How things have changed!

[Storn]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I think White Wolf is to blame... because they really introduced a level of marketing into RPGs that was unheard of before that. They wrote their books to be read like some people chew through cheesy fantasy series. Thick books... many of them... most with zero real relevance to actually PLAYING A GAME..

 

and

 

What RPGs need is lots of concepts and ideas, theories on which to make judgments like CC talks about above... all of which you can then use to build your own rules...

 

Boy Neil.. I just simply disagree with you on the White Wolf thing. HIstorically, White Wolf got lucky. It wasn't any great big marketing plan beyond that of any other game company of the time. And the correlation between cheesy fantasy novels (which, back off, I like... no worse or better than comics) is only suposition. If anything, the explosion of license Forgotten Realms novels and the like had more to do with the d&d crowd through exposure to software titles, than to the White Wolf crowd.

 

Besides, the first gaming novels I saw in like 1986? Battletech. Blame Fasa.

 

WW just tapped into a zietgeist. That of modern horror. Really, the only horror game of any market share at the time was Call of Cthlhulu, set in the 20s.... the market was primed for modern horror. And vampires have a hook that is easy to get to.

 

Did it evolve to a marketing plan? Sure. No doubt.

 

But I did some checking.

 

And as for rulebooks, my Vampire has pages 59- 230 out of 269 pages devoted to the rules. That is pretty hefty amount. I'm not sure where you get :'zero relevance to actually playing the game" Starting pg 231 is a section all about judgement calls of rules. A quick read, and it is a very GOOD section written about GM calls about rules... one of the best i"ve ever read.

 

So the Concepts and Ideas that you speak of are very, very much in place in WW's products.

 

Exalted has rules on pages 86-257 and 324-346 of equipment rules out of 350 pages. Exalted is a complicated world structure. Granted, much of the worldview is tied up in Castes and is taught along with the rules of making characters in various Castes.

 

Now, you know I don't like pigeon holing of Castes or Clans... but it is a very simple and organized and effective way of teaching rules. It isn't badwrongfun. Just not for me.

 

Now. I cannot speak for the supplements. I only own a couple and they are Trinity... and they are mostly equipment and colony books. But I think you are misplacing the fire of your ire.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: How things have changed!

 

This is really an interesting question. I remember back in the day-day when I was running RIFTS, then ShadowRun - those games had plenty of resources, but if you started working through the math in the core rulebooks, things didn't always add up. Occassionally the material contradicted itself, occassionally they'd create a character which simply couldn't exist. These things happen.

 

Fast-forward to the last five, six years I spent playing d20 (we'll skip White Wolf - I made up more rules for that game than I can reasonably recount). The problem I have with WOTC (and I've cited many times on this board) is that the books always feel as though they were written with an intention of incompleteness. Never, once, do I get the feeling that I can do anything other than play Fantasy d20 (and a stripped down version of it) for my 3 Core Rulebooks.

 

For all the pretty art, and for all the glossy paper and hardcover bindings, the game always felt (and still feels) like something is missing. HERO, if we're being honest, errs completely to the other side of the line. Here's NO GAME, just a Space-Station full of rules in a book big enough to create a gravity well. Here's how to build powers. Here's how to run combat, and here's a section on characters & skills. Play whatever you want!

 

The difference is that for me, HERO works in its scope. By not aligning itself to a genre you are admittedly limited in what you can do without alot of effort, but that's why I constantly insist that d20 is Windows, and HERO is Linux. Not as many people use it, but the ones who do swear by it. Windows can in fact, only do Windows. HERO does the rest of the house.

 

It isn't always elegant, and I know from personal experience that some of my players PREFER to be over-balanced and would rather be 'better' than the rest of the party. That's the joy of a pure point buy; I no longer have to worry about it.

 

C'est plus la change, c'est plus la meme chose.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: How things have changed!

