Hero System design considerations

[Chris Goodwin]

In this thread:

 

HERO SYSTEM IS NOT JUST CHAMPIONS.

 

 

 

In theory, as I understand it, Hero System is supposed to work for everything. Consider that the whole knockback question does not even usually apply except in superheroic games. What does it do to your equations when you factor that in?

 

and

 

It is Nucleon's opinion that KA should be reflected as either a cheap and easy way to get a dirty job done, and an efficient way to bust throught things; To raise their cost to high may make 38 Specials and knives too costly for the common thug.

 

The superpowered genre still need death threats, even thought it should be a relatively uncommon occurence.

 

We're using one set of rules to emulate the following conditions:

 

* Superhero games where killing attacks aren't a serious threat. It's been stated somewhere as a rule of superhero physics that the more likely the attack is to kill the target, the less likely it is to hit. Bullets bounce off the Thing; he's tough enough that he doesn't even bother to try to avoid them, while Spider-Man bounces all over the landscape to avoid them, and therefore never gets hit.

 

* Heroic fiction where killing attacks are a threat. Characters get bullet wounds and sword wounds. They need to be patched up. Admittedly, some heroic fiction genres share that sort of superhero outlook on killing attacks, and you can see that reflected in, of all things, D&D's hit point system.

 

We're using a system for these things that has been designed with a highly simulationist element in mind, to the extent that we distinguish between normal attacks and killing attacks; note the fact that the killing attack Powers were designed specifically to represent things like knives, bullets, claws, lightsabers, cutting lasers, etc.

 

I responded to Lucius' posting (or, more specifically, the first line that I quoted above) thusly:

 

Correct' date=' but...and this may be a topic for another thread... it started out that way, and many of the design decisions point to that.[/quote']

 

What I'm specifically thinking of are the existence of the Powers Energy Blast, Force Field, Flight, Missile Deflection, Regeneration, HKA, Danger Sense, Enhanced Senses, Entangle, Teleportation, Ego Attack, Telepathy, Mind Control, Swinging, etc. -- all of which were common powers possessed by characters in the comic books, especially the comic books that were most popular around the time Champions was first created (1981 -- think X-Men, Spider-Man, Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman, essentially the top titles in the Marvel and DC stables) -- along with their relative costs, meant to encourage and allow players to build characters similar to the ones they've seen in those comics.

 

I'll note that first edition Fantasy Hero changed many of the names and point costs, removed some of the Powers, altered descriptions of some and in general was created with some different design considerations in mind (including a default magic system that nevertheless left plenty of room for customization).

 

The idea that the Hero System could be used for anything came about as an artifact of it originally being used to represent a form of fiction in which anything could happen and often did: in one series in one universe the characters might be in space, working with aliens and flying around in starships, and in another series in the same universe the characters might be supermages, and in another they might be travelling to other dimensions or times; some characters carry swords, some cast spells, some use high tech firearms and battlesuits. So we needed one system that could represent starships, modern firearms, swords, magic spells, giant robots, and so forth. The kicker is, those things don't work the same in superhero comic books as they do in fantasy novels, science fiction films, anime, men's adventure fiction, et cetera. Shoot, they're not even the same medium in many cases.

 

I guess what I'm really trying to say is: I've never been comfortable with the "one size fits all" approach that 4th edition (and now 5th) took. And many, many discussions (often heated) I've seen over the years, not just here but on the Champions mailing list and rec.games.frp.super-heroes (and departed hangouts like the Red October BBS and GEnie), reflect this. Shoot, the discussions haven't changed much since 1991 and 1994 and 1997.

[Nucleon]

Yes, but...

 

* Superhero games where killing attacks aren't a serious threat. It's been stated somewhere as a rule of superhero physics that the more likely the attack is to kill the target, the less likely it is to hit. Bullets bounce off the Thing; he's tough enough that he doesn't even bother to try to avoid them, while Spider-Man bounces all over the landscape to avoid them, and therefore never gets hit.

 

Isn't these simply exemples of well-made heroes? If instead of Peter Parker the spider bit Flash, who would confront the bullets instead of dodging them, maybe we wouldn't have heard of Spiderman as well.

 

What I'm specifically thinking of are the existence of the Powers Energy Blast, Force Field, Flight, Missile Deflection, Regeneration, HKA, Danger Sense, Enhanced Senses, Entangle, Teleportation, Ego Attack, Telepathy, Mind Control, Swinging, etc. -- all of which were common powers possessed by characters in the comic books, especially the comic books that were most popular around the time Champions was first created (1981 -- think X-Men, Spider-Man, Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman, essentially the top titles in the Marvel and DC stables) -- along with their relative costs, meant to encourage and allow players to build characters similar to the ones they've seen in those comics.

