Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

[Lucius]

Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

*shudders

 

actually, that's a wonderful idea. unfortunately it would require a complete rewrite of the Herosphere code. but it is something to consider.

 

IT's also an idea that seems to assume everyone's using Herosphere. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm still using paper and pencil and dice.

 

LA

p

[DreadDomain]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

To me' date=' the difference is that GURPS has more exceptional conditions (powers working in different ways), nuances (such as skills relationships/influences), and different "handling rules," (differing types of damage and treatment of damage per SFX-bases) lacking as much consistency as HERO, even if in some instances it's technically more realistic.[/quote']

 

Well then me may just have to agree. What you describe there, I see as more detailed not more complex but otherwise, we are saying the same thing.

[Mentor]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Count me in on the "sufficient complexity" score in general, but some of the complexity is based on the complex nature of the actions being simulated in the first place. Most importantly, you are trying to build a super lightning gal, or Dwarven warrior, or Space ranger or Hard bitten 1930s detective and not the most efficiently purchased damage producing set of powers and skills in the game, and any complexity should address creating the PC with all their abilities and flaws rather than just the advantages.

 

On the cheap STR and HtoH damage, the inherent balance is that a ranged attacker is, well,... attacking at range vs. a grappler still has the Brick ducking attacks from an Energy Projector while soliliquizing, "Just wait and see what a better and more efficient damage construction I do when I get my hands on you." The inherent distance advantage calculations themselves are complex enough that overall I think the Hero approach of Frameworks is pretty elegant. There are still some rough spots in the rules that could use some tweaking, but I probably would not consider that complexity increase.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

I think this is a meaningless question.

 

Taken as a whole the system could stand to be streamlined / made more consistent. However that's not to say that the system is too complex or that it isnt complex enough.

 

There are areas of the rules that are well or even over covered, and there are other areas of the rules that could use a little extra love, and there are areas of the system that need to be shored up quite a bit, and there are areas that the system just doesnt cover at all (or does so only via hacks and kludges). None of which resolves to a question of complexity.

 

Ultimately, the HERO System is composed of many sub-components which themselvs may have sub-components, and each sub-component must be considered individually for complexity or lack of complexity, needful or not.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

It all boils down to Str being 'too cheap' and thus additional rules to give added utility to HAs and Martial Arts were needed to keep them semi-competitive with Str.

 

After all, what would you rather have, 3d6 HA for 10 pts, or +15 Str and sell back 5 Stun for the same cost? Thus the reason for the generous rules of adding Str to Advantaged HAs.

Agreed. There are a number of inconsistencies that all trace back to "STR is too cheap".

[Rapier]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

You've been spying on me haven't you?

 

[Black Rose]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

I think this is a meaningless question.

 

Taken as a whole the system could stand to be streamlined / made more consistent. However that's not to say that the system is too complex or that it isnt complex enough.

 

There are areas of the rules that are well or even over covered, and there are other areas of the rules that could use a little extra love, and there are areas of the system that need to be shored up quite a bit, and there are areas that the system just doesnt cover at all (or does so only via hacks and kludges). None of which resolves to a question of complexity.

 

Ultimately, the HERO System is composed of many sub-components which themselvs may have sub-components, and each sub-component must be considered individually for complexity or lack of complexity, needful or not.

Absolutely agreed. What I think 6th needs - since we'd have to put this off to a new edition anyway - is for all of those bits to be made "elegant". You are actually damn good at this, KS, and I was just thinking that you would be an excellent collaborator on such a project.

 

I think each and every component should be tightened up, and all of the points where things start to get kludgy - STR adding to Advantaged MA Maneuvers, up next on Jerry Springer! - need to be shaken out and clarified. Like you said, there are a lot of components that work fine as is, and those won't need all that much work, but the spots that keep getting stumbled over, or having to be worked around, those need help.