 

Now' date=' you know I don't like pigeon holing of Castes or Clans... but it is a very simple and organized and effective way of teaching rules. It isn't badwrongfun. Just not for me.[/quote']

 

I'd like to circle 5 - strongly disagree. I've owned many WW books, and run extensive games of both Vampire & Were-Wolf. They are, in fact, limited in scope. I also don't know which version of the rules you're using for comparison; the original book, IIRC, was a massive amount of fluff and background, and very little in the way of new rules or Disciplines (sic?).

 

Which isn't to say the original V:tM didn't have a sense of completeness to it; it was one of the few systems that did. But purchasing additional softbacks from the Guide series (i.e., "Guide to the Tzimisce") was an absolute waste of time. The only time the books got interesting was with the introduction of the Sabbat and their new clans (Tzimisce & the Obtenebrating clan, whose name escapes me but who's power I have memorized). I vaguely remember Vampire: The Dark Ages being the most complete Vampire book I have ever owned, and one of the better games I'd ever run.

 

Nothing quite like Ghouled Mounts and undead Knights saving the day from... themselves. And those like them. Great game.

 

Anyway, point being - those books - especially the supplements - have a long history of being rules light and text heavy.

[prestidigitator]

Re: How things have changed!

 

The difference is that for me' date=' HERO works in its scope. By not aligning itself to a genre you are admittedly limited in what you can do without alot of effort, but that's why I constantly insist that d20 is Windows, and HERO is Linux. Not as many people use it, but the ones who do swear by it. Windows can in fact, only do Windows. HERO does the rest of the house.[/quote']

Woo hoo! I made exactly that analogy a while back. People didn't like it for some reason. I find it applicable in aspects other than just generality of the rules, too. The style of, "business," would be another fair place to use it, I think.

 

Now we probably need to do what Linux distributions are doing to make Linux more popular: smooth out the user interface a little, create a great installer....

[prestidigitator]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I'd like to circle 5 - strongly disagree. I've owned many WW books, and run extensive games of both Vampire & Were-Wolf. They are, in fact, limited in scope. I also don't know which version of the rules you're using for comparison; the original book, IIRC, was a massive amount of fluff and background, and very little in the way of new rules or Disciplines (sic?).

 

Which isn't to say the original V:tM didn't have a sense of completeness to it; it was one of the few systems that did. But purchasing additional softbacks from the Guide series (i.e., "Guide to the Tzimisce") was an absolute waste of time. The only time the books got interesting was with the introduction of the Sabbat and their new clans (Tzimisce & the Obtenebrating clan, whose name escapes me but who's power I have memorized). I vaguely remember Vampire: The Dark Ages being the most complete Vampire book I have ever owned, and one of the better games I'd ever run.

 

Nothing quite like Ghouled Mounts and undead Knights saving the day from... themselves. And those like them. Great game.

 

Anyway, point being - those books - especially the supplements - have a long history of being rules light and text heavy.

Yeah. The WW systems were made to be rules light, and they do it really well IMO. They really are roleplaying systems. Somehow they are loose enough and complete enough that the Storyteller doesn't often have trouble resolving something that isn't explicitly covered by the rules. Of course different Storyteller's might resolve it quite differently, but the beauty is that that is all a part of the flavor!

 

I really like their supplements, too. One of the big reasons is that they don't introduce many (if any) new rules. Maybe some new skills, Disciplines, or whatever, but that to me is just like new example power constructs in Hero. Instead of offering rules, the supplements give great options for stories, character and group backgrounds, settings, perspectives, etc. To me that is the ideal role of the supplement.

 

Now I think Hero does something very similar to the WW games in one respect. They both free you up to concentrate on the story and the characters. The WW systems do it by stripping down and loosening up the system to the point where you don't have to worry about it too much. Hero does it by being so complete and logical that there is a good solution to just about anything, thus again unburdoning the GM of the worries of how to run things. In essence, once you have done some initial work on characters, basic house rules, setting, etc., you can for the most part sit back and let the system take care of the non-roleplaying aspects while you deal with story and action!

[RDU Neil]

Re: How things have changed!