 

(...) The idea that the Hero System could be used for anything came about as an artifact of it originally being used to represent a form of fiction in which anything could happen and often did: in one series in one universe the characters might be in space, working with aliens and flying around in starships, and in another series in the same universe the characters might be supermages, and in another they might be travelling to other dimensions or times; some characters carry swords, some cast spells, some use high tech firearms and battlesuits. So we needed one system that could represent starships, modern firearms, swords, magic spells, giant robots, and so forth. The kicker is, those things don't work the same in superhero comic books as they do in fantasy novels, science fiction films, anime, men's adventure fiction, et cetera. Shoot, they're not even the same medium in many cases.

 

Much true.

 

However, as a GM, it is Nucleon's duty to "fix" those rules who interferes with His personal gaming style, or genre. And He happens to find out that many GMs have experienced the same observations as He did.

 

So, at this point, why not share our solutions? Nucleon is all for houserules.

 

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Yes, but...

 

Isn't these simply exemples of well-made heroes? If instead of Peter Parker the spider bit Flash, who would confront the bullets instead of dodging them, maybe we wouldn't have heard of Spiderman as well.

 

Flash Thompson, you mean? He'd have pretty much the same powers as Peter, probably, except a bigger physique. So he'd be dodging them as easily as Peter. (Unless you're talking about a Marvel What If, in which he did get bitten; I can't say there.) But anyway, my point is that, unless the story calls for the character to get killed, he won't get hit by an attack capable of killing him (though he will get hit by plenty capable of trashing him or otherwise putting him where the author needs him to be).

 

However, as a GM, it is Nucleon's duty to "fix" those rules who interferes with His personal gaming style, or genre. And He happens to find out that many GMs have experienced the same observations as He did.

 

I just think that it would be nicer to not have to fix the rules in the first place. That aside, I have a 37KB HTML file of my own "fixes" (many of which, to be honest, I haven't put to the "does it pay for itself?" test).

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

This is an offshoot of a a variety of "design" discussions that we've engaged in here on these boards and in other groups. There are as many interpretations of design as their are players... though they can be grouped in a variety of different ways.

 

I firmly believe that the 4th Edition (successful, IMO) and 5th Edition (not so, IMO) interpretations of "HERO CAN DO ANYTHING" are, in some ways, misinterpretations of this concept.

 

As you so well point out, Chris. Likely the real meaning of "HERO CAN DO ANYTHING" was meant to say was "CHAMPIONS CAN DO ALL THE DIFFERENT WILD STUFF YOU SEE IN COMICS" The fact that the system could be changed to also reflect many other action/adventure genres spawned Fantasy Hero, Danger International, etc. But as you point out... THOSE WERE DIFFERENT GAMES! A common beginning point... but not really the same system. Hero 4th attempted to say "There is a common system behind all these games," which has some truth to it... but 4th succeeded by keeping the main book as "Champions" and recognizing that all other genres were modifications AWAY from the core intent of the original build.

 

Hero 5th took this much farther... trying to create a truly generic "toolkit" approach... a system that exists pure and separate from the genre/games it creates. That is where it breaks. Such a pure concepts doesn't/can't exist, IMO... thus so many more arguments and issues come up about "what is the right/pure/base Hero way to do X" when that question is based on a lot of false assumptions... the primary one being that there is a base/pure/right Hero way.

 

More to say on this later... but I gotta run. Good conversation.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Take 10 tool boxes filled with exactly the same tools and give them to 10 different craftsmen and turn them loose to build a residence. The effects would be very similar to giving 10 GMs 5er and turning them loose to build a campaign.

[lrojas]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

i dont get it, what is the OP trying to say actually? i am infering that he is complainign about a perceived/real lack in the hero system. with that in mind, i have to ask, can you give a specifick example? i think the hero system ( 5th Edition Specially ) lends itself quiet graciously to be a generic system. True be told, the "genre" books do a wonderfull job of explaining the nuances of the diferent aspects of the flavours and styles of play in the diferent genres you can make yoru stories in. The campaign books could provide a more streamlined more concise enviroment ( instead of being an extention of the genre book ), they could perhaps take the toolkit philosophy a bit further and provide the whole setting fleshed out instead of letting it be open and up for player GM/Interpretation.

