I'm considering Hero...

[Fox1]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

double disagree

 

I'm sure you do, it's the expected reaction from a forum devoted to the the... concept.

 

However anyone thinking of moving to it from other systems should be aware of other opinions.

 

 

1. HERO itself admits a major problem with the presented Armor/Weapon balance. In short, it sucks. Be prepared to deal with unconscious combatants. Nothing like having your Paladin walk around cutting the throats of defeated foes because he's unable to kill them in an actual fight.

 

A possible work around is to use different rules for NPCs and PCs. The book includes a number of different methods that basically come down to copying 'mook' rules from other games. In short, NPCs die from stuff that wouldn't kill a character by the core game rules. For many gamers, this method is completely unacceptable.

 

A another work around suggested by the designers (the original Fantasy Hero designers that is, I haven't brought the new book given the small number of changes and complete lack of interest) is to jack up character combat skill levels and used them to convert to damage. Something around 6 levels+. However this makes the character chose between winning the fight (being able to hit and being able to defend) or not dealing with unconscious foes. You'll have to put limits on the skill levels to prevent this- yet another case of complex builds being required to do what the core system should have already done for you.

 

Another way is to change the rules. Reducing Stun Multiples, etc. At that point you're into redesigning a flawed game. Better to pick a more suitable game in the first place.

 

Another way is to redo all the weapon damage and armor ratings so that it functions right. A fair amount of work, and something that will make most of the published material useless for you.

 

 

 

2. One of the classic fantasy styles is advancing characters from worthless newbies to grand heroes.

 

Frankly Experience and advancement in HERO system is a pain in the behind. I typically run fixed point games as a result. Keeping characters in concept while still having them fit in your world and avoiding balance issues isn't for the faint hearted.

 

Real fantasy rpgs have systems that control all this for you. HERO doesn't. If you have players who don't see eye-to-eye with you as to the style of the game and their place in it, be prepared for saying 'No' a lot and micro-managing every point of XP spent.

 

 

 

 

3. Be ready to do work. And more work. And yet more work.

 

Spells, creatures, etc. All have to be constructed.

 

HERO provides some books on the subject, but I find them to be simple constructions lacking any flair. Rather low point characters can walk through almost their entire beastary without breaking a sweat.

 

Unless you're looking for a seldom played game, you're quickly going to find out that you need to re-write *everything* in order to maintain your specific desired gaming style and challange level.

 

With the exception of GURPS, no other Fantasy game on the market brings anywhere near the work load.

 

 

 

4. You'll have to think about spells differently.

 

You'll find the point build to be counter-productive in a fantasy setting. Most of the time you can get the effect you want with enough points and effort. But unless you alter the rules the Active Point cost will quickly get out of hand.

 

In D&D for example, charm person is a lower level spell than charm monster for the simple reason that it affects fewer potential targets. In HERO they'd have a same active cost, but the real cost would be lower. However Power Pools and Multi-powers don't care about real cost when setting their upper limits nor does a common 'requires skill rolls' limit, those are solely Active Point matters.

 

Thus your charm person and charm monster spells (to gain the same effect vs. equal EGO targets) require the same max. Active Points and the same skill roll. They will also have the same END cost.

 

Working around this requires more complex builds (buying different 'required skill rolls" modifiers on different spells) and even house rules in some cases. Nothing is 'easy', each spell will have to be carefully construct in order to fit into your desire limits. Depending upon your desired style, many just won't work or will have to 'break' the game's groundlevel rules.

 

 

Another issue with spells is that unless you go with a Power Pool, you'll have far fewer spells per character than other games allow. The points to buy hundreds of different spells just aren't there and even if they were, there would be more effective plays to spend them. A look at the official write-ups shows that most characters have access to only a handful spells.

 

Power Pools come with their own problems. I make extensive use of them myself in other genres, but they are a STOP power in HERO for a reason.

 

 

HERO publishes a spell book or two, but I find them boring and uninteresting. Completely lacking in favor.

 

 

 

5. Many have problems with fantasy 'science'.

 

HERO is a very rational design system built upon simple but logical math.

 

As a result many players find its point build construction methods to be at its core a not fantasy like thing. It feels more like science in motion than it does magic.

 

In the same way the poker chips and playing cards can help set a wild west feeling for games like Deadlands, the HERO system can undermine a campaign's fantasy feel.

 

 

 

6. The 2x progression (every 5 points doubles your 'coverted to the real world power') isn't suited for every Superhero setting, it certainly isn't suited for the typical fantasy world.

 

Just look at the Strength chart. Few things in fantasy can lift 100 tons. But that's only a STR of 60.

 

"I attack with my Great Axe and roll 3d6+1 kill with my STR and skill adds...

 

What? That's a damage level equal to the punching power of a 25 ton average STR golem!!???"

 

Be ready to change the progression (causes house rule ripples throughout the game),

 

 

 

This is only a start. I have limited time for this post you see.

 

 

All this is an outgrowth of the fact that HERO was designed for a Superhero setting, not a fantasy one. If you buy into HERO, be aware that you're buying into a game that was designed for an completely different style- and was then shoe-horned into fantasy.

 

 

HERO is a wonderful game system. I use it for every game setting except two.

 

Deadlands and Fantasy.

 

There are times when a purpose driven game design is just plain better, no matter how good a generalist design is.

 

Edit: correct some typo's

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

By the way, IIRC I'm on Fox1's ignore list, so this is for the benefit of people considering Hero, and not for FOX1.

 

I'm sure you do' date=' it's the expected reaction from a forum devoted to the the... concept.[/quote']

 

Very true. I noted our likely bias previously. It does make me wonder why someone who believes Hero is useless for Fantasy spends his time here, however. Perhaps the Fox doth protest overmuch?

