A Mind in Crisis (Rant Warning…)

[Nightshade]

Why?

 

Power attack allows you to lower your to hit to increase damage.

 

Called shot, sword arm. In HERO, that lowers the damage, not increase.

 

Called shot, foot to pin to the oak floor. In HERO, that lowers the damage, not increase.

 

You're right, that is exactly the same as Power Attack.

 

Okay. I agree with you. The fighter example wasn't too clear. How about I state it this way:

 

Any character rolling an opposed roll against a character with a skill roll modifier that is 8 higher than the first character (which in my mind is significant) has a 12.5% chance of successfully beating that character at WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY ARE DOING. That, in my mind, is ridiculous. This would be the equivalent of having a 9th level rogue who maxed out a skill being beaten by a 1st level rogue with the same stats maxing out the skill. This includes feats.

 

It is simply due to the statistics of the die rolling mechanic. The primary flaw with the d20 system mechanic is that the d20 is just too random. It doesn't follow a bell curve, so it is not particularly unusual for a character who by all rights should wipe the walls with you on that skill to lose to a much less skilled character. Be it skill vs skill, a fight, or whatever.

 

 

i could certainly HOUSE RULE to add this, but the rules do not make it so. If i wanted this level of house ruling in DND, i could make it swo. It seems odd to keep criticizing DND for not having prebuilt rules for things like this, like crossbows doing ap damage, and so forth when HERo doesn't either.

 

 

Of course you don't bring up any of the other armor piercing weapons from my example.

 

This is my criticism: HERO has a mechanic for called shots, D&D does not. HERO has a mechanic for disabling wounds (which is what the 1 body to the eye example was), D&D does not. This is not a level of house ruling for HERO, this is rules you can start with, and therefore don't have to create it as a house rule.

 

 

As for your hero example, the 8 skill levels, there is NOTHING in the rules preventing a beginning PC at either 100 or 150 from having +8 skill levels. There is nothing saying the more experienced fighter has more skill levels at all. This might be the case, or it might not. Right? At least DND gives you significant combat differences as a matter of course.

 

 

HERO doesn't give people with higher combat skill levels more combat differences? HERO's ability to do something other than getting a better to hit number doesn't mean that characters get better at combat if they put experience that way?

 

 

that is certainly ONE model for publication. Another is "when we sell someone a game, lets give them a game, not a game builder kit. This way, right after buying our product, they have enoguh stuff to actually sit down a play rather quickly and can get into the under the hood stuff AFTER, not before, they have some experience."

 

 

Oh, right. That's how WotC did it. They didn't publish a gaming book that referenced other gaming books (look at the leadership feat in the PHB, which puts it in the DMG; or the druid writeup that references the Monster Manual) and then have some of those books released months AFTER the first was published. They certainly give enough information to run Greyhawk in the main books. You can tell by their detailed history and maps they put in the books.

 

And boy do they let you get under the hood with their system description. I am sure glad that the DMG goes into great detail as to what level to put what ability, especially the abilities that I create. I personally like it when they say "Look at the existing classes and compare."

 

 

Power attack equates to the various combat maneuvers (no hero book in front of me but say like fast strike or such) where you penalize OCV and gain dcs. Instead of having several such maneuvers, each purchased spearately giving slightly different scales of OCV for DCs trade, you get one feat which gives you the ability to select the amount of "power" vs "accuracy" for each one. You could look at it as for a BAB+8 guy as representing 8 different maneuvers each - ocv lower and 1 damage higher.

 

Expertise, same thing but with a BAB or 5 limit and to hit goes to defense.

 

Expertise and Power Attack, now we have the ability to maneuver OCv to DCV or damage. Thats a whole lot more maneuvers.

 

 

Boy. That really sounds like something I read in HERO. Let me think. Wait! I think I know what it is! COMBAT SKILL LEVELS! You're right. They do a wiz-bang job of becoming martial arts. That's why HERO has both.

 

I also grow tired of this discussion. Obviously, we will never agree. How about this:

 

I will agree that D&D is customizable if you spend the time to do it and that I will no longer post anti-D&D posts without having the book in front of me so that I can quote it verbatim. However, you have to agree that HERO makes it easier for a GM to do so because it has a much more open systematic way of doing so.

 

Nightshade

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Tesujii One problem with your Ftr 8 Vs ftr 1 there are several ways that that can be screwed with.

Circumstantial elements can alter the relative balance between different strength characters. That is not a problem but simply an aspect of having more than one metric for gauging "combat strength" reflected in the system.

 

If i wanted to judge the two characters fighting underwater, the lighter encumbered chain shirt guy might be even superior to the guy in plate armor.

 

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

However part of the Problem with D&D is that it _assumes_ a "more experienced fighter" is better at combat. Hero assumes a more experienced fighter will be able to do more. not just combat.

Ok so let me get this straight.

 

When we are in the middle of comparing examples to try to deal with a complaint about how DND does not make a 1st level fighter sufficiently more advanced in combat than an 8th level fighter, we also at the same time have to deal with the claim that it makes them too much combat skill differentiated as a matter of course?

 

So, DND would need to make them more strongly disparate in their combat abilities and at the same time not make them as disparate in combat capabilities in order to meet your two issues adequately?

 

That is an interesting set of parameters.

 

In direct answer to this point, YES, the system does assume that when you take a level in FIGHTER then you are trying to reflect working for that period of time at getting better at fighting.

 

If you worked at something else, say religious spell work or at social skills and were not working on fighting and want this reflected in your character, DND assumes you will take a level in a class appropriately reflecting your choices.

 

This works just like in HERO where, if you earned 9 xp from an adventure spent mostly socializing, you CAN choose to spend these developing your social skills or, as long as the GM allows it, you CAN spend them on three more CV levels.