 

As am example, in Turakian age, instead of selling the rules all over again they should have put a simpler way of playing, something that could ease the players to the system. I mean, why put rules to build weapons instead of puttiong the weapons available in the world already stated. Magic? put the spells and magic systems in place and make it part of the game book ( after all this is a setting book not a genre book )..

 

*sigh* i ranted..

 

ok that was my 1 piece of nickel.

 

:s i could stand to be more coherent

[lrojas]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

cant beat the Killer! Killer is fast

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Take 10 tool boxes filled with exactly the same tools and give them to 10 different craftsmen and turn them loose to build a residence. The effects would be very similar to giving 10 GMs 5er and turning them loose to build a campaign.

 

No argument there. I can only speak for myself (and maybe what Chris is saying) is that when you are sold these tools you are told that they are effective to build "anything."

 

Then when you start working with the tools, you start to realize that "anything" really isn't the case. While clearly adapted from a vehicle machine shop, the tools are excellent for building various cars. In fact, they build certain models of cars really well... others somewhat less so. You can build other non-car machines with them, but sometimes you have to cobble together pieces and clearly there are some gaps... and the farther you get from building a car, the less effective the tools are. They don't really build "anything" but they can build "any car and a lot of other machines" but they weren't billed that way.

 

Just playing off a metaphor I started a long time ago. Hero System is the machine shop/tools and the games like Champions Universe and Turakian Age are the cars. Some of these cars "drive" better than others, because they are closer to the original intention of the tools.

 

And with that, I'm hopping in my car and heading home.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Yes, but...

 

But anyway' date=' my point is that, unless the story calls for the character to get killed, he won't get hit by an attack capable of killing him (though he will get hit by plenty capable of trashing him or otherwise putting him where the author needs him to be).[/quote']

That is of course, the very soul of the difference between fiction and an RPG. One is controlled by authorial decree (and rightly so), the other is controlled by an agreed-upon system of rules (and rightly so).

 

Or is that your point? Actually, I'm having trouble boiling down the post to get at the central question. Could you write it in a single sentence?

 

Keith "Parse-challenged" Curtis

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Yes, but...

 

Or is that your point? Actually' date=' I'm having trouble boiling down the post to get at the central question. Could you write it in a single sentence?[/quote']

 

Good question, and I was afraid I hadn't gotten to it in my initial posting. Sorry, this isn't a single sentence, but....

 

Okay, my point. Let's see. The Hero System started out as superhero roleplaying, and has ended up as a sort of one size fits all, one true way universal system that hasn't evolved far from its superhero roots, despite having effectively branched out in the past (if you want to boil it down to a single sentence, this is it). Design features that existed previously to improve applicability to other genres have fallen by the wayside and vanished as time has passed and the system has been through new editions. Some examples were the robot building system from Robot Warriors, the base magic system from Fantasy Hero first edition, the Size stat for weapons in Danger International, the psychic powers from Justice, Inc. They worked differently, and the differences gave an entirely different mechanical feel; they were all created from the get-go with different assumptions in mind. JI psychic abilities had a commonality in the way they worked that was different from Champions mental powers. FH spells had, in effect, certain limitations built into them by default, and the costs were different, and there were no frameworks. Sure, you can build many of these things using the 5th edition Powers, but to me they've always seemed like.... like using superpowers to represent magic spells, or robot weapons, or pulp era psychic abilities. It's like you've still got the assumptions built-in for Champions superpowers; for instance, any Power that costs END is automatically visible to three Sense Groups by default. You have a whole class of powers (Mental Powers) that work and function in the style of comic book superhero mentalists. Why not have a different list of powers for, for instance, a modern day secret psionics campaign a la Scanners or Firestarter or Carrie with different assumptions built into them, different costs, etc.?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

On the contrary; the more basic the tool the more general its usage, the more specific the tool the more effective it is when it is used for its specific purpose. The trick is using the tools when it is constructive and they lend value, and realizing when you need to use the tools to make a new tool or use the tools in unusual combinations to get what you want done done.

 

 

Games are built by effort and creativity. The greater the game master, the more he contributes in creativity, the less he demands in effort.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Killer Shrike hits the bullseye.

 

I understand where you are coming from Chris, but you are looking at Hero the wrong way. DOJ has merely provided for us the basic materials we need to contruct our games...the toolkit and the materials. How we use them and what we build with them is completely up to us.