 

However anyone thinking of moving to it from other systems should be aware of other opinions.

 

Which is certainly reasonable.

 

1. HERO itself admits a major problem with the presented Armor/Weapon balance. In short' date=' it sucks. Be prepared to deal with unconscious combatants. Nothing like having your Paladin walk around cutting the throats of defeated foes because he's unable to kill them in an actual fight. [/quote']

 

I don't recall Hero stating this as a "problem". However, a fight between two guys in plate mail (subtracting 8 from Body damage inflicted) using swords (say 1 1/2d6 base damage, can increase to 3d6+1 with various adders) will likely end with one of them KO'd, not dead.

 

To me, however, this is not a weakness. Many RPG's have only "live character" and "dead character". Others have some penalties as wounds accumulate, and ultimately death. Far too few (in my opinion) allow for a reasonable possibility that combatants will be knocked out without being killed, or near death. A KO'd hero is a staple of heroic fiction. Why can't heroic fiction RPG's duplicate that?

 

And who says you have to slit throats? Defeated opponents are often, if not normally, quite adequate. Don't Paladins take prisoners? Or is it OK to be a bloodthirsty killing machine Paladin?

 

Finally, it bears noting that, while lethal damage is slower to rack up, healing is also restricted. In most FH games, a character isn't going to take enough damage to kill him three times over, which has been healed by curative spells, in the course of a day.

 

A possible work around is to use different rules for NPCs and PCs. The book includes a number of different methods that basically come done to copying 'mook' rules from other games. In short, NPCs die from stuff that wouldn't kill a character by the core game rules. For many gamers, this method is completely unacceptable.

 

A work around suggested by the designers (the original Fantasy Hero designers that is, I haven't brought the new book given the small number of changes and complete lack of interest) is to jack up character combat skill levels and used them to convert to damage. Something around 6 levels+. However this makes the character chose between winning the fight (being able to hit and being able to defend) or not dealing with unconscious foes

 

Another way is to change the rules. Reducing Stun Multiples, etc. At that point you're into redesigning a flawed game. Better to pick a more suitable game in the first place.

 

There are other workarounds which can be adopted, but these get the point across that the balance between killing and stun damage can be changed if you wish to do so. As noted above, I consider the KO to Kill ratio to be a feature, not a flaw. However, I would concur with FOX1 that, if you want combat that is generally, if not always, to the death, Hero may not be the best system - it will certainly require some tweaking to increase lethality if this is the approach you want.

 

[EASY TWEAK: Use hit locations, but apply multiples of BODY damage before, not after, defense from Armor. Easier tweak: Make high levels of armor hard to come by.]

 

Another way is to redo all the weapon damage and armor ratings so that it functions right. A fair amount of work' date=' and something that will make most of the published material useless for you.[/quote']

 

This is a Fox1 soapbox, as he's quite proud of having revised all the firearms, at a minimum. It's unnecessary at best in my opinion. But, again, it's a means to adjustung lethality if that's something you want to do.

 

One final point: As you can read from the above, the "default" lethality setting is fairly low. Unlike most RPG's, it is feasible and practical to adjust lethality should you wish to do so.

 

2. One of the classic fantasy styles is advancing characters from worthless newbies to grand heroes.

 

Frankly Experience and advancement in HERO system is a pain in the behind. I typically run fixed point games as a result. Keeping characters in concept while still having fit in your world and avoiding balance issues isn't for the faint hearted.

 

I'm not a big fan of complaints that "I changed the rules and now the game doesn't work for me". I don't find the xp system hard to work with, although it can complicate matters, as xp feeds directly back to the character creation system. You can spend your points on anything you desire (pending GM permission), so a lot of choice exists. Choice=complexity.

 

In allowing for the GM to set the level of starting points, and the pace at which experience is gained, I consider Hero ideally suited for "advancing characters from worthless newbies to grand heroes" if this is your desired approach. It's also quite suitable for creating grand heroes who will remain pretty constant, if you prefer that approach, or anything in between.

 

Real fantasy rpgs have systems that control all this for you. HERO doesn't. If you have players who don't see eye-to-eye with you as to the style of the game and their place in it' date=' be prepared for saying 'No' a lot and micro-managing every point of XP spent.[/quote']

 

To restate, most fantasy RPG's have systems that lcok you into their style of play. Hero doesn't. I find if your players don't see eye to eye with you, you're going to have a scrap selecting game systems, game settings, any use of optional or house rules, etc. in any case. d20 certainly suffers from that issue ("No, you cannot play a half dragon with the Prestige Class from the supplement you just bought from NoPlaytest Games Inc., and purchase a Vorpal Sword. We are going for a "low fantasy" campaign here.")

 

3. Be ready to do work. And more work. And yet more work.

 

Spells, creatures, etc. All have to be constructed.

*********************************************************

With the exception of GURP, no other Fantasy game on the market brings anywhere near the work load.

 

Very true. If you don't want to use the pre-fab's, you'll need to write up the creatures, spells, etc. yourself. This carries considerable work for the benefit of great flexibility. I've never worked with GURPS, so I can't vet Fox1's comment that it's similar in required work. Assuming it is, this seems a non-issue in that you seem to be choosing between GURPS and Hero.

 

4. You'll have to think about spells differently.

 

You'll find the point build to be counter-productive in a fantasy setting. Most of the time you can get the effect you want with enough points and effort. But unless you alter the rules the Active Point cost will quickly get out of hand.

 

In D&D for example, charm person is a lower level spell than charm monster for the simple reason that it affect fewer targetss. In HERO they'd have a same active cost, but the real cost would be lower. However Power Pools and Multi-powers don't care about real cost when setting their upper limits nor does a common 'requires skill rolls' limit, those are solely Active Point matters.