 

I do not get why this is so hard to get.

 

A class is not a lifelong pursuit. It is periods of learning. Thats why multiclassing is so easy in 3e. There are very few prohibitions, and those are setting specific, and the penalties for unfavored multiclassing are simple XP penalties, not forbiddances, and many of those are either officially removed (they do not apply for PRCs and some standard classes depending on setting and race) or make great campaign specific setting rules. I use a variant of the favored class system in my games because i was not wanting the greyhawk model.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

If I as a fighter gain a level or two only through social interaction (sorry for the shockin supposition) what exactly have I _really done_ that has advanced me as a fighter? Trained on the side? Well why did I not bother with leveling and just train on the side?

If you want to reflect your fighter's actual work, as defined as what he did during the on-screen time, then you should take a level in the class most applicable to what you did.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

The Assumption is that you will go out and kick arse to get xp to level.

The assumtpion is that thats what most heroes do in their stories of myth and legend and that thats what the vast majority of games run have shown. As such, they give more coverage to that in the XP system but they do not force the advancement to be about that. The xp comes from meeting the challenges your GM defines, whether that means combat, social dynamic or ingenuity is up to him when HE defines the scenario and challenge.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

there is no other assumption for the classes.

Xp comes from challenges. Challenges are defined by the GM.

 

thus the assumption for what enables you to advance is HIS decision.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

if you run a high diplomacy/social interaction game you are advancing in areas that are not applicable to combat and combat combat combat games you spend points on skills eventually that do not apply to those things you are learning.

So, in the game where you are doing social stuff a lot you would I expect be taking levels in classes with social skills as a focus. It seems silly to want to run a character who does social skill stuff a lot and is good at it and take levels in something entirely different like a class thats primarily fighter.

 

What would happen in hero if that same character who did all that social stuff kept pouring his XP into strength and combat levels and con and stuff?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Sorry I prefer a game wherin I can see the metasystem as opposed to one where people arbitrairily decide that Magic Missle is the best first level spell in the game, and contrive to hide the metasystem from the average gamer.

 

If you mean arbitrary as in by whim or caprice, you simply underestimate the designers.

 

Now pay attention... every time i question a relative value in hero on these boards, i get someone or two or three chiming in with "well a reasonable gm should assign thoise values to fit his campaign."

 

The math that leads to conclusions in hero is based on two aspects... the core values and the mathematical model.

 

Both the core values (wall crawling is twice as valuable as water breathing and half as good as invisibility) are determined by judgement, not by equation. They are the very values i am told i can and should change to meet campaign demands.

 

That means their values are determined by SUBJECTIVE JUDGEMENT... which is the less derogatory definition of arbitrary.

 

The core values provided for hero are every bit as arbitrary as those spells defined in DND.

 

That means the ingredianents provided for your "make a spell" HERo cake recipe are not any better than those for the DND

cake. All are simply the product of reasoned and experienced judgement.

 

Now, after that, in HERO you also then throw things thru a mathematical blender, the process of which was also determined by judgement. There are plenty of cases which can be cited to show this math model not producing results one would agree with. (heck, one of the most irksome traits among hero gamers is the notion that the build process verifies the result, that if its built right that means its final value is right and sometimes this means EVEN in the face of obvious contradictions. weaker tail, fighting array, and scads of others over the years. The lack of the obvious final stage, result testing, is unbelievable.)

 

Both systems are arbitrary... one just tries to convince you that more math makes it better.

 

When hero tells me that a guy with a strength 60 and a strength 30 tail is going to be MORE EXPENSIVE than the same guy with a strength 60 tail, then i do not walk away thinking that math and "some say less arbitrary" system is telling me much of anything at all. When the system designer tells me the preferred way to gain 1-6 points of HEAVILY limited dex is to pay 33% MORE than i would if i just bought 6 regular dex, then i don't get this "less arbitrary" bit at all. What i get is, for all this math, its subjective values fed into an overly complex and inaccurate grading system and... the most important part... even with all the math, if i assume the math is RIGHT... the values it produces wont be "right" unless i by decisions in game design MAKE THEM RIGHT.

 

I can do better than that using my own experience and judgement and since the final proof comes out based on what I decide to throw at them, all the mounds of math did for me is to take up valuable time.

[tesuji]

Re: Why?

 

[/b]

 

Originally posted by Nightshade

The primary flaw with the d20 system mechanic is that the d20 is just too random. It doesn't follow a bell curve,

Hero mythconception 107: the bell curve is what makes things less random.

 

BUUZZZZ wrong. Care to try for Double jeopoary?

 

3d6 bell curve is the same thing as rolling a d216. Thats a lot like a d20 except about 10 times as big, 11 times is closer.

 

The difference in probabilities is solely defined in two distinct aspects.

 

1. What is the smallest measurable increment. D216 has a smallest increment of a fraction of a percent while d20 stops at 5%. If you thin estimations of less than 5% are within your scope, that judging that this factor or that factor in the shooting of the gun should result in a fraction of a percent difference in chances... then the d216 is for you.

 

2. The huge determining element is the mapping of results assigned by the system. if you want the shot to be 60% likely to hit then you should assign it a 1-12 success on a d20 and a 11- on 3d6. Its not the fact that X number of die combos falls into 11 that makes the outcome less random, its that you when you assigned the success ranges decided to assign that many results to success. an 8- on 3d6 is every bit as random as a 5- on d20, both occur 25% of the time and both fail 75% of the time, expected results. So to get the probability you want, the degree of randomness you want, you simply choose the appropriate valuve for the DC/skill check.

 

The huge honking difference in running with the two is that with a d20, you know the probabilities at a glance. each additional point is 5% change. With a 3d6, you have a variable scale.