 

Even the toolkit is not set in stone. The tools themselves can be customized to the users needs for the job at hand.

 

For example: if you wanted to run a fantasy oriented campaign where weapons affected the order of initiative, you can add initiative bonuses and penalties to the weapons to get the feel of a fast dagger or rapier vs a slow Greatsword or Battleaxe. If you wanted a magic system where characters had to sacrifice lifeforce to perform spells you can easily do so. Merely work it around Hero's mechanics. Not Heros powers construction system, but its mechanics. No one has to pay for it because its a campaign standard. If you want to randomize initiative, you can easily add any one of numerous methods many have experimented with around these parts. Its completely up to you. Hero 5th simply provides you with the basic mechanics which dictate success/failure in any given endeavor. Adjust them as you see fit.

 

I've always done that and I was always amazed by how many people absolutely refused to do anything outside the bounds of Hero's rules. They aren't rules in the literal sense of the word...they are mechanics. Monkey around with them as you see fit...they became yours the minute you purchased the book.

 

Don't agonize over it. If you want to use the old Robot Warriors method of designing mecha, do so! It still fits in quite well with Hero's basic mechanics.

 

You want the damage of high-tech weapons to be fixed, do it! (an easy fix. Simply use Standard Effect rules!) No one says that damage in Hero has to be random.

 

You wanna get rid of the Stun Lotto, do it!

 

Thats one reason I like Hero over every other game system out there. The possibilities are literally endless. I have yet to see a writeup that couldn't be done in Hero, even if some of the methods go beyond the bounds of Hero's core rules (and it is extremely rare when that is necessary). Everything is negotiable.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I've always done that and I was always amazed by how many people absolutely refused to do anything outside the bounds of Hero's rules.

 

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It's one true way-ism. I've got theories as to why, but I'm seeing a combination of HeroDesigner setting the rules in stone and Steve being available to answer questions. Not that Steve promotes one true way; in fact, from what I've seen, he goes out of his way to avoid it. But people ask questions for the official answer, then run with it as if it were gospel.

 

If Hero is not a tax return, neither is it a bible (despite the size and general appearance of the book).

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It's one true way-ism. I've got theories as to why, but I'm seeing a combination of HeroDesigner setting the rules in stone and Steve being available to answer questions. Not that Steve promotes one true way; in fact, from what I've seen, he goes out of his way to avoid it. But people ask questions for the official answer, then run with it as if it were gospel.

 

If Hero is not a tax return, neither is it a bible (despite the size and general appearance of the book).

Who says it is?

 

What NuSoard is saying is that there is no "one true way" -- extemporize as you see fit.

 

What Im saying is that your ability to do more things with the system will grow with your mastery of the system and comfort level as a GM. Find your own way and other people can roll it up and shove it if they don't like it -- its your game. The important thing is that you understand where you are going off the reservation and what you hope to accomplish by doing so.

[Black Rose]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

To give an example (and hopefully not sound like too much of a KS suckup) if you have a strong vision for your game world, you need to put forth the effort to make that world, and if you look at KS's game worlds, he does that... a lot. I mean a whole lot. He has specific magic systems that don't simply say "Okay, 60 Active Points max, no Reduced END, -1 minimum from Concentration, Extra Time, and Side Effects, and Gestures and Incantations mandatory." Which on it's own would be a reasonable magic system, but he takes it a lot further.

 

If you want to run a Scanners/Firestarter/Carrie game (and I'd love to play in that, BTW) and you want powers to be costed a certain way, do it. You might want to try it out for a couple sessions, see if you need to tweak it, but that makes sense to me. Maybe you feel the need to have specific Talents before you allow the purchase of certain Powers at reduced cost, or you can only buy some Powers with a superior build if you already have certain other Powers, or.... Well, you get the idea.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

See' date=' this is exactly what I'm talking about. It's one true way-ism. I've got theories as to why, but I'm seeing a combination of HeroDesigner setting the rules in stone and Steve being available to answer questions. Not that Steve promotes one true way; in fact, from what I've seen, he goes out of his way to avoid it. But people ask questions for the official answer, then run with it as if it were gospel. [/quote']

 

I know where you are coming from Chris. I've been "Fighting the good fight" for years on these boards. Back in the 4th edition days when people would lament the fact that Heroic characters were limited to Speed 4 and couldn't act as fast as their fictional counterparts who were expert swordsmen and martial artists and I suggested using a variation of the Sweep rules to allow multiple attacks against a single opponent, I was practically cyber-lynched for it. The same thing for suggesting using Frameworks for spells in Fantasy Hero. ("But the Fantasy Hero books doesn't allow it!" Bugger that!) Not to mention my post about powers as superskills in a Heroic level game ("But you aren't supposed to have powers in a Heroic level game unless you're a mage!") Just face it Chris...people are sheep. They want someone or something (in this case a book) to tell them what to do and how to do it. The alternative is confusion and chaos. At least to the mind of the sheep.