 

And for my personal hobby-horse: there needs to be a deeper discussion on setting up power constructs for games. Full on superhero games are about the only setting that allows everything in the Powers section. We need to show how you-the-GM can take the Powers list and pick and choose for your campaign. I still use the sheet from my copy of 4th's Fantasy Hero; it works great for such things, but I'd still love a better one. Just a way to let the players (if they have such free reign in choosing Powers) know what's allowed, denied, and assumed. House Rules are great for such thing; I'm just thinking of a somewhat more structured document.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Hmm...I've thought about doing a "Shrike" version of HERO, but I don't think I could post it without impinging on DOJ's rights, so Ive never done it.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

I wasn't aware that the Hero System was too complex (well, until someone mentioned the adding damage rules), so I figure it has room to grow.

 

Of course, it can grow plenty without getting any complex too. So long as anything new just goes with the flow of what's already there, no added complexity. Of course, with Hero the beautiful thing is that any given player can make things as simlple or as complex they wish, so whether or not Hero is too complex or not complex enough is more than moot.

 

The cost of STR is not just perfect, it is the cornerstone upon which the cost of all other Powers and Characteristics is based. How can it be wrong?

[Agent X]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

I think one of the things that has added complexity is trying to make regeneration into an aid and the like. Sometimes special powers that are fairly narrowly defined increase playability rather than decrease it.

 

6th Edition should probably consider this and more attention to playability rather than one perspective on rules "consistency" should be the standard.

 

That I can build virtually anything with HERO with advantages and limitations doesn't mean that my goal is to have a long character sheet. For common power concepts there isn't any real reason to avoid having a special power - Instant Change, Regeneration, Damage Shield w/o the convolutions.

[Intrope]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

I'm of the opinion that HERO's about as complex as it needs to be, but it isn't as...efficiently complex as it could be. The 'adding damage' thing is a good example of this; it's very complex, but how much does it really add to the system?

 

For me, though, the biggest area where a re-work would improve the efficiecy of the complexity would be to strip out all special effects built into the mechanics.

 

By which I mean things like having several different defense powers (MD, PowD, several powers that grant PD or ED) that are really different special effects. Essentially, the system itself should not divide things into special effect categories; instead, the genre of the campaign should define the special effects and the relative value of them (in addition to saying what kinds of defenses you can buy).

 

For example, take a supers game. In this kind of game, their are lots of physical and energy attacks, so having defenses against one or the other is about equally effecient, and buying defense v. just physical should cost the same as v. just energy. Moreover, it's legal to buy defense against 'energy' as a general catagory.

 

OTOH, a modern semi-realistic game would probably set Energy as being less valuable than physical, since it's much less common in real-world type situations. You'd probably also have to buy specific defenses against individual types of energy (like say an electrical attack) rather than a blanket energy defense (something that's useful against electrical attacks probably won't help againt fire, for instance). In a similar vein, you might have to buy separate defenses for bullets v. hand weapons (although a single object might have both; Kevlar's primarily about bullets, but it does give some protection from being beaten with a club.

[atlascott]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

No, there could easily be more complexity added, which might sell more books.

 

For example, alot of people do not like the vehicle building rules. Why not make vehicle building rules more complex, and unlike anything else in the system? Players and GM buy games because of the rules, the more, the better, the more complex, the better. Eliminate artwork altogether, because everyone knows it is just fluff where more rules could be. The more complex vehicle rules would make gamers happier because they would be noew, different, and voluminous.

 

More rules. And, more optional rules. For example, for the initiative issue--do standard d6 roll, or go with DEX order, or devise about 30 different ways to do it. That's what gamers want, not a simple, elegant, sensical way to do it--rather, a complex, malleable, inconsistent way. CHOICES, not hard and fast rules. A toolkit.

 

Also, there should be a separate Characteristics book, Skills book, Powers book, Combat book, etc. That would address the book size criticisms. Gamers on a low budget could buy what they could afford, when they could afford it. Instead on one big book, sell about 5 $20 rule books as the core, with another dozen adding options and more rules. Appearance or source material doesnt sell a game, the RULES do.

[hancock.tom]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

HERO is plenty complex, but i'll echo the desires of others to streamline some of the rules. Keep the complexity, but streamline it and make it elegant. The damage adding rules would be much better if they were more streamlined, and the same thing goes for a lot of other things in HERO.

[Zephrosyne]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Well, I for one just hope that there isn't a 6th edition for a very, very long time. LOL.

[Warp9]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Obviously Complexity VS Simplicity is one of the major trade off factors in a game.