 

This can certainly be an issue, and it requires you to choose your mechanics for creation of spells with care. Fox1 mentions multipowers and variable power pools. These are often not permitted in Fantasy Hero, and the active points issue is a good reason for this IMO.

 

As to duplicating D&D spells, it's my personal opinion you will never find a game system that duplicates D&D as well as D&D. If I want to play D&D, that's what I play. You've already indicated you don't want d20, so that would appear not to be the issue.

 

A major difference, however, is that D&D provides arbitrary "point cost" assignments done for you (ie "This is a first level spell and this one is fifth level"). Hero uses pioints to achieve a similar effect, but there can be some glitches. In my experience, the system is flexible for any such glitches to be worked around.

 

No question the flexibility comes at a cost of complexity. For myself, I haven't found "just a few spells" (and my failry junior spellcaster has more than half a dozen) to be a big stumbling block. How many spells do your D&D mages actually memorize (as opposed to "have access to")?

 

5. Many have problems with fantasy 'science'.

 

HERO is a very rational design system built upon simple but logical math.

 

As a result many players find its point build construction methods to be at its core a very not fantasy like thing. It feels more like science in motion than it does magic.

 

There's no question the Hero system requires the flavour and SFX to be added by the players. This basically comes from your players' playstyle.

 

6. The 2x progression (every 5 points doubles your 'coverted to the real world power') isn't suited for every Superhero setting, it certainly isn't suited for the typical fantasy world.

 

Just look at the Strength chart. Few things in fantasy can lift 100 tons. But that's only a STR of 60.

 

"I attack with my Great Axe and roll 3d6+1 kill with my STR and skill adds...

 

What? That's a damage level equal to the punching power of a 25 ton average STR golem!!???"

 

This is an issue with virtually every fantasy game. If you go through the D&D lift charts, you will find a similar "lift doubles every X points" effect. I find carrying capacity in most fanatsy games is overstated because we want characters who are effective, not taking oenalties for simply carrying the equipment we associate with our Fantasy Heroes.

 

As well, players normally want to achieve damage levels commensurate with their opposition. As a result, we get strange results like powerful heroes inflicting damage on the same scale as powerful monsters.

 

HERO is a wonderful game system. I use it for every game except two.

 

Deadlands and Fantasy.

 

There are times when a purpose driven game design is just plain better, no matter how good a generalist design is.

 

I would agree, with one caveat. The times when a purpose-driven game design is superior are limited to times when you agree 100% with the purpose by which the game system is driven. Your sdtated aversion to d20 and comments on the wide array of gtame products you own indicates, to me, that you haven't found a game (and there likely isn't one out there) driven to your desired fanatasy flavour. That leads you to consider only the mnore generic systems, GURPS and Hero.

[CourtFool]

Tripply Disagree

 

Thanx for the reference' date=' but I feel I must clarify that it's not a D&D conversion site -- it's a general Fantasy HERO site that also contains xD&D conversions.[/quote']

 

My apologies, sir. You are absolutely correct.

 

I must post between calls these days so I loose my train of thought.

 

I'm sure you do' date=' it's the expected reaction from a forum devoted to the the... concept.[/quote']

 

...and it could never be the expected reaction of someone who simply disagrees with your preferences.

 

1. HERO itself admits a major problem with the presented Armor/Weapon balance.

 

If saying that you, personally, may want a more lethal system = it sucks...then yeah, I guess so. You can not seriously think that D&D's combat is more realistic or lethal.

 

Real fantasy rpgs have systems that control all this for you.

 

'Real' fantasy rpgs may have systems that straight jacket you into this way of thinking, Hero doesn't.

 

3. Be ready to do work. And more work. And yet more work.

 

Yes, you will need to be ready to do some work. I regret to inform you that Hero System does not have the exact world, magic system and all the NPCs you have rolling around in your head stated out for you in a nice, glossy, hardbound book.

 

4. You'll have to think about spells differently.

 

Yes, you will. For those of us who hated the way spells worked in other systems, this is good news.

 

In D&D for example' date=' charm person is a lower level spell than charm monster for the simple reason that it affect fewer targetss. [/quote']

 

D&D has its own balance issues. It is true that D&D spells converted into Hero may cost more or less than comprable level spells. Does this mean Hero is wrong? I am more inclined to think the D&D spell is wrong.

 

Yes, Active Point limits can cause problems with Power Frameworks. That is why the Turakian Age spell system is designed differently.

 

Another issue with spells is that unless you go with a Power Pool' date=' you'll have far fewer spells per character than other games allow.[/quote']

 

Spell casters are always overpowered in other systems, that is why.

[Fox1]

Re: Tripply Disagree

 

...and it could never be the expected reaction of someone who simply disagrees with your preferences.

 

From a unconnected PoV- same thing, different word choice.

 

There is however a real reason I selected the words I did. This is the official HERO discussion boards. One would by nature expect nearly 100% approval of HERO in such a place. Fanboys forward!

 

The question of switching game systems however is something that needs a more objective side.

 

I'd suggest taking up the pros and cons of Fantasy HERO over at ww.rpg.net for example. One is more likely to see all sides of the coin.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

i like the experiance gain in hero. Every session it feels like the players learned something and grew. After playing for a year, my -15 pt character is now a 200pt character (about, really something like 180) because he's been out learning and becoming a king etc. At some points it becomes rediculose, but it's the same in DnD

[Lupaerian]

Re: Tripply Disagree

 

There is however a real reason I selected the words I did. This is the official HERO discussion boards. One would by nature expect nearly 100% approval of HERO in such a place. Fanboys forward!