 

My suggestion. Ignore all the naysayers and do what you want with the system. Continue to bring your intersting suggestions and writeups to the board, because there are indeed still some free-thinkers left. They'll be more than happy to pass ideas back and forth.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I would also suggest you stop using designer. (if you are indeed using it) Seems kinda like the lazy approach to me.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

I've been playing Hero System since about the begining of 4th edition. I don't have any background in what the various rules were before then. I do believe in the "one true way" of the Hero System, but define that way as being varied and maluable. It's a fluid system that fits whatever container you place it in and filters though whatever genre filter you put it through. It's Play-Dough. It's an Erector Set. It's a home chemistry kit. You don't have to use all the parts, colors and molds that come with it.

 

That being said, I can see why so many people see the rules as being a superhero game that can be adapted to other genres. Many people see d20 in a similar way in regards to the fantasy genre, because it had its roots in a fantasy genre. Like d20 (and before d20, and better than d20), it has expanded and become a true toolkit system. That doesn't seem to stop the people who remember 1st edition from thinking (with some fondness I'm sure) of Champions whenever they look at the rules. I just think they are wrong.

 

It's like having a baby, and watching him or her grow up to an adult. An adult he or she might be, capable of anything, but a child nonetheless in the eyes of the parents (and likely all who watched him or her grow up).

[keithcurtis]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Besides echoing the general sentiments of my fellow system-buiilders out there, I'd like to point out that HD is extremely customizable. I have a template that adds three non-standard figured stats and altered costs on STR, as well as a few other tweaks such as specialized skill lists or altered skill consts. It takes more work to vary from vanilla, but that's true of the ruleset in general.

 

Back to the main question, all Hero 4 & 5 have done is to codify a way in which you could achieve the same effect as the specialized rules in RW or DI, JI, FH1, etc. You can hide the costs if it troubles you by taking the final construct and giving it a simple name and cost, like talents.

Look at Turakian Age: Divide all spell costs by 3. Period. No framework, no limitations, no nothing. To make it work, divide by three. Nothing in 5ER supports that. But it works for the genre. Modify, Bend or Completely Break rules that don't serve the purpose.

 

Keith "Tinkerer" Curtis

[RDU Neil]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

What bugs me is the falacy of the "generic toolkit" when this is simply not a possibility. You don't use Hero to build a D20 game... or if you do, you are using a hammer to create an oil painting. You can do it, but it is difficult and moves so far away from the expectations of what a hammer was intended that you might as well be free form and not be using any specific tool.

 

1) There is a point at which you have modified, bent or broken the rules so much that you aren't playing Hero any more. That point is different for everybody. EX: I despise the SPD chart. Tossed it years ago, and would never go back. To my mind, my games would be easily recognized as Hero/Champions... but others would say I'm not playing Hero any more.

 

2) There is no such thing as a generic tool. If you use a hammer, you are by default, creating something that can be created with a hammer. Your tools limit your creation, even if that limit is very broad. To this point... whether you call it an EB, or you think of it as 1d6 damage per five points, or you try to be extremely vague and say x game value for y points... these structures/concepts drive a certain kind of game play. The farther you get from these structures, somewhere along the way you cross the line from "building a game with Hero" to "building a game where I've taken some ideas from Hero" which is very different.

 

(As Chris notes, and I agree, the Hero system doesn't feel like "magic" when it is used in Fantasy Hero in many cases... but if you start to diverge extremely from the 1d6 per 5 pts, which to my mind creates that superhero feel... are you still playing Hero?)

 

On my end, I've added all kinds of mechanics that are not Hero inspired at all to my games, to fill in the places where I think the Hero System does not provide any decent functionality. (Luck Chits as example.) In many other places, I've reinterpreted Hero stats to provide a similar function with a different mechanic. (END & SPD as example.) And in most places, I just play as is. The point of most of these conversations (and I use that term loosely) is that a change one person is comfortable with, another is not. Or a change for one game/genre is not applicable to another, and it requires a lot of in depth discussion and testing to determine whether a change is specific or generic in use.