 

However, it is also true that many games have more complexity than necessary.

 

IMO HERO is pretty good about its complexity, although I do not believe that it is perfect. So I do think that looking to streamline the rules is always a good idea.

 

Also I would be willing to see more complexity if this addition resulted in extra options, for example, the ability for a character to fly Mach 3 in combat.

[zornwil]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Obviously Complexity VS Simplicity is one of the major trade off factors in a game.

 

However, it is also true that many games have more complexity than necessary.

 

IMO HERO is pretty good about its complexity, although I do not believe that it is perfect. So I do think that looking to streamline the rules is always a good idea.

 

Also I would be willing to see more complexity if this addition resulted in extra options, for example, the ability for a character to fly Mach 3 in combat.

That's an interesting general statement, "many games have more complexity than necessary" I would tend to believe that's true. I think designers, by virtue of what they do, get too wedded to "cool" things they really like, and we don't have a wealth of system editing and game design heritage to tighten that up. It's developing, and much of it is nothing more than applying the lessons of general art. But it's definitely true that people traditionally haven't taken extreme care to end up with systems that include only what they need and need only what they include. And that's a painful process to a designer, to shed things he's proud of that aren't absolutely necessary.

 

I think in general, if a feature in a game isn't used in playtesting (or whatever process one uses, Jared Sorenson doesn't even playtest, but I think we can relegate that to the extremely unusual case), the feature either needs to be thrown out entirely or at least substantially reworked until it is really part of the game.

 

I think in general that game designers don't spend enough time - even though for good reasons (time, accessibility) - determining how their games, as written, are really used by play groups. As a result, we have lots of "exception" rules that often are meaningless - they could just as easily be solved by the play group and don't impact the actual reason the system exists, meaning these exception conditions, however they are handled, add nothing to the intended play experience.

 

Unless of course the intended play experience isn't so much play experience as all but rather a theoretical, academic issue. In which case that's great, and i support it as a concept, but then it should really be placed outside the system into an optional realm or even in an entirely different text than the rulebook entirely.

 

Ultimately, if a mechanic or section of the rules are hand-waved or glossed over most of the time, it simply isn't working and should be eliminated or at least replaced. It's not doing anyone any good.

[BoneDaddy]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

I'm going to commit a minor board heresy by pointing out that it's ONLY A GAME. More rules is not necessarily better if it means that a twelve second combat encounter takes more than an hour to figure out. More rules would only serve to decrease playability for the minor (near non-existant) benefit of more accurately modeling the physics of a flying invisible man who shoots lasers out of his eyes (see how silly that sounds? Accurately modeling fantasy is an odd thing to do in the first place).

 

Lets take two examples from other game systems to show what the hell I mean. First, Shadowrun, an old fave of mine with which I am pretty familiar. Oodles and oddles of d6 are rolled. Metric buttloads of d6, in some cases. Sixes are re-rolled ad infinitum. The oppo is reduced to a sort of runny curry on the sidewalk. Low complexity, high playability, limited (lets call it streamlined, it sounds better) realism. Combat is fast and furious.

 

Next, consider everybody's favorite whipping boy, AD&D 2.0, with all the trimmings. Speed factors, weapon size (important when trying to use a broadaxe in a tunnel), armor type, damage type (crushing piercing or slashing), armor class, hit dice, THAC0, reaction bonuses, morale checks, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. Hours pass. Blows are traded back and forth at a rate of one swing per minute. Limited realism, overburdened complexity, and eventually the good guys mug the bad guys and loot the bodies. Combat takes a buttload of time and consultation of thousands of tables.

 

The point is, realism isn't important. Having a good time is important. If realism was the whole point, you could go wash the dishes and take out the trash like your wife wants you to back in the real world. If more rules doesn't mean more fun, more rules is bad.

[Warp9]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

That's an interesting general statement, "many games have more complexity than necessary" I would tend to believe that's true. I think designers, by virtue of what they do, get too wedded to "cool" things they really like, and we don't have a wealth of system editing and game design heritage to tighten that up. It's developing, and much of it is nothing more than applying the lessons of general art. But it's definitely true that people traditionally haven't taken extreme care to end up with systems that include only what they need and need only what they include. And that's a painful process to a designer, to shed things he's proud of that aren't absolutely necessary.