 

 

Now I think Hero does something very similar to the WW games in one respect. They both free you up to concentrate on the story and the characters. The WW systems do it by stripping down and loosening up the system to the point where you don't have to worry about it too much. Hero does it by being so complete and logical that there is a good solution to just about anything, thus again unburdoning the GM of the worries of how to run things. In essence, once you have done some initial work on characters, basic house rules, setting, etc., you can for the most part sit back and let the system take care of the non-roleplaying aspects while you deal with story and action!

 

This may be the heart of the disagreement between Storn and myself. He prefers a sense of open "let the GM just make a call" style of play that is very flavor based... while I prefer the Hero sense of "let the GM make the call" based on inherent system logic.

 

All "play" is about judgment calls in game... but the decision making process... logical analysis or value based... is basic human psychological differences. What Storn may see as freedom to make the call, I may feel is whimsical handwaiving, because I don't see the logic behind it. What I may feel is a rational decision that is internally consistent and forces interesting play call, Storn may see as restrictive and just doesn't feel right. It is probably the main source of why Storn and I don't play together much anymore. We want something very different out of the games we play and the systems we use.

[Storn]

Re: How things have changed!

 

This may be the heart of the disagreement between Storn and myself. He prefers a sense of open "let the GM just make a call" style of play that is very flavor based... while I prefer the Hero sense of "let the GM make the call" based on inherent system logic.

 

A bit overstated.

 

I want these things in a combat. Not in any particular order.

1) Ease of use

2) Speedy resolution

3) Imagination creates fun and dramatic options.

4) Combat should be dangerous, but not overly lethal. Death at the hands of the dice SHOULD happen, but be rare. Unless we are playing a gritty version of something... Cyberpunk for example.... then ratchet up the lethality....

 

That is not the same as "let the GM just make the call."

 

And to be fair to Hero, I don't hate it. It does some of my list pretty well.

 

1) Ease of use? Not so much, I want to keep track of Stun, Body, End... easy when I play, drives me bugnuts as a GM (pd, rpd, ed, red, Dmg reduction, Dmg Resistance, Penetrating, Armor Piercing, Stun multi, Hardened etc, NND).. a Champions fight can have a lot of modifiers stack in order to resolve a single blow.

 

As far as skills and task resolutions, Hero is speedy. I have no problem with that. RDU Neil's house rules on Speed make SO much sense, that as written, Hero feels like a dinosaur on a tricycle in comparison to me now. There are faster combat systems out there and a bunch that are slower.

 

3) Combat dramatics. Hero is pretty good at this. d20, which I pretty much loathe, is terrible. M&M, a d20 system, is pretty good, but isn't quite as tight as that little list that prints out on your character sheet in Hero. Yeah, that Block, Dodge, Grab, Move Through, Brace list etc... is pretty damn wonderful and holds up from 1982 well.

 

4) Hero does this excellently. No complaints.

 

 

Here are my two major beefs with Fantasy Hero (my first love is Fantasy and my yardstick).

1) Strength is too cheap. In 3rd Ed, when characters were being built on 75 pts, this was less of an issue. Since STR is the benchmark, it throws the whole system outta whack.

2) Magic is too constricted. VPPs are a pain in the ***. Magic doesn't "feel" right to me. YOu get the same effect, a 3d6 Drain is a 3d6 Drain. Yet Ars Magica does. It allows for the easier to cast preconstructed spells and yet a wonderful framework for "making spells on the fly". Ars Magica has a mechanic in place that isn't "let the GM make the call." NOw, can you build a world of magic around Hero? Absolutely, a world where spells have the same outcome over and over, is a reasonable way to go.

 

Which leads to my major beef with Champions. There is no thought on how to "Stunt". Feng Shui and Mutants and Masterminds is built around the core idea of the Stunt. M&M does it better, IMO, than Feng Shui, because it is linked to a limited resource, Hero pts. Yet in what I feel is genre, Stunting happens almost every combat. Thing rips up the fire hydrant to douse Jonny, that is a stunt, Spidey weaves a parachute in desperation out of his webbing, that is a stunt. Cap'n America can't get into a combat w/o Stunting.... sure, all of these things can be built in Hero. But do they have to?