 

A magic sword may provide you with a +1 to hit and depending on how good you are then that might mean 5% or it might mean 12.5% under 3d6. The better you are (or the worse you are) the less it matters. A -2 for "treacherous ground" might mean 25% or it might mean much less. Every bonus or penalty i assign does not have a defined number of chances in 216 it changes from pass to fail. it varies.

 

With a d20, i know that each +1 is another 5% to the chance of success... its one more chance in 20.

 

I dont know about you, but that makes more sense to me, that i can know how much more chances in X a modifier i apply is producing.

 

Originally posted by Nightshade

And boy do they let you get under the hood with their system description. I am sure glad that the DMG goes into great detail as to what level to put what ability, especially the abilities that I create. I personally like it when they say "Look at the existing classes and compare."

ME, i feel the DMG went too far in some cases. The worst thing they did with 3 was to publish that troublesome chart of magic item pricing. It seemd to convince people to approach it like hero and figure if they did the math they could turn their comparative

 

And yes, i think compare tom existing is a better solution.

Originally posted by Nightshade

 

I will agree that D&D is customizable if you spend the time to do it and that I will no longer post anti-D&D posts without having the book in front of me so that I can quote it verbatim. However, you have to agree that HERO makes it easier for a GM to do so because it has a much more open systematic way of doing so.

 

We will i guess have to agree to disagree.

 

I find the weight behind the systemic approach to be mostly worthless and simply cumbersome. Doing the math doesn't gain me anything, because in order for the math to be right i have to SUBJECTIVELY assign accurate starting values for my game and then IN PLAY the accuracy of the results depends solely on whether i script the challenges to make the numbers work.

 

If i am going to make the numbers work in play by scripting, i did not need the math. I can save time by thinking of it in terms of "how will this play out" and then giving a value and then sticking to it. Can i err on that initial assessment? Sure. But that same initial assessment is the thing which gives HERO its core values. invisibility is twice as valuable as clinging is twice as valuable as water breating is just that subjective assessment.

 

If you NEED the math, whether you believe in it is irrelevent because sometimes all the math does is provide some weight to back up your choices, then by all means use it. But frankly, if you really feel you need it, then IMO you are likely as not ill qualified to handle your end on the assignment of values and enforcement of vlaues. if you believe you are qualified to make the initial subjective assessments and qualified to make the necessary scripting and challnge decisions to make the numbers play right, then you did not need the math.

[tesuji]

Re: Why?

 

Originally posted by Nightshade

and that I will no longer post anti-D&D posts without having the book in front of me so that I can quote it verbatim.

Nightshade

 

I never asked for this, although i did ask for a rules cite once so i could look up a rule your were apparently misremembering.

 

I think it would be sufficient if.. when you have a comparative example of mechanics that you wish to use to show how DND does something worse, and when that comparison hinges on and emphasizes a key element such as the likelihood of the outcome, knowing how the DND system determines that outcome, in even the most basic sense of is it a single 20 on a d20 or is it 10 20's with no rolls lower than 10 in between (for instance), would be helpful and would greatly, and i mean greatly, improve your argument's apparent strength. It would make it sound like an informed assessment and not just confusion.

 

At least, thats how i look at it.

 

Fortunately, the D20 SRD is online and can be accessed even taken for free, so you dont have to have the DND books or even buy them to see and cite the system. One day perhaps, HERO will be that available and accessible.

[AnotherSkip]

Originally posted by tesuji

 

 

Circumstantial elements can alter the relative balance between different strength characters. That is not a problem but simply an aspect of having more than one metric for gauging "combat strength" reflected in the system. [/b]

Nice of you to make my points for me!

Wealth is a false assumption in D&D.

Indeed most of the magical Items pricings are very very screwed up. and most people _wont_ notice this unless a character painfully points this out. It caused a character death in a campaign I was in.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

 

When we are in the middle of comparing examples to try to deal with a complaint about how DND does not make a 1st level fighter sufficiently more advanced in combat than an 8th level fighter, we also at the same time have to deal with the claim that it makes them too much combat skill differentiated as a matter of course?

A class is not a lifelong pursuit. It is periods of learning. Thats why multiclassing is so easy in 3e. There are very few prohibitions, and those are setting specific, and the penalties for unfavored multiclassing are simple XP penalties, not forbiddances, and many of those are either officially removed (they do not apply for PRCs and some standard classes depending on setting and race) or make great campaign specific setting rules. I use a variant of the favored class system in my games because i was not wanting the greyhawk model.

 

[/b]

 

Nooooooo that would be Tesuji not reading the post. the point is that 1. there are few real social classes in AD&D, 2. there is no real suggestion in any of the main books that a character take classes relative to what they have been doing.

 

Sure a smart Gm can suggest that but in the end it just 1. weakens a character 2. violates character concept 3. grants exteraneous abilities.

 

Sure you could essentially rewrite every character for each player but then why not play HERO?

 

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

 

 

Both systems are arbitrary... one just tries to convince you that more math makes it better.

 

When hero tells me that a guy with a strength 60 and a strength 30 tail is going to be MORE EXPENSIVE than the same guy with a strength 60 tail, then i do not walk away thinking that math and "some say less arbitrary" system is telling me much of anything at all. When the system designer tells me the preferred way to gain 1-6 points of HEAVILY limited dex is to pay 33% MORE than i would if i just bought 6 regular dex, then i don't get this "less arbitrary" bit at all. What i get is, for all this math, its subjective values fed into an overly complex and inaccurate grading system and... the most important part... even with all the math, if i assume the math is RIGHT... the values it produces wont be "right" unless i by decisions in game design MAKE THEM RIGHT.