 

Finally... we have to look at the precedent of how Hero is published. All the "games" created still say "You have to have the 5ER book to get the full rules." and this does create a mindset of "5ER is the final arbiter of the rules."

 

This is a fine message... important as a marketing strategy... but it is a very different message from "Built originally from concepts in 5ER but self contained and independent of generic Hero rules."

 

If you are going to do this... you are basically creating your own game... so why bother with Hero at all. Just make up your own sh1t!

 

A system exists to provide common language for arbitrating game decisions. If you are going to reference 5ER (or whatever rule version you use) as that common language... then as written, that book has very strong, structural design elements that drive a certain style of play... a style of play that is not all that different than it's origins as a superhero game. Thus all games using 5ER as reference will have that design element rub off to some extent. If you start to move far away (to get another "feel" through new and different designs) so much so that in many cases you can't use 5ER for common reference... then are you still playing a Hero game?

 

These are not easy questions to answer... in fact I don't think there is an answer, but calling people sheep and preening about your hyper-retentive gaming obsessiveness, and calling a complete overhaul/new game creation "tinkering" doesn't serve anybody anything worth while.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Take 10 tool boxes filled with exactly the same tools and give them to 10 different craftsmen and turn them loose to build a residence. The effects would be very similar to giving 10 GMs 5er and turning them loose to build a campaign.

Dag nabbitt...

 

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Killer Shrike again."

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Yes, but...

 

The Hero System started out as superhero roleplaying' date=' and has ended up as a sort of one size fits all, one true way universal system that hasn't evolved far from its superhero roots...[/quote']Well... yeah.

 

I don't think anyone knowledgeable would argue that even the best "universal" RPG system simulates any particular genre as well as the best genre-specific RPG's simulate their genres. But that's not the appeal of a universal system. The appeal is portability and ease-of-transition between genres (only having to learn a single rule set, ease of crossing characters over, etc.)

 

Imagine an excellent fantasy RPG as a screwdriver, an excellent superhero RPG as a pair of pliers, an excellent sci-fi RPG as a knife, etc.

 

The HERO System is a Leatherman multi-tool.

 

Is it as good a screwdriver as a high-quality stand-alone screwdriver? No. Is it as good a pair of pliers as a high-quality stand-alone pair of pliers? No. Is it as good a knife as a high-quality stand-alone knife? No.

 

But it's one tool to buy and carry around, not a bunch of separate tools. And -- as a high-quality multi-tool itself -- it is better than low-quality stand-alone tools.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

See' date=' this is exactly what I'm talking about. It's one true way-ism. I've got theories as to why, but I'm seeing a combination of HeroDesigner setting the rules in stone and Steve being available to answer questions. Not that Steve promotes one true way; in fact, from what I've seen, he goes out of his way to avoid it. But people ask questions for the official answer, then run with it as if it were gospel.[/quote']Not to imply that you're not entitled to your opinion Chris, because certainly you are, but I think you may be making too much of these two factors.

 

I think Hero Designer tows the line on the rules because -- as the official HERO System chargen -- it has an obligation to do so. You can customize it a fair amount without digging under the hood, and quite a bit more if you're willing to dig. But at its surface, it needs to "enforce" the vanilla by-the-book rules because that's part of its purpose (to help check that characters are "legal").

 

As far as Steve's rulings are concerned, remember that a lot of the time, the whole reason people are coming to Steve in the first place is that their group cannot agree amongst themselves how a rule should be applied, but they're willing to abide by Steve's ruling as a sort of "compromise." Also, when someone posts a rules question or a "how should I build this" on the boards, there's kind of an unspoken assumption (since we're not all playing in the same campaign, and therefore not all using the same house rules) that they're really asking, "how do I build this within the rules." So people's first instinct is try and stick to the rules if possible. Not because they're wedded to them, or believe there's a One True Way... but because the book rules are the "lingua franca"... the common ground that we're all proceeding from.

[Lucius]

Hero System design considerations

 

Exactly HOW does a "1d6/5 pts" mechanic "create a superhero feel?"

I'm afraid that confuses me.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says the word of the day is ___________

[Mentor]

Re: Hero System design considerations

 

Naturally, all I can add is my personal experience. My first gaming experiene with Hero was Champions, but it was the heroic genre games which made me a believer.

 

Unlike superheroes, bullets and blades really ruin a "normal's" day. Overwhelming PRE is truley overwhelming. SPD over 4 is blazing fast.