fluid...any of that constrains the system as a whole.[/quote']

 

Saying "Here is the one true way this stuff is done in Hero" would. Saying "Here are some ways you can figure this stuff out" wouldn't, and IMO should have been done a long time ago. Ghu knows I've been trying to do it for years.

[Thrakazog]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Speaking of Car Wars Hero...

 

I haven't worried too much about vehicle design yet. The campaign has only just started - you can read it here. I had initially planned on using Car Wars vehicle design and combat rules and Hero System rules for everything else. It's all invisible to the players, anyway. Now I'm thinking I might actually just build out the vehicles using Hero System vehicle rules and just not worry about point costs and instead focus on translating from system to system properly.

 

I have the Ultimate Vehicle and the old Autoduel Champions book to work with, as well as just about every Car Wars publication. I'll let you know how I do.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: HERO System Vehicles

 

Saying "Here is the one true way this stuff is done in Hero" would. Saying "Here are some ways you can figure this stuff out" wouldn't' date=' and IMO should have been done a long time ago. Ghu knows I've been trying to do it for years.[/quote']

 

I can agree with that. I'm kind of surprised that no one has done it for Digital Hero yet...

[redsash]

Jade Fury shakes off the effect of the electrical feedback net and, thoroughly enraged (up to 80 STR and 13 OCV), Leaps into the air to come down on the last of a row of three M1A1 tanks (Def 30, Body 25, DCV 3).

80 STR at 18m/phase delivers an impressive 19d6 normal attack. At OCV 13, Jade Fury needs to roll 21- to hit.

Fury  rolls a 9, well below half what he needed, so the attack does full damage: 38 Body and 114 Stun. (The GM rules the tank is not “inanimate”, since it and it’s crew is trying to shoot Jade Fury, and so it is vulnerable to critical hits.) The tank takes 8 Body, just less than 1/3 of its maximum 25, and ignores the Stun (what happens to the crew we will leave as an exercise).

Fury rolls 2d6 for Knockback and gets a 6, so (after its -6 KB resistance) the tank gets driven into the ground for another 26d6 damage! Fury’s player gathers up all of his dice and rolls a pretty good result: 30 Body and … let’s not even count the Stun.

Since Fury’s leap hammered the tank into the ground, the GM rules that the bottom armor took the second hit, so the tank takes 10 more Body. This brings its current Body down to 7. It also throws up several cubic meters of shattered concrete.

The GM rolls twice on the Vehicle damage table and, hey, the tank is looking great! It lost 10 STR and 1 SPD, but what’s that to an Abrams?

The GM rules that the enormous pit and the crumpled front tank armor provided enough give to spare Jade Fury the full brunt of his move-through, so he ends up taking half damage for 19 Body, 57 Stun, or a final 19 Stun after PD and his enraged 50% Damage Reduction. Ouch, but not enough to slow him down.

Fury yanks free of the warped tank, then picks it up easily and Haymakers it down onto the next, undamaged tank in the row. Doing the math (30 PD + 7 Body - 16 DC / 2), this gets him another 10DC, plus 4DC for the haymaker, for a total attack of 30d6. It’s an Area Effect attack now, so even with the unbalanced tank it’s still an easy shot, although the GM isn’t likely to grant another critical.

Let’s say he hits, and rolls just a little above average, for 32 Body. The first Abrams is down to 5 Body, the second is at 23. Another two rolls on the table, and the first Abrams loses its cannon (it’s biggest power). The second loses … ooh, it’s noncombat movement multiplier.

But that 32 Body strike has further consequences, as JF has once again pounded the second tank directly into the ground. He rolls a 3 for knockback, so gets to roll another (32-3-6 for the heavy tank) 23d6, this time against the tank’s 20PD belly armor. Another 3 Body crunches through, and this tank loses some combat movement.

The third tank is starting to turn and find a target (the driver was surprised and disoriented for a bit, and the other two are in no condition to fight back). Jade Fury spins on his heels, the first tank describing a tight circle that smashes into the side of the second, propelling it into the third.

This is no haymaker; JF’s player doesn’t want to take a shell after that 19 Stun hit. But he gets a clean 25d6 attack out of the heavily damaged tank. He hits, and does another 23 Body and this time just 7x2=14m Knockback (he rolled a 6), which doesn’t damage any of the tanks further, but rolls them into an unusable tangle and exposes vulnerable underbelly armor.

Next phase, Jade charges the second tank with the first tank. This time the move-through does 28d6 damage (16 DC STR, 18/6=3DC Move, 35-16/2=9DC weapon), and he rolls a whopping 35 Body. The first tank falls to pieces in the impact, sparing Jade further damage. The second tank, struck in the weak 20PD armor section, is down to just 5 Body, and also loses its main weapon. The knockback drives it into the ground but does no further damage to the tough top armor.

Frustrated by his fragile toys, Fury picks up the second bent tank with casual strength and leaps over to the final undamaged tank for another 28d6 move-through, again on the vulnerable armor plating exposed by the capsized vehicle. He continues to haymaker the one tank with the other until one or the other falls apart. It doesn’t take long.

Around this time, Jade gets control of his temper and loses his extra strength. After a moment of thought (his first in a couple of turns), he hefts the final tank onto his shoulders, jogs a couple of steps, and then leaps again, maximum noncombat, 144m straight up. At the apex of his jump, he hurls the tank straight down.

When he eventually lands lightly himself, the crater from the tank impact is pretty impressive.

Edited February 11, 2023 by redsash
couple of typos