 

I can do better than that using my own experience and judgement and since the final proof comes out based on what I decide to throw at them, all the mounds of math did for me is to take up valuable time. [/b]

 

 

1. Uhh yeah why dont you show me those specific examples: it could be a case of you not having the eloquence or comprehensive understanding of how to do things in HERO. that could be your fault

frankly a guy with 60 Str and a 30 Str tail could be a Phis lim disadvantage, a disad on his Extra limbs or (real shocker) worth no disad at all if it does not obey the cardinal rule of if a disad is not really a disad then it is worth no points at all. Usually found in BIG BOLD LETTERS in the disadvantages section.

 

2. Hero is based upon if you spend 15 points for something it is decent, 30 points and it is pretty good and 60 points and it is wonderful. With negating a disadvantage certain system realism disads being in the 10 or less area.

3. Do you have a similar judgement system for AD&D presented in the big three?

I think not.

 

Im not going to quibble over 5 vs 10 for WB and Clinging. WB just enables you to breathe a different medium, Clinging lets you move in verry difficult ways. WB may save your arse but usually it is a no big deal. Clinging can make certain combats _very difficult_ (sword weilding orcs could have a problem reaching your character on a cavern ceiling 30' above their heads)

 

HERO is more about buying strengths and playing to them quite different than AD&D. Where most of the time it is about rolling well

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Nice of you to make my points for me!

Wealth is a false assumption in D&D.

I haven't a clue what you think supports that assumption.

 

In DND, wealth is a metric, a benchmark used to assess character power. If your PC has a lot of wealth in gear above that expected per level, you should raise his "level" for your assessment purposes. if a character has less, you should lower it. Scenarios and such in various DND products show this even more explicitly with somewhat common cases where they list a NCP character as 1 level down from his level for challenge purposes because he has less than nornal gear.

 

I thought it was good of them to realize that gear had an impact and to use this metric to help bring that to the Gms attention.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Indeed most of the magical Items pricings are very very screwed up. and most people _wont_ notice this unless a character painfully points this out. It caused a character death in a campaign I was in.

If you are referring to custom built ones and that chart the foolishly provided which gave a kind hero-esque build, then i agree. In their defense, they did publish clarifications in which they said it was not intended to be a hero-esque permissive thing but was only to be used after you had decided an item was Ok to get a starting value and emphasized that the comparitive step against current items was still to be done.

 

in essence, they forgot to tell the DND players that "being built by the chart" is not sufficient and that a final comparitive subjective stage needs to be done.

 

if you are reffering to the main book items, assuming you use the erratta, all i can say is that i found most of their values to be close to correct. However, like with any price that is supposed to be relative to effectiveness, you MUST adjust these values based on the campaign and its challenges. A campaign focused on an invasion from the elemental plane of fire should increase the value of fire resistance items and chill weapons, for instance. This all comes back to effectiveness being subjective and tied to challenges.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Nooooooo that would be Tesuji not reading the post. the point is that 1. there are few real social classes in AD&D,

That remains true even in DND, which is what we are discussing.

 

OK, one thing i will repeat again. In the vast majority of heroic myths and legends, action films and stories regarding the fantasy genres, the heroes achieve success over the bad guys by some form of combat. This may come as a shock to you, but in the vast number of scenarios when heroic PCs win over a bad guy, some combat was involved, much like in those films, stories, and myths. (If this so shocks you, then you may need to sit down and catch a breath. I'll wait...)

 

So when it came to deciding which classes to present in the limited space in the main rulebook, they decided to keep each class with SOME combat capabilities, thinking that even if the adventure involved a lot of guile and subterfuge, there would likely bee some combat and that most of the time combat would be a predominant element. Thus all the main PC classes get some combat aptitude presented.

 

If you think this all is a silly notion and you do not see combat as a frequent element in adventure fantasy, well, then you probably have more than a smidgen of work ahead.

 

But again, this is setting. If you want to run a charlemaigne's court campaign where the vast majority of challenges are social, then you need to provide relevent classed. Fortunately, the game does provide you with some NPC classes which the Gm can use or alter to help meet his needs. The expert and the aristocrat (or was it noble?) are two great examples and I do allow these to be taken as PC levels if they wish. Book not in front of me but iirc the noble was almost all skills and social.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

2. there is no real suggestion in any of the main books that a character take classes relative to what they have been doing.

the multiclass rules allow taking any lclass level you want for whatever reason you want, barring GM restrictions and setting restrictions such as paladin or monk reclassing. Do you honestly expect them to throw a list of every possible reason to multiclass? That would be an overwhelmingly long one. isn't it much simpler to leave the reason behind the decision to the people playing?

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Sure a smart Gm can suggest that but in the end it just 1. weakens a character 2. violates character concept 3. grants exteraneous abilities.

I have yet to see a case where gaining a new level in anythiong weakened a character. About the only cases where that would be the case is where some element in the decision violated a restriction and cost him class abilities.

 

2. I fail to see how taking levels in classes to reflect the actions the character has already taken results in violating character concept. It seems to me that it would enhance it (allowing stats to reflect already performed deeds.)

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Sure you could essentially rewrite every character for each player but then why not play HERO?

For the three players among seven in my current game whose character concepts needed a tweak to the classes, It took moments to do so. The resuklt was a big happy for them.

I consider that worth the few minutes.

 

Why not play HERO? The list is long but basically it boils down to a ton more work, a much heavier and impactful system, and a learning curve which would, even after my spending a lot of manpower streamlining it as i did last time, scared off some of my current players. Even if i believed this weight and math focus had any substantial benefit (and i don't) the impact on new players would have driven me away from it. One of my players is the wife of another, she is 50 some years old and has never roleplayed before. because of the imopact light system, she pretty much got her character quickly and has out roleplayed most of the veterans. I would not have dropped the weight of hero on her and gotten anywhere.