 

Again, this is not "Let the GM make the call." There is a framework in place. Champion's Power Skill kludge is a joke. And there is precious little framework in the 3 or 4 paragraphs in the ruling. Sorry folks, every Super should have Power Skill.. and if every super has it... then there is no reason to spend points on it. If you demand pts spent, then my guy who has it is all of sudden doing all kinds of "cheap" uses of his powers... and just when you say "hey, its totally handwave to have Flame Guy use his 12d6 Fire blast to create a small bit of flame.", (which I agree with, it is totally in the concept of the character)... that small bit of flame becomes a major issue when he is trapped in a cave and needs some light.

 

In the end, I just don't think Hero emulates my two favorite genres all that well. Fantasy and Superheroic Comics. It does do Supers... but they don't feel comic-booky to me, from Silver to Iron... doesn't matter... they don't feel like the genre is being emulated. So it is not "Logic" that I reject, it is some of the Hero Design Logic that I reject...and not all of it.

 

Sword and gun fights, Hero rocks on toast. If the speed chart is tossed and our Speed House rules are incorporated.

[Storn]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I walked away for a bit, did some other stuff... and an add'l thought came to me.

 

In the beginning, when I tackled Fantasy Hero for the first time (and by extension, Champions) in 1984... I thought Energy Defense and Physical Defense was brilliant. I thought the base idea of special effects was amazing.

 

Now, many years later... I've moved away from thinking that was so brilliant. Oh, don't get me wrong, defining the sfx of EB is still brilliant... but I've moved away from the overabundance of stats and splitting of defenses and attacks into such narrow parameters. I also feel that sfx doesn't go far enough.

 

And this is because of other games that have come down the pike since 1984.

 

Lets take Defenses of super. There is PD, ED, rPD, rED. I think this can easily be condensed to Resiliancy (or pick your term), the inheritent toughness... and Defense (body armor, force field...what have you), the stuff that helps repel lethal force. Does it really matter if a punch is Physical and a EB is Energy? It used to. I thought it was neat. Not to me anymore. It is splitting hairs too fine for my tastes now. It is overcomplication, increased bookkeeping and not elegant.

 

IF! You want the Hulk ripoff to be affected more by Energy attacks, build it into the Disadvantages. No one has taken away the ability to fine tune the character by collapsing the defenses into fewer stats. How many bricks have the Energy and Physical side of the equation pretty much identical anyways?

 

Looking at the "stay in the fight" stats. WE have Stun, Body, REC and End. Do we really need that many stats to represent some one is either incapapble of pushing on or is capable of pushing on? While I still think the Stun/Body dichotomy is brilliant, i truly do, there are other games out there have found ways of simulating Stun/Body w/o 4 Stats, often just one. Yet those Heroes in those systems fall, get tired, push themselves to the breaking point...all the dramatic stuff that happens in movies, literature and comics.

 

One can go too far. I think Hit Points without ramifications are an abomination. I will play Hero. I won't play d20. What I mean by ramifications is that it makes no difference if I have 5 hps or 125 hps... I"m still in the fight identical in ability in either case, just that i"m closer to "out".

 

Lastly, Hero seems antiquated to me because of the lack of drama systems. I think the power of the Hero, Fate, Luck, Benny pt puts limited dramatic control in the hands of the player. I love that. Hero does not have it. We have it, we've house ruled it. But Hero doesn't... and I think that really shows its age.

 

Burning Wheel, M&M 2nd ed and Weapons of the Gods have taken the idea of Disadvantages and created a much more nuanced and interesting (yet, much simpler at Chargen) mechanic. You pay points for flaws. no more trying to shoehorn yet another disad so you can top out at 150 pts worth. If you have a flaw, and you play it, you get a Luck, Fate, Hero, Benny etc. In other words, it creates a dynamic at the table where Players are eager to bone their own characters... to reach that understanding that setbacks can be fun... something that I admit I have a tough time with... but when I can author my own setback... it is much easier to swallow... after all, it was my idea.

 

If 6th ed was in my hands, it would be a pretty radical rewrite.