 

Was it really needed to point that one out? Isn't it just a bit obvious that you would get a preference for some gaming system when you go ask about it in the official forum of that gaming system?

 

Dunno how everybody else feels, but IMHO the discussion seemed quite non-fanboyish up to the point where you dropped the rather fanboyish sounding "D&D is the better game" comment, so what purpose did it serve other than to disrupt the thread?

 

I'd suggest taking up the pros and cons of Fantasy HERO over at ww.rpg.net for example. One is more likely to see all sides of the coin.

 

Then why didn't you suggest that right from the start? There are more constructive ways to get a point such as that across.

[Starwolf]

Re: Tripply Disagree

 

There are in fact two "settings" canned for Fantasy Hero, The Turakian Age and The Valdorian Age. Each includes suggestions for magic systems that are quite different from D&D. Between the FH Grimoires (I & II), along with the Hero System Beastiary, and Monsters, Minions, and Maruaders, there are lots of pre-published spells and critters to keep your heroes occupied without having to generate these things from scratch. If you add in the Hero Designer program and the appropriate character packs you can generate characters quickly, and print out mountians of creatures with very little effort. In order to speed battle and add some realism/lethality I use another program called GMAid (an old DOS app, but there are a couple of WIN/Java apps in development) to track my combat. THis way I can include hit locations, and bleeding/impairment/disabling results with almost no effort.

[obatron]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

...again pardons if this seems disjointed, even more sleep lost due to prank call last night informing me my mother died, which kept me up for hours out of sheer anger over the &!#*.

 

Some might question my sensibilities in asking my questions here, since obviously the answers would be slanted. However, I wanted to hear the positive response rather than the negative. I believe GURPS and Hero are not that far apart in style, just the way they do it. I know the basic negatives of a point based system...

 

Coming from GURPS, I'm aware of the amount of work needed to create the NPCs, monsters/animals, etc. I suspect Hero of being in the same ball park. However, doing a different magic system in GURPS required more work; The official magic system is more integrated into the system.

 

GURPS also suffers from the unconcious foe if the combat is done correctly (which is not an easy task, and makes it much longer...but that's another debate that raged over there recently.) I don't have a problem with this as my players are often upset if they've done and killed their foe before they get to play (they love getting info...)

 

After reading the discussion above, I've formed the opinion that GURPS and Fantasy are very close in the amount of work, the concepts, and so forth. It does seem that Hero is more toolkit like and could be easier to customize a magic system into, etc. This may be different with GURPS 4th edition, I don't know yet.

 

In many ways, I asked here because I wanted to see if the online community was supportive of what I wanted in the game. Given that both GURPS and Hero do not foster the game aids that D20 does, asking fellow players online is the second best game aid a GM can have (and often times, the best.)

 

I broke out my books and started going through the big book. So far, it all seems rather straight forward. It's similar enough (outside of powers) to GURPS that I think it should be fairly easy to pick up. Combat and magic are my biggest concerns, and your pointers on magic already have me thinking...

[CourtFool]

Nah uh!

 

From a unconnected PoV- same thing, different word choice.

 

I disagree, sir. Someone may prefer another system and still recommend Hero over D&D and G.U.R.P.S. Personally, I found your comment dismissive. But I am sensitive like that.

[Fox1]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

Some might question my sensibilities in asking my questions here' date=' since obviously the answers would be slanted. However, I wanted to hear the positive response rather than the negative. [/quote']

 

HERO has a good rep and users at http://www.rpg.net. You would have heard the positive there too.

 

 

In many ways, I asked here because I wanted to see if the online community was supportive of what I wanted in the game.

 

I generally find that this site is supportive. You can get tons of advice here.

 

The only problem is that HERO is so customized, that people are often playing a different game even if they are using the same rulebook.

 

This site is great for concepts, not so useful for specific numbers. You'll have to find your own balance.

 

 

I broke out my books and started going through the big book. So far, it all seems rather straight forward. It's similar enough (outside of powers) to GURPS that I think it should be fairly easy to pick up. Combat and magic are my biggest concerns, and your pointers on magic already have me thinking...

 

Best of Luck then.

 

Given your GURPS background, it shouldn't be too difficult. One thing you'll be leaving behind is the overwhelming importance GURPS places on it's core Stats. I think you'll find this change alone opens up a range of new character types.

 

If it doesn't work out for Fantasy, be sure to give in a try in some other settings.

[John Desmarais]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

I broke out my books and started going through the big book. So far' date=' it all seems rather straight forward. It's similar enough (outside of powers) to GURPS that I think it should be fairly easy to pick up. Combat and magic are my biggest concerns, and your pointers on magic already have me thinking... [/quote']

 

I vaguely recall an earlier post in this thread where you mention that you had all of the Fantasy Hero line of books. If so, read through the chapter in Fantasy Hero on creating magic systems. Tons of advice as well as writeups of several different types of magic systems and suggestions for others. Additionally, the magic system used in Turakian Age (which the Fantasy Hero Grimoires are geared towards) is a fairly good, already fully created, system that can be used as an easy starting point.

[obatron]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

Out of curiosity, if I were to buy Hero Designer, which add ons would be essential for fantasy?

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

In many ways, I asked here because I wanted to see if the online community was supportive of what I wanted in the game. Given that both GURPS and Hero do not foster the game aids that D20 does, asking fellow players online is the second best game aid a GM can have (and often times, the best.)

 

We're always glad to help or critique or give opinions here, i've learned alot from only a month on the boards and have gotten some good ideas for PCs and NPCs

[teh bunneh]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

I'm sure you do' date=' it's the expected reaction from a forum devoted to the the... concept. [/quote']

 

I used to feel similarly, that Hero wasn't much good for a fantasy game. Having run and played in a few FH campaigns now, I've come around to a different way of thinking.