 

HERO is a game focused on veterans of the hero game. its not friendly to new players. I value bringing new players into roleplaying and make a determined effort to bring new players into every single game i run along with my veterans.

 

Don't take my word for it about HERO and new players. look across these boards for discussions of hero lite and sidekick, even with posts from Mr Long himself.

 

SO, in choosing between playing hero and being willing to take the repeated suggestion to alter classes or create new classes to meet PC needs... i will take the latter.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

1. Uhh yeah why dont you show me those specific examples: it could be a case of you not having the eloquence or comprehensive understanding of how to do things in HERO. that could be your fault

you must not have been on the boards when two different threads and about 3-4 questions on the QnA board went thru this already. Steve Long commented that if one did not like the rules one shouldn't use them, not that the rules were incorrect or the math at error.

 

Here is an off the cuff repeat of the example.

 

STR 60

Dex 30

CON 30

BOD 30

Int 10

EGO 10

PRE 10

COM 10

PD 12

ED 6

Stun 75

REC 18

speed 5

end 60

 

Extra limb tail (60 strength)

 

This character costs 205 for these traits.

 

Now if i buy the character with a strength 30 tail he costs MORE...

 

 

STR 60 (-1/4 on 30 strength)

Dex 30

CON 30

BOD 30

Int 10

EGO 10

PRE 10

COM 10

PD 12 (6 base and +6 bought*)

ED 6

Stun 75 (60 base and +15 bought)

REC 18 (12 base and +6 bought)

speed 5

end 60

 

Extra limb tail (30 strength only)

 

This guy costs 231.

 

* The cost could be 225 if the GM ruled that the PD from the extra strength was limited to the tail and since he was using called shots this still limited the PD and so PD was 12 base.

 

Rules to know...

HERO5.112 Limited manipulation which specifically spells out the way to point out extra limbs that use less than the full strength as a -1/4 limit on the STR or DEX.

 

HERO5.92 under characteristics which specifically states the if the limitation on the primary does not effect the figureds, then you dont get the figureds.

 

The organic flaw in the hero system shown here is the one i catalog as "buying a lim" where buying some relatively cheap power allows you to take a limit on some other more expensive element of the character, thus resulting in spending a few points to save a lot of points.

 

This is an accepted practice, a defined organic method in HERO, spelled out yet again precisely in the base rules, and yet the obvious flaws in cost it vreates are obvious.

 

It isn't my misunderstanding of the HERO rules, it is an error in the hero rules supported by the designer.

 

I will note that since the time of the original threads and QnA, there has been an addition to the faq that described the limited manipulation as a no point voluntary restriction IF it applies only to some additional limbs but not to other additional limbs.

 

So if i took weak tail as listed above at 225-231 and gave him a 60 strength tongue in addition to his 30 strength tail, he would get back to 205 points and have 20 points to spend.

 

If you need me to repeat this with bases i can, but a look in the archives will probably fine it under "a tale of two bases" and the tail questions under a "tale of two tails" iirc.

 

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

frankly a guy with 60 Str and a 30 Str tail could be a Phis lim disadvantage, a disad on his Extra limbs or (real shocker) worth no disad at all

This is made much more fun by the fact that you started this question with "case of you not having the eloquence or comprehensive understanding of how to do things in HERO. that could be your fault."

 

The procedure for defining limited manipulation (including weaker strength tails) for extra limbs is precisely and specifically defined on HERO5.112. It calls for a limitation on the strength/dex.

 

Perhaps it is your not having the eloquence or comprehensive understanding of how to do things in HERO that is preventing you from seeing its faults or understanding how little it actually does.

 

FWIW... I started GMing hero in ~83 with 3rd edition and have a number of 2nd edition products. I have GMed it more than any other game system using it for supers and fantsy and scifi. i would say conservatively i have run about 12 years of campaigns using hero in that 20 years since i first started. DND is a distant third with about 6, vampire actually being second with around 6. (Most of the time i ran two campaigns as i am now.)

 

When i speak of the faults of HERO, i do not speak from ignorance. This is not to say I am flawless, and i would no doubt expect those who played HERO5 for more than the 8 months i did before abandoning it are more likely able to pinpoint specific areas than I, but i do research my examples to make sure they are rules correct BEFORE using them (unlike apparently some do with their complaints about DND, a=t least round here.)

 

By the way, the "buy a lim" organic system error is one of those 'total subset" cases... where the cheaper set contains everything the more expensive set and more. Those are examples of balance errors from the system that are not subjective but simply objective.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

if it does not obey the cardinal rule of if a disad is not really a disad then it is worth no points at all. Usually found in BIG BOLD LETTERS in the disadvantages section.

Yawn. HERO5.112.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

2. Hero is based upon if you spend 15 points for something it is decent, 30 points and it is pretty good and 60 points and it is wonderful. With negating a disadvantage certain system realism disads being in the 10 or less area.

So it claims at least. unfortunately, this is frequently not the case.

 

Regardless, the "value" of something is primarily determined IN PLAY and by the challenges set for it. If i spend 60 points for 70 swimming and we never meet an aquatic adventure or go under water, then it aint all that wonderful.

 

If i spend 5 points on water breathing and we go under water a lot because of the atlantean adventure campaign we are in, then that 5 points may well be wonderful, particularly if the campaign nature only allows scuba tank like items for the others as bulky foci.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

3. Do you have a similar judgement system for AD&D presented in the big three?

I think not.

DND does not use a poiint system for most things. It is an effect system using comparitive judgements, not a cost system using "points and formula."

 

You guys can keep slamming it for not using points, but that sort misses that that is an understood difference right away and that "the points" hero uses are subjectively determined before the math and subjectively enforced in play after the math. Every time you refute a "cost question" with saying that the Gm can or maybe should adjust the base costs for the campaign specifics, you point to how much of a effect-comparitive-judgement system hero is.