 

I think in general, if a feature in a game isn't used in playtesting (or whatever process one uses, Jared Sorenson doesn't even playtest, but I think we can relegate that to the extremely unusual case), the feature either needs to be thrown out entirely or at least substantially reworked until it is really part of the game.

 

I think in general that game designers don't spend enough time - even though for good reasons (time, accessibility) - determining how their games, as written, are really used by play groups. As a result, we have lots of "exception" rules that often are meaningless - they could just as easily be solved by the play group and don't impact the actual reason the system exists, meaning these exception conditions, however they are handled, add nothing to the intended play experience.

 

Unless of course the intended play experience isn't so much play experience as all but rather a theoretical, academic issue. In which case that's great, and i support it as a concept, but then it should really be placed outside the system into an optional realm or even in an entirely different text than the rulebook entirely.

 

Ultimately, if a mechanic or section of the rules are hand-waved or glossed over most of the time, it simply isn't working and should be eliminated or at least replaced. It's not doing anyone any good.

Those are some good points! That is a bit different than what I actually had in mind, but it is something for me to think about.

 

My initial concept of a game "which is more complex than it needs to be" would perhaps be exemplified by RIFTS.

 

In RIFTS, rather than having a more simple exponential scale, instead uses multiple linear scales.

 

In RIFTS you can have many different types of STR. A character might have any one of the following:

14 Normal STR,

45 Extraordinary STR,

38 Robotic STR,

28 Supernatural STR,

 

There is a different chart and different Rules for each type of STR, there are also different types of damage in RIFTS.

 

Which is stronger, a 23 Supernatural STR , or an 85 Robotic STR?

 

IMO RIFTS is an over-complex system, because even with all this extra complexity the system is still very limited in what it can easily represent. For example it can not easily handle a planet busting weapon (unlike the HERO system which can handle an attack of such magnitude very easily). An exponential system only needs one type of STR to cover a much greater range of ability.

 

But it then occured to me that some people may feel much differently. Some people feel that having to deal with the mathematics of an exponential system is more complex than dealing with several linear systems.

 

 

Upon reflection it seems like there are perhaps different kinds of complexity.

 

A game might be called complex due to the sheer volume of rules it has. This would probably be the most obvious kind of complexity.

 

A game might be called complex if it requires some specific background (possibly mathematical) to play it.

 

A game might be called complex if it requires learning a great deal of information/terminology in order to begin to play it. This concept could also be thought of as complexity that the Player has to deal with, as opposed to complexity for the GM.

 

I've actually heard all of these accusations of complexity used in reference to the HERO system.

 

Each of them can be dealt with differently.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

The point is' date=' realism isn't important. Having a good time is important. If realism was the whole point, you could go wash the dishes and take out the trash like your wife wants you to back in the real world.[/quote']

 

You know I get really tired of seeing people say things like this, it is about a dumb as people who tell paint ballers to join the army if they want to shoot at people (they get shot at with PAINT BALLS, not BULLETS). The fact is realism (or at least something approaching realism) is important to some people, sure if you play supers or a similar genre that is well outside of the real world having a fairly good simulation of the real world doesn't matter much, but if you are playing a genre set in the real world it is important, there are dozens of games I've played in over the years where the group (not just me) gave up on it because of the disregard for what we knew as real. I do agree on the good time part though, if your not having fun, then why are you playing, however lack of realism can easily result in no fun, its just not important to you. Sure Married guy working two jobs and doing the honey do list probably wouldn't be a big seller, but you know there are some real people on this planet that lead pretty interesting lives, whats wrong with playing a game where you are one of them.

 

For all of you out there (and you are not alone Bonedaddy), who routinely make these realism is not important and the pursuit of it is a waste of time, try replacing the word realism with genre conventions and tell me the statement isn't silly.

[Black Rose]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Hmm...I've thought about doing a "Shrike" version of HERO' date=' but I don't think I could post it without impinging on DOJ's rights, so Ive never done it.[/quote']

Actually, I meant you would be a good person to be in on the writing of 6th Edition. Though I wouldn't weep if you did KS HERO either*.