 

However anyone thinking of moving to it from other systems should be aware of other opinions.

 

Always! Garnering multiple opinions is always a good idear.

 

1. HERO itself admits a major problem with the presented Armor/Weapon balance. In short, it sucks. Be prepared to deal with unconscious combatants. Nothing like having your Paladin walk around cutting the throats of defeated foes because he's unable to kill them in an actual fight.

 

This is not necessarily a problem, to my way of thinking. Many game systems tend to have two combat options: enemy dead, or enemy still trying to kill you. Unconscious and Stunned adds a new dimension to fantasy combat.

 

(And, IIRC, can be historically accurate. I recall reading that two knights in full plate, armed with swords, would often batter one another until one succumbed to exhaustion-slash-unconsciousness, and then the winner would capture him or cut his throat).

 

So it really comes down to what type of game you want to play. If you're playing a "999 dead orcs in a pile around the hero" game, FH might not be the best way to go. If killing someone is serious business and you'd like to have other options, FH could be your bag.

 

IOW, it depends on the style of the game you want to run (which in itself isn't a change from any other system). And of course, as Hugh pointed out there are tweaks to the system you can make that adjust the lethality of the game (BODY multipliers applied before armor instead of after, f'rinstance). I've never found this to be a problem.

 

2. One of the classic fantasy styles is advancing characters from worthless newbies to grand heroes.

 

Frankly Experience and advancement in HERO system is a pain in the behind. I typically run fixed point games as a result. Keeping characters in concept while still having them fit in your world and avoiding balance issues isn't for the faint hearted.

 

Real fantasy rpgs have systems that control all this for you. HERO doesn't. If you have players who don't see eye-to-eye with you as to the style of the game and their place in it, be prepared for saying 'No' a lot and micro-managing every point of XP spent.

 

As you said, that's one way of doing fantasy. There are plenty of other styles, too.

 

That said, I'm not sure what the problem with experience in HERO is. You grant XPs at the end of an adventure. The players can choose to spend them or save them for a larger purchase. Spending them (in my experience at least) is as easy as saying, "Hey, I want Tralgar the Fighter to get another Combat Level in his sword, is that OK?" That's not much different from saying "I want Tralgar the Fighter to get Improved Trip, is that OK?" in D&D3.x, is it?

 

I wouldn't call that micro-managing, but I guess YMMV.

 

3. Be ready to do work. And more work. And yet more work.

 

Spells, creatures, etc. All have to be constructed.

 

HERO provides some books on the subject, but I find them to be simple constructions lacking any flair. Rather low point characters can walk through almost their entire beastary without breaking a sweat.

 

Unless you're looking for a seldom played game, you're quickly going to find out that you need to re-write *everything* in order to maintain your specific desired gaming style and challange level.

 

Not so. Obviously this varies from person to person (your case in point), but I know people who run full campaigns "straight out of the box" (as it were), using Turakian Age, the Hero Bestiary, and the Grimoire.

 

I find I do less re-writing and re-working of spells, magic items, and monsters in Hero than I did in D&D. And I'm an inveterate tinkerer!

 

With the exception of GURPS, no other Fantasy game on the market brings anywhere near the work load.

 

But again, this varies from person to person. When I was running D&D, I found that I had to tweak everything to match my campaign ideas. I do a lot less of that now.

 

4. You'll have to think about spells differently.

 

This is a selling point, in my mind.

 

How do you want magic to work in your world? Don't think about how Gary Gygax and his successors wanted magic to work -- think about how you want it to work. So what if Charm Person and Charm Monster don't add up, points wise? You're not playing in the D&D playground any more. The whole world is open to you.

 

Fantasy Hero and the Grimoire give (I think) 7 different ways to think about magic, but that list is hardly exhaustive. Believe me, when I think about magic in my campaign, I don't think "Mage throws a fireball."

 

Another issue with spells is that unless you go with a Power Pool, you'll have far fewer spells per character than other games allow. The points to buy hundreds of different spells just aren't there and even if they were, there would be more effective plays to spend them. A look at the official write-ups shows that most characters have access to only a handful spells.

 

In a D&D3 game I'm currently in, my wizard character has something like 90 spells in his list. Of that list, I've memorized a total of 12. Not 12 at a time -- 12 spells, ever, out of the whole list. And he's a medium-high level character. If you want a game where your spellcasters need access to scores of spells, Fox has a point. I've never run into that situation, myself.

 

HERO publishes a spell book or two, but I find them boring and uninteresting. Completely lacking in favor.

 

Eh, diff'rent strokes. The books give me what I need, without adding a lot of extraneous fluff. For some folks, that's a problem. If you feel you need the fluff, then I would agree with Fox.

 

5. Many have problems with fantasy 'science'.

 

HERO is a very rational design system built upon simple but logical math.

 

As a result many players find its point build construction methods to be at its core a not fantasy like thing. It feels more like science in motion than it does magic.

 

In the same way the poker chips and playing cards can help set a wild west feeling for games like Deadlands, the HERO system can undermine a campaign's fantasy feel.

 

I've always found that it's the GM who establishes the feel of the campaign. If he properly sets the tone, if he describes magic as magical, then the players will (usually) follow suit.

 

There are few games out there that I've encountered that don't, at their core, boil down to "Magic spell X does Y points of damage." All games (that I've seen) are mechanistic in this regard. Hero is no different -- it's just that in Hero you get to design what X and Y represent.

 

There are times when a purpose driven game design is just plain better, no matter how good a generalist design is.

 

Agreed. If you want to play D&D, play D&D. But it sounds to me like the original poster wants to create his own world and his own system of magic. If that's the case, then FH is worth taking a look at.