 

You guys keep referring to the math as looking under the hood so you know whats going on, but in truth the subjective-comparitve-judgement system is the "under the hood" or "behind the curtain" for the math!

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Im not going to quibble over 5 vs 10 for WB and Clinging.

WOW, twice the price is not important enough to worry with? Does that include 5 for each d6 of eb vs 10 for each d6 of mental blast? The difference between 1 pd and ED and 2 armor is only 1 point. Can i buy armor at the same cost of PD and ED? its not worth quibbling over, right?

 

of course, in all these cases that "per unit" cost difference might seem not worth quibbling about when looking at the base cost. it will quickly add up to real points when you start taking more potent abilities, in other words, the BASE COST is worth quibbling about once you start applying that vaunted HERO math.

 

Say i want spells that provides water breathing (clinging) to all my allies within a certain radius and i start applying it as using area effect (so i dont have to hit each one one by one) and useable by others (say something like 16 more people maybe) then the vaunted hero math tells me (I will roguh out the combined mods as being a +3 advantage) 20 points for the water breathing and 40 points for the clinging.

 

Now, i really must thank you! One of my points has been that the vaunbted hero SYSTEM depends on the subjective base values to make the math work.

 

You just dismissed the relative values, base values, for these two as they did not matter enough for you to quibble over. Low and behold, apply the vaunted hero math to create a power from these unimportant base values and now we have a 20 point difference. Thats enough of a difference to buy +2 combat levels (all combat 16 points) and +2 OCV levels with your main attack.

 

Is that enough for you to quibble over? (hey, 20 points happens to be in the same ballpark as weak tail vs strong tail shown above.)

 

The base power costs in HERO are VITAL to the system. They are not "things not worth quibbling over." They are the foundation upon which the rest is built.

 

Barage in garbage out, as they say.

 

The key thing that HERO players who play the arbitrary card whenever they want is that these values are "arbitrarily" or rather subjectively assigned and should be assigned varying from campaign to campaign based on the challneges expected to be presented. (Then of course comes the in play enforcement.)

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

HERO is more about buying strengths and playing to them quite different than AD&D. Where most of the time it is about rolling well

 

WOW, now thats a wonderfully unsupported parting shot.

 

Well done. it speaks volumes about your position.

[AnotherSkip]

I dont have the quotes set up right so just deal with it.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

The assumtpion is that thats what most heroes do in their stories of myth and legend and that thats what the vast majority of games run have shown. As such, they give more coverage to that in the XP system but they do not force the advancement to be about that. The xp comes from meeting the challenges your GM defines, whether that means combat, social dynamic or ingenuity is up to him when HE defines the scenario and challenge.

[/b]

Right so you mr. I have rewritten much of 3rd edition are a follow the crowd kinda guy just like me? suuure.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

I haven't a clue what you think supports that assumption.

 

In DND, wealth is a metric, a benchmark used to assess character power. If your PC has a lot of wealth in gear above that expected per level, you should raise his "level" for your assessment purposes. if a character has less, you should lower it. Scenarios and such in various DND products show this even more explicitly with somewhat common cases where they list a NCP character as 1 level down from his level for challenge purposes because he has less than nornal gear.

 

I thought it was good of them to realize that gear had an impact and

to use this metric to help bring that to the Gms attention.

 

[/b]

 

Im not sure how you would define a naked 16th level fighter vs 12 Tuckers Kobolds as being a no xp situation. I cannot see how the D&D system could get so convoluted as to assume that every person has all of their monetary value on them at all times in good order. Most campaign situations i have been in the Gm strives, yes strives mightily, to remove the wealth factor from players in order to "challenge" them.

 

and that wealth beomes a mighty crutch. Heavily Experienced AD&D players look to their magical items first and Spells/feats second, attributes third then possibly Skills to get them out of a situation. There are so few skills it is not even funny.

 

Hero charactes typically Look at Skills, Powers(which includes Spells Feats and racial abilities) and maybe magical items if they have them.

 

So what happens to the poor player who doesnt realise he needs some of the important skills untill third or later level. Play catchup?

 

Pretty difficult to do in 3rd.

 

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

If you are referring to custom built ones and that chart the foolishly provided which gave a kind hero-esque build, then i agree. In their defense, they did publish clarifications in which they said it was not intended to be a hero-esque permissive thing but was only to be used after you had decided an item was Ok to get a starting value and emphasized that the comparitive step against current items was still to be done.

 

in essence, they forgot to tell the DND players that "being built by the chart" is not sufficient and that a final comparitive subjective stage needs to be done.

 

if you are reffering to the main book items, assuming you use the erratta, all i can say is that i found most of their values to be close to correct. However, like with any price that is supposed to be relative to effectiveness, you MUST adjust these values based on the campaign and its challenges. A campaign focused on an invasion from the elemental plane of fire should increase the value of fire resistance items and chill weapons, for instance. This all comes back to effectiveness being subjective and tied to challenges.

 

[/b]

 

Ah, so you agree that the publishers of D&D 3RD are fools? why thank you. Id better not buy anything of theirs then or anything based upon thier system! thank you very much you just saved me alot of money. Yes Im being sarcastic. big surprise there.

 

Anyways so the whole system Still needs to be judged upon relative merits just like Hero?

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

That remains true even in DND, which is what we are discussing.

 

OK, one thing i will repeat again. In the vast majority of heroic myths and legends, action films and stories regarding the fantasy genres, the heroes achieve success over the bad guys by some form of combat. This may come as a shock to you, but in the vast number of scenarios when heroic PCs win over a bad guy, some combat was involved, much like in those films, stories, and myths. (If this so shocks you, then you may need to sit down and catch a breath. I'll wait...)