 

 

*You're probably right about DOJ getting torqued off, unfortunately. No HERO: Unearthed Elegance for us, I guess.

[zornwil]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Those are some good points! That is a bit different than what I actually had in mind, but it is something for me to think about.

 

My initial concept of a game "which is more complex than it needs to be" would perhaps be exemplified by RIFTS.

 

In RIFTS, rather than having a more simple exponential scale, instead uses multiple linear scales.

 

In RIFTS you can have many different types of STR. A character might have any one of the following:

14 Normal STR,

45 Extraordinary STR,

38 Robotic STR,

28 Supernatural STR,

 

There is a different chart and different Rules for each type of STR, there are also different types of damage in RIFTS.

 

Which is stronger, a 23 Supernatural STR , or an 85 Robotic STR?

 

IMO RIFTS is an over-complex system, because even with all this extra complexity the system is still very limited in what it can easily represent. For example it can not easily handle a planet busting weapon (unlike the HERO system which can handle an attack of such magnitude very easily). An exponential system only needs one type of STR to cover a much greater range of ability.

 

But it then occured to me that some people may feel much differently. Some people feel that having to deal with the mathematics of an exponential system is more complex than dealing with several linear systems.

 

 

Upon reflection it seems like there are perhaps different kinds of complexity.

 

A game might be called complex due to the sheer volume of rules it has. This would probably be the most obvious kind of complexity.

 

A game might be called complex if it requires some specific background (possibly mathematical) to play it.

 

A game might be called complex if it requires learning a great deal of information/terminology in order to begin to play it. This concept could also be thought of as complexity that the Player has to deal with, as opposed to complexity for the GM.

 

I've actually heard all of these accusations of complexity used in reference to the HERO system.

 

Each of them can be dealt with differently.

Yeah, more good points, agreed - and repped (and I need to rep BoneDaddy - he hit the nail on the head when he pointed out if "more rules <> more fun, rules bad", which correctly identifies by all means if "more rules = more fun", great!)

[BoneDaddy]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

For all of you out there (and you are not alone Bonedaddy)' date=' who routinely make these realism is not important and the pursuit of it is a waste of time, try replacing the word realism with genre conventions and tell me the statement isn't silly.[/quote']

Fair point. I'll add a layer of precision to my statement. Realism isn't of primary importance. Having a good time is of primary importance. If realism gets in the way of having a good time, then realism should go - it's secondary.

 

And I see your point. Shadowrun's treatment of C12 evidenced such blatant ignorance of the facts that it made the use of plastic explosives moot. Same for radio. But for such things house rules are made.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Fair point. I'll add a layer of precision to my statement. Realism isn't of primary importance. Having a good time is of primary importance. If realism gets in the way of having a good time, then realism should go - it's secondary.

 

And I see your point. Shadowrun's treatment of C12 evidenced such blatant ignorance of the facts that it made the use of plastic explosives moot. Same for radio. But for such things house rules are made.

LOL

I dislike Shadowrun, and in general won't play i, but y'all might remember earlierthis year when my g/f was going to join a SR game and play a demolitions expert (I asked if anyone had decent sources for info... I finally just had her read the appropriate section of DC).

 

She was recapping her first game, and mentioned how they had gone to try and blow open some sort of vault door, and when her shaped charge C-12 failed to do the job she had to blow it open with a couple of concussion grenades. Which were overkill.

I almost swallowed my tounge.

My first three thoughts...

#1 How could a game designer be that ignorant?

#2 How could the GM be that ignorant? (He's a friend of mine, and not normally so dumb)

#3 Why wasn't there a houserule here, for the love of common sense?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

Actually, I meant you would be a good person to be in on the writing of 6th Edition. Though I wouldn't weep if you did KS HERO either*.

 

 

*You're probably right about DOJ getting torqued off, unfortunately. No HERO: Unearthed Elegance for us, I guess.

Well, in a strange way, that's very flattering. Thanx!

[Zephrosyne]

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

 

For me the biggest thing I look for in a game is a good balance of realism/detail versus playability. I don't mind a bit of complexity or detail if it is actually adding something to the game that is worth the extra effort. I think that Hero does that well. That being said, I still believe the damage system for Hero is a bit more tedious than it needs to be.