 

Bill.

[mvoncannon]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

Out of curiosity' date=' if I were to buy Hero Designer, which add ons would be essential for fantasy?[/quote']

 

Although not needed, you could find the Turakian Age Character Pack, Monster Minions Marauders, Bestiary, and Fantasy Hero Character Pack very usefull. You could also speed things along with the Grimoires as well.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

Some might question my sensibilities in asking my questions here, since obviously the answers would be slanted. However, I wanted to hear the positive response rather than the negative. I believe GURPS and Hero are not that far apart in style, just the way they do it. I know the basic negatives of a point based system...

 

 

Coming from GURPS, I'm aware of the amount of work needed to create the NPCs, monsters/animals, etc. I suspect Hero of being in the same ball park. However, doing a different magic system in GURPS required more work; The official magic system is more integrated into the system.

 

Designing Magic Systems in the HERO System is relatively easy. I have a document of considerations for people attempting to make new Magic Systems here:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/GreyHEROContent/Powers/Magic.shtml#MAGIC%20SYSTEM%20DESIGN

 

I also have a bunch of Magic Systems Ive made that both serve as examples and as usable systems.

 

GURPS also suffers from the unconcious foe if the combat is done correctly (which is not an easy task, and makes it much longer...but that's another debate that raged over there recently.) I don't have a problem with this as my players are often upset if they've done and killed their foe before they get to play (they love getting info...)

The level of lethality can be controlled by the GM. From using the optional Hit Locations, some or all of the injury rules, or making campaign groundrule decisions about how damage will be resolved.

 

If a simple solution doesn't dial in the right amount of lethality, you can also get more complicated until you are happy with the results. For example, I ended creating my own Weapons and Armor rules to acheive the feel I wanted in Fantasy HERO, located here:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/armamentsNotes.shtml

 

But obviously that is an extreme case, and also I partially did it just as an excerise to test a theory. My players liked it and it took off, but I could have accomplished similar ends in a much less heavy handed fashion.

 

 

 

In many ways, I asked here because I wanted to see if the online community was supportive of what I wanted in the game. Given that both GURPS and Hero do not foster the game aids that D20 does, asking fellow players online is the second best game aid a GM can have (and often times, the best.)

 

I broke out my books and started going through the big book. So far, it all seems rather straight forward. It's similar enough (outside of powers) to GURPS that I think it should be fairly easy to pick up. Combat and magic are my biggest concerns, and your pointers on magic already have me thinking...

 

I've run many Fantasy campaigns with the HERO System. It's a blast, but like anything else with an open ended game system, the quality of the game depends almost entirely on the quality of the GM. If the GM is able to clearly define for the players how custom things in their game work and be consistent in their application, then all good things will come. If the GM is a poor communicator, doesnt think things thru, and or otherwise can't implement their visions effectively, then the game will suck.

 

You seem like a thoughtful, open minded person, so I suspect that you have the potential to do all of these things correctly should you choose to pursue it.

[ZenStorm]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

I used to use GURPS.

 

If I might offer my own opinion to help you in your decision. My honest opinion, humble as it is, is this: When I found Hero, gave it a thorough read-through and started planning a game, I honestly felt that this was a system that successfully accomplishes what GURPS unsuccessfully attempts to do.

 

I always found with GURPS, that the 'Universality' it touts as it's stock-in-trade comes at the cost of quite a few compromises that always end-up being made on the part of the players and (most especially) the GM.

 

Hero, on the other hand is ten-fold-and-then-some crunchy enough to handle whatever, (and I mean W-H-A-T-E-V-E-R ) you'd like to do, in whatever way you'd like to do it.

 

Please don't get me wrong, as you are clearly a fan of GURPS, I liked that system when I was using it.

 

GURPS is a good system.

 

But, Hero is a GREAT system.

[Bismark]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

[Just for context, my Fantasy CV includes: HERO (2nd, 4th, and 5th ed), OD&D, AD&D1, AD&D2, C&S1,2,3 and 4, T&T 3,5,6, BUSHIDO 2, GURPS 3, RM 2, Pendragon, WFRP1 and Dying Earth RPG]

 

As an experienced GURPS user, you are already primed to spot the dreaded 'rules-raping' that some people can perpetrate when designing points-based characters (I remember choosing some frankly ludicrous defaults in GURPS 3e just to get a whole group of useful skills more cheaply than paying for them in a 'sensible' way).

 

Like GURPs, often the best way to get good levels in a group of CHAR-based skills is simply to buy up the underlying characteristic (the more skills you have in that group, the better value the primary characteristics become).

 

Some things will be a lot cheaper to buy in HERO than GURPS (e.g. making a competent Mongol-style horse-archer is WAY cheaper).

 

Regarding combat and stunning people - that is actually quite reasonable, in fact if anything, light weapons do far too much STUN damage (light arrow vs. plate helmet at anything above a few feet range should not cause much more than a response of 'is it raining here?'). Where heavy weapons (2-handed hammers, etc) are concerned, bear in mind that a lot of people in plate were only killed by these things because their armour got hammered flat and they were unable to breathe as a result - unlike tacky Hollywood movies and bad fantasy novels [ ], you do NOT cut through serious armour with a 1-handed slashing sword (armour was worn for a reason, after all). If you want to be able to do this, the effect is best done by having scarier (i.e. higher point value) PCs (the Deadly Blow skill combined with Skill levels can turn any character into a 'slicer-dicer').

 

As other posters have mentioned, the HERO sourcebooks do a pretty good job of making the GM's task easier (the Grimoires are incredibly useful for getting the creative juices going where spell design is concerned, and Turakian Age is a rather spiffy worldbook [Valdorian Age less so, but that's just my opinion - the extra rules are intriguing, the world a bit 'flat']).