 

So when it came to deciding which classes to present in the limited space in the main rulebook, they decided to keep each class with SOME combat capabilities, thinking that even if the adventure involved a lot of guile and subterfuge, there would likely bee some combat and that most of the time combat would be a predominant element. Thus all the main PC classes get some combat aptitude presented.

 

If you think this all is a silly notion and you do not see combat as a frequent element in adventure fantasy, well, then you probably have more than a smidgen of work ahead.

 

But again, this is setting. If you want to run a charlemaigne's court campaign where the vast majority of challenges are social, then you need to provide relevent classed. Fortunately, the game does provide you with some NPC classes which the Gm can use or alter to help meet his needs. The expert and the aristocrat (or was it noble?) are two great examples and I do allow these to be taken as PC levels if they wish. Book not in front of me but iirc the noble was almost all skills and social.

 

[/b]

 

OKies lets _NOT_ bring in NPC Sh***T classes, okies? I have a LOoooooong History of having a biiiig B*t*h about the stupidities of the "great and Noble division" between PC and NPC.

 

There also is a huge difference between _some_ combat capacity and heavy combat. all of the classes have significant heavy combat capacity. Try to deny it and ill laugh at you. Heck D&D is worried about armor for Mages, what a loon.

 

This Decision by the makers to have hack and slash classes (yes that is what they really are)is problematic. Frequently an author (totally different medium) uses combat to bring uncertanity and excitement to the adventure. The more complex books with better writers can write adventures without resorting to violence. or by making the violence something to not only be avoided if possible but entirely worthless and detrimental to the missions.... in essecnce violence is not necessary to the story or plot at all and could be done away with.

 

D&D has chosen an entirely different path. to get XP you need to face 13.3 equal rating challenge threats to "gain a level"... talk about a cold blooded points system. Now then it does not matter if these 13.3 apply to the quest or story line or not or even if the gm plays these threats appropriately. If a party of charcters at 12th level have a problem dealing with a pack of Kobolds and finally through a significant effort overcome the nasty buggers they are worth no xp. according to cannon 3RD. I much prefer the threatless system of Hero wherein the Gm determines how much challenge the players faced and awards xp based upon that and not some "written law" of xp awards based upon an unforgiving system of irregardless of whether or not tactically the gm can whip some poor players into a puddle..

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

the multiclass rules allow taking any lclass level you want for whatever reason you want, barring GM restrictions and setting restrictions such as paladin or monk reclassing. Do you honestly expect them to throw a list of every possible reason to multiclass? That would be an overwhelmingly long one. isn't it much simpler to leave the reason behind the decision to the people playing?

 

 

I have yet to see a case where gaining a new level in anythiong weakened a character. About the only cases where that would be the case is where some element in the decision violated a restriction and cost him class abilities.

 

2. I fail to see how taking levels in classes to reflect the actions the character has already taken results in violating character concept. It seems to me that it would enhance it (allowing stats to reflect already performed deeds.)

 

For the three players among seven in my current game whose character concepts needed a tweak to the classes, It took moments to do so. The resuklt was a big happy for them.

I consider that worth the few minutes.

 

Why not play HERO? The list is long but basically it boils down to a ton more work, a much heavier and impactful system, and a learning curve which would, even after my spending a lot of manpower streamlining it as i did last time, scared off some of my current players. Even if i believed this weight and math focus had any substantial benefit (and i don't) the impact on new players would have driven me away from it. One of my players is the wife of another, she is 50 some years old and has never roleplayed before. because of the imopact light system, she pretty much got her character quickly and has out roleplayed most of the veterans. I would not have dropped the weight of hero on her and gotten anywhere.

 

HERO is a game focused on veterans of the hero game. its not friendly to new players. I value bringing new players into roleplaying and make a determined effort to bring new players into every single game i run along with my veterans.

 

Don't take my word for it about HERO and new players. look across these boards for discussions of hero lite and sidekick, even with posts from Mr Long himself.

 

SO, in choosing between playing hero and being willing to take the repeated suggestion to alter classes or create new classes to meet PC needs... i will take the latter.

 

[/b]

 

ok Lets face this you like a fiat system, frankly I have seen fiats abused more often than not, also I find it real difficult to rules lawyer a gm into doing stuff in the hero system. 3RD is a piece of cake to rules lawyer.

 

3RD also habitually brings out the worst in people IMNSHO. look at the people on the WOTC board and the munchkin flamewars. Heck look at Artucks personality. Ever wonder why a sweet guy like that became the guy he is today? AD&D.

 

Sure people are frightened of our rep unfairly given to us by D&D players. The same ones who moan about the points, the math etc.

and really cant see the freedoms we are insituting. so sorry bud. When was the last time you could make a spell do something new on the fly? My answer is HERO 5th Edition, so far it cannot be D&D.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

you must not have been on the boards when two different threads and about 3-4 questions on the QnA board went thru this already. Steve Long commented that if one did not like the rules one shouldn't use them, not that the rules were incorrect or the math at error.

 

Here is an off the cuff repeat of the example.

 

STR 60

Dex 30

CON 30

BOD 30

Int 10

EGO 10

PRE 10

COM 10

PD 12

ED 6

Stun 75

REC 18

speed 5

end 60

 

Extra limb tail (60 strength)

 

This character costs 205 for these traits.

 

Now if i buy the character with a strength 30 tail he costs MORE...

 

 

STR 60 (-1/4 on 30 strength)

Dex 30

CON 30

BOD 30

Int 10

EGO 10

PRE 10

COM 10

PD 12 (6 base and +6 bought*)

ED 6

Stun 75 (60 base and +15 bought)

REC 18 (12 base and +6 bought)

speed 5

end 60

 

Extra limb tail (30 strength only)

 

This guy costs 231.

 

* The cost could be 225 if the GM ruled that the PD from the extra strength was limited to the tail and since he was using called shots this still limited the PD and so PD was 12 base.

 

Rules to know...

HERO5.112 Limited manipulation which specifically spells out the way to point out extra limbs that use less than the full strength as a -1/4 limit on the STR or DEX.

 

HERO5.92 under characteristics which specifically states the if the limitation on the primary does not effect the figureds, then you dont get the figureds.

 

The organic flaw in the hero system shown here is the one i catalog as "buying a lim" where buying some relatively cheap power allows you to take a limit on some other more expensive element of the character, thus resulting in spending a few points to save a lot of points.

 

[/b]

 

OKies lesse first off ill Quote Steven Long You have done quoted his writings plenty plenty allready so lessee : Dont get too worked up over

how to buy thnigs in the Hero System, or is it there is no one right way to do things in the Hero system.

 

either or it does not really matter.

First off lets find out what you are trying to do.

the underlying philosophy to HERO (which D&D severly lacks IMNSHO) can be summed up very many different ways but the way I like to think of it is you get what you concieve for.

 

For example I can think of several different ways to build the character.

the first issue is not the points but the concept. From the way you are trying to mechanically limit the character it looks like you are not going for a Scorpion or Doc Ock Character but rather a Nightcrawler/devil character. Good you have a concept.

 

Now then you are trying to put the limit on the Str. How limiting is the limit on the actual Strength? Not very. In fact it could be argued that it is not at all limiting. Okies so with all four of your normal limbs you have 60 STR and with your tail (and tail only) you anly have 30STR. How is that really a limit? It is none IMNSHO. The real question is what is being limited here? The Tail. Yes the tail is limited here, not the Str. now then there are two ways to limit the character concerning the tail witout applying them to STR.

 

1. -1/4 limit on the Extra limbs power defined as .Tail only can use half strengthTail can only use 30 or half strength. points total drops from 205 cost to 204 (Yay your character is cheaper for not being very limited.)

 

2. a five point phisical limit (Inf, Minor) tail only uses half Str.

 

Frankly i would use that limit on a stat only in cases wherein i was building a tail that was significantly stronger/more agile than the rest of the body.

 

You are less limited by the rules and only your own imagination than in 3RD.

 

 

Also Steve Has to watch out for rules lawyering punks who want to munchkin the rules. That is the main reason why we have such harsh and sometimes what appears to be unreasonably inflexible rules. Being really strong means many thnigs.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

This is an accepted practice, a defined organic method in HERO, spelled out yet again precisely in the base rules, and yet the obvious flaws in cost it vreates are obvious.

 

It isn't my misunderstanding of the HERO rules, it is an error in the hero rules supported by the designer.

 

I will note that since the time of the original threads and QnA, there has been an addition to the faq that described the limited manipulation as a no point voluntary restriction IF it applies only to

some additional limbs but not to other additional limbs.

 

[/b]

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

procedure for defining limited manipulation (including weaker strength tails) for extra limbs is precisely and specifically defined on HERO5.112. It calls for a limitation on the strength/dex.

 

[/b]

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

Perhaps it is your not having the eloquence or comprehensive understanding of how to do things in HERO that is preventing you from seeing its faults or understanding how little it actually does.

 

FWIW... I started GMing hero in ~83 with 3rd edition and have a number of 2nd edition products. I have GMed it more than any other game system using it for supers and fantsy and scifi. i would say conservatively i have run about 12 years of campaigns using hero in that 20 years since i first started. DND is a distant third with about 6, vampire actually being second with around 6. (Most of the time i ran two campaigns as i am now.)

 

When i speak of the faults of HERO, i do not speak from ignorance. This is not to say I am flawless, and i would no doubt expect those who played HERO5 for more than the 8 months i did before abandoning it are more likely able to pinpoint specific areas than I, but i do research my examples to make sure they are rules correct BEFORE using them (unlike apparently some do with their complaints about DND, a=t least round here.)

 

By the way, the "buy a lim" organic system error is one of those 'total subset" cases... where the cheaper set contains everything the more expensive set and more. Those are examples of balance errors from the system that are not subjective but simply objective.

[/b]

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

 

Regardless, the "value" of something is primarily determined IN PLAY and by the challenges set for it. If i spend 60 points for 70 swimming and we never meet an aquatic adventure or go under water, then it

aint all that wonderful.

 

[/b]

 

Uhmmm, Yeah, riiiight try looking at maps of every major city in the world most have some sort of water way inthem. I can get from Denver to Dallas dangably fast w/ 124" NCM. Crossing the Rockies/most mountain ranges would be tough admittedly, but then it is not the perfect form of movement either (nothing is ).

Swimming gives you access to over 75% of the earth's Surface plus a ton beneath it.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

If i spend 5 points on water breathing and we go under water a lot because of the atlantean adventure campaign we are in, then that 5 points may well be wonderful, particularly if the campaign nature only allows scuba tank like items for the others as bulky foci.

 

[/b]

 

Actually your argument right here is proof positive that water breathing is priced right. Many settings (like Hudson city, Gotham, NYC, Metropolis, Houston, anything on the Great Lakes and many others) have major waterways or are right on the edge of an ocean or what not. Classic villian scene: bad guys blow up a dam. Even Supes with his Flight vs you and your waterbreathing and Swimming you will be in much better shape to deal with sub aquatic villians and major plots around water than old Supes. 62"move VS 15" at best for flying underwater IIRC(both placed at 60 points spent) 62" vs 30" on the surface. If the Gm can't/won't let your character shine by having some