 

Probably a good thing it isn't.

[Roter Baron]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I must say I agree. I have been a Hero enthusiast since 1988 and infected my whole group which is still enjoying the system for its flexibility in crating any kind of genre in the game (mostly FH and in the future Star Wars Hero). I am less enchanted. The good points balance out the bad ones pretty much and especially comabt is not that exciting actually. I think of it like some kind of chess - lots of tactics, lots of strategy, all based on the knowledge of the rules "Move here with your half move, ypu only get a minus 4 for range then!" - "He attacked on Phase 3 and 5, so he is a Speed 5 character. Let's see ...!" This is not the characters thinking about how to move or to wonder why their enmy is so fast - it's gamer's knowledge put to work. And drama goes away for me in the meantime.

STUN and BODY is nice. END is a waste of time with most heroic characters The LUCK talent is a waste of points - buy levels and you won't need it.

But what is most disenchnating to me is that there is a certain lack of "feeling" to Hero. Ten years ago it was there. The mechanics were basically the same, but CHAMPIONS felt like THE super game. Now it's a complicated engine - a TOOLBOX! But I don't want to play with tools, I want to play a game, a sexy game that inspires me to run it. Toolboxes seldom do that.

 

I do also agree with Storn that STR is too cheap, especially in Fantasy campaigns. Yes, I know: "Charge more points!" Sure, I can take any game and change the rules - use a die 10 in D20 games to make it harder. But I don't like to have to change things to mak ethem more or less work. I'm German - I go by the book!

 

I think waht is missing is the level of uncertainty with fantasy spells - and there is basically no difference in feel to superpowers. You usually only rolll less dice.

 

Anyhow - will probably take a while till I run another Hero game. Will see how Stars Wars Hero does next week ...

[Zeropoint]

Re: How things have changed!

 

So build some uncertainty into your magic system. In my Fantasy Hero game, for instance, mages have to make a skill roll to cast a spell. With some spells, they still have to hit their target. That adds some uncertainty; certainly more uncertainty than a "designate target and roll damage" Magic Missile.

 

Maybe casting a spell could involve an EGO roll, with the effectiveness of the spell based on the result of the roll, as the caster attempts to force the fabric of reality into a new shape by sheer force of will.

 

Maybe the power of magic could be influenced by the phases of the moons.

 

Think of a way that magic could vary, and you can model it in Hero.

[Storn]

Re: How things have changed!

 

So build some uncertainty into your magic system. In my Fantasy Hero game, for instance, mages have to make a skill roll to cast a spell. With some spells, they still have to hit their target. That adds some uncertainty; certainly more uncertainty than a "designate target and roll damage" Magic Missile.

 

Maybe casting a spell could involve an EGO roll, with the effectiveness of the spell based on the result of the roll, as the caster attempts to force the fabric of reality into a new shape by sheer force of will.

 

Maybe the power of magic could be influenced by the phases of the moons.

 

Think of a way that magic could vary, and you can model it in Hero.

 

 

I haven't seen it yet. And I've done a ton of experimenting. Sure, skill roll... failure, auto Side Effect. I even tried to do a Side Effect table that had some positive, some totally odd but neutral and some negative effects. It just felt like a kludge and overcomplication.

 

I've seen the many variants on the VPP... but the problem with the VPP is that it caps stuff. Some very cool spells, that are not combat effective or game unbalancing, cost SO much in Active Points and/or real points... it is just silly. Vpps have never really worked for me.

 

I tried a multipower with the same effect, the cap of active pts really strikes out some great concepts.... if you build the MP to those active pts, then the mage is WAAAAY too much of a powerhouse.

 

I've tried each spell is a seperate skill roll. Each spell costs 3 pts. +2 pts per every +1 in that spell. Active pts took away from the skill. This seemed to work the best. But still didn't get down to some really staid "my spell goes off and feels no different than a superpower with an activation.".

 

This is something that in Mage or Ars Magica... I just don't get that feeling!!! I feel that the game base concept makes magic cool, interesting, unpredictable and fun and imaginative.