 

Best of luck…

[Nolgroth]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

I wish I had jumped into this thread earlier....

 

I haven't played GURPS, but looking through the rules once I thought, "I already have HERO and it just seemed more...intuitive than GURPS." Anyway I can't make an educated comparison.

 

I just happened to see some things that I think are outright misconceptions; long combat times, different "games" and armor balance.

 

I have found HERO as quick or quicker than any other system at combat. The other day, my (ir)regular group ran two pretty significant combats and both were done within an hour of real time. To be fair, one of my friends hosted the game on his IRC server and had a nice little PHP script that handled attack, hit locations and damage rolls. By comparison, I have spent six hours running a similar combat in D&D.

 

Hit Locations and other optional rules make the whole armor issue a moot point in my book. I imagine if everybody was munchkined up with armor and stuff it might take a long time. In one of the above combats I mentioned, a group of summoned demon dogs nearly ate the party for breakfast and killed a significant member of the party. In fact, only one player character was left standing in the end. So, lethality is just as real in HERO as in any other game.

 

As far as different "games" played with the same book, there is some validity to that. Turakian Age and Valdorian Age are both "official" methods to create benchmarks for the Fantasy genre. Despite those efforts, the basic mechanics (skill resolution, combat, etc) are still the same. It should only take a few moments to "tool" any character for another setting. And, just to be snarky, it shouldn't be necessary to convert characters between HERO settings if you are the GM and you establish the benchmark for your setting. At best, it makes the different games with one system argument a pointless quibble. Afterall, I wouldn't even let D&D characters from another campaign into mine because of all the stinkin' house rules that develop in the D&D community. Of course, it's been near a decade since I even ran a D&D game.

 

Hope any of that helps.

[Fox1]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

Hit Locations and other optional rules make the whole armor issue a moot point in my book. I imagine if everybody was munchkined up with armor and stuff it might take a long time. In one of the above combats I mentioned, a group of summoned demon dogs nearly ate the party for breakfast and killed a significant member of the party. In fact, only one player character was left standing in the end. So, lethality is just as real in HERO as in any other game.

 

You pick what should be your most lethal example of combat in a Fantasy HERO game and only *one* player dies?

 

And you claim it's just as lethal as any other game seemingly including mine where has seen a number of total party *kills* and has a 40% of generated PC death rate?

 

I suppose from the death characters PoV that may be the case. But as far as a measure of how lethal the system it, it's a joke.

[CourtFool]

I'm considering ignoring...

 

You pick what should be your most lethal example of combat in a Fantasy HERO game and only *one* player dies?

 

You might want to re-read his post.

[Fox1]

Re: I'm considering ignoring...

 

You might want to re-read his post.

 

Here's the line:

 

"In one of the above combats I mentioned, a group of summoned demon dogs nearly ate the party for breakfast and killed a significant member of the party. In fact, only one player character was left standing in the end."

 

Bolding mine.

 

That reads like one death, one conscious PCs, and a bunch of unconscious PCs to me.

 

If it was meant to mean something else, I'd suggest some re-phrasing.

 

 

Edit:

 

I must say that I find it amusing to see people claim a problem doesn't exist- when the actual rulebook in question flatly states that it's a problem for many campaigns and provides additional mook style rules to deal with it.

[MitchellS]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

I'm sure you do, it's the expected reaction from a forum devoted to the the... concept.

 

However anyone thinking of moving to it from other systems should be aware of other opinions.

 

 

1. HERO itself admits a major problem with the presented Armor/Weapon balance. In short, it sucks. Be prepared to deal with unconscious combatants. Nothing like having your Paladin walk around cutting the throats of defeated foes because he's unable to kill them in an actual fight.

 

A possible work around is to use different rules for NPCs and PCs. The book includes a number of different methods that basically come down to copying 'mook' rules from other games. In short, NPCs die from stuff that wouldn't kill a character by the core game rules. For many gamers, this method is completely unacceptable.

 

A another work around suggested by the designers (the original Fantasy Hero designers that is, I haven't brought the new book given the small number of changes and complete lack of interest) is to jack up character combat skill levels and used them to convert to damage. Something around 6 levels+. However this makes the character chose between winning the fight (being able to hit and being able to defend) or not dealing with unconscious foes. You'll have to put limits on the skill levels to prevent this- yet another case of complex builds being required to do what the core system should have already done for you.

 

Another way is to change the rules. Reducing Stun Multiples, etc. At that point you're into redesigning a flawed game. Better to pick a more suitable game in the first place.

 

Another way is to redo all the weapon damage and armor ratings so that it functions right. A fair amount of work, and something that will make most of the published material useless for you.

 

 

 

2. One of the classic fantasy styles is advancing characters from worthless newbies to grand heroes.

 

Frankly Experience and advancement in HERO system is a pain in the behind. I typically run fixed point games as a result. Keeping characters in concept while still having them fit in your world and avoiding balance issues isn't for the faint hearted.

 

Real fantasy rpgs have systems that control all this for you. HERO doesn't. If you have players who don't see eye-to-eye with you as to the style of the game and their place in it, be prepared for saying 'No' a lot and micro-managing every point of XP spent.

 

 

 

 

3. Be ready to do work. And more work. And yet more work.

 

Spells, creatures, etc. All have to be constructed.

 

HERO provides some books on the subject, but I find them to be simple constructions lacking any flair. Rather low point characters can walk through almost their entire beastary without breaking a sweat.

 

Unless you're looking for a seldom played game, you're quickly going to find out that you need to re-write *everything* in order to maintain your specific desired gaming style and challange level.

 

With the exception of GURPS, no other Fantasy game on the market brings anywhere near the work load.

 

 

 

4. You'll have to think about spells differently.

 

You'll find the point build to be counter-productive in a fantasy setting. Most of the time you can get the effect you want with enough points and effort. But unless you alter the rules the Active Point cost will quickly get out of hand.

 

In D&D for example, charm person is a lower level spell than charm monster for the simple reason that it affects fewer potential targets. In HERO they'd have a same active cost, but the real cost would be lower. However Power Pools and Multi-powers don't care about real cost when setting their upper limits nor does a common 'requires skill rolls' limit, those are solely Active Point matters.

 

Thus your charm person and charm monster spells (to gain the same effect vs. equal EGO targets) require the same max. Active Points and the same skill roll. They will also have the same END cost.

 

Working around this requires more complex builds (buying different 'required skill rolls" modifiers on different spells) and even house rules in some cases. Nothing is 'easy', each spell will have to be carefully construct in order to fit into your desire limits. Depending upon your desired style, many just won't work or will have to 'break' the game's groundlevel rules.

 

 

Another issue with spells is that unless you go with a Power Pool, you'll have far fewer spells per character than other games allow. The points to buy hundreds of different spells just aren't there and even if they were, there would be more effective plays to spend them. A look at the official write-ups shows that most characters have access to only a handful spells.

 

Power Pools come with their own problems. I make extensive use of them myself in other genres, but they are a STOP power in HERO for a reason.

 

 

HERO publishes a spell book or two, but I find them boring and uninteresting. Completely lacking in favor.

 

 

 

5. Many have problems with fantasy 'science'.

 

HERO is a very rational design system built upon simple but logical math.

 

As a result many players find its point build construction methods to be at its core a not fantasy like thing. It feels more like science in motion than it does magic.

 

In the same way the poker chips and playing cards can help set a wild west feeling for games like Deadlands, the HERO system can undermine a campaign's fantasy feel.

 

 

 

6. The 2x progression (every 5 points doubles your 'coverted to the real world power') isn't suited for every Superhero setting, it certainly isn't suited for the typical fantasy world.

 

Just look at the Strength chart. Few things in fantasy can lift 100 tons. But that's only a STR of 60.

 

"I attack with my Great Axe and roll 3d6+1 kill with my STR and skill adds...

 

What? That's a damage level equal to the punching power of a 25 ton average STR golem!!???"

 

Be ready to change the progression (causes house rule ripples throughout the game),

 

 

 

This is only a start. I have limited time for this post you see.

 

 

All this is an outgrowth of the fact that HERO was designed for a Superhero setting, not a fantasy one. If you buy into HERO, be aware that you're buying into a game that was designed for an completely different style- and was then shoe-horned into fantasy.

 

 

HERO is a wonderful game system. I use it for every game setting except two.

 

Deadlands and Fantasy.

 

There are times when a purpose driven game design is just plain better, no matter how good a generalist design is.

 

Edit: correct some typo's

So basically Fox1 thinks:

 

1- Weapon combat is broken and sucks.

 

2- The experience system is broken and sucks.

 

3- The spell system sucks.

 

4- The basic design ideas of point-based systems suck.

 

5- Hero is not fantasy-based.

 

6- Hero is not superhero-based.

 

And yet he still plays Hero.

[MitchellS]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

Out of curiosity' date=' if I were to buy Hero Designer, which add ons would be essential for fantasy?[/quote']

I would recommend Monsters, Minions & Marauders and the FH Grimoires first. Those character packs will give you the most useful information, IMO.

[Fox1]

Re: I'm considering Hero...

 

So basically Fox1 things:

 

1- Weapon combat is broken and sucks.

 

2- The experience system is broken and sucks.

 

3- The spell system sucks.

 

4- The basic design ideas of point-based systems suck.

 

5- Hero is not fantasy-based.

 

6- Hero is not superhero-based.

 

And yet he still plays Hero.

 

 

As I said, I don't use it for fantasy games.

 

 

I do for other settings, but there the above issues either don't apply, or are not significant.

 

In order:

 

1- Weapon combat is broken and sucks.

 

While its broken (for my needs, always with the statement "for my needs" please) with respect to heavy armored fantasy combat, it works fine in low effective armor settings and in settings where you don't want to kill anyone due to genre- i.e. Superheroes.

 

So in the HERO campaigns I run, issue #1 does not apply.

 

 

2- The experience system is broken and sucks.

 

For the classic fantasy setting "near child becomes experienced savior of the world" run, HERO is broken for my needs. Too much micro-managing, too uncontrolled.

 

Thus the setting where I use HERO System fall into two types:

 

a. No XP games.

 

b. Games not intended to run that full range of advancement.

 

 

So in the HERO campaigns I run, issue #2 is controlled.

 

 

3- The spell system sucks.

 

I've made a house rule change to Power Pools that allow it to work well enough in non-fantasy settings.

 

So in the HERO campaigns I run, issue #3 is corrected by house rule.

 

 

4- The basic design ideas of point-based systems suck.

 

I've often stated on these boards that the points don't matter. And that's true.

 

I don't play HERO because it's a point system. I play it because I like the game mechanics.

 

So in the HERO campaigns I run, issue #4 is Irrelevant

 

 

5- Hero is not fantasy-based.

 

I don't use it for fantasy. I have a much better system for that.

 

So in the HERO campaigns I run, issue #5 is Irrelevant

 

 

6- Hero is not superhero-based.

 

Not what I stated. I stated the x2 progession isn't suite for all superhero settings.

 

I changed the x2 progression to a different value suited to my setting.

 

So in the HERO campaigns I run, issue #5 is corrected by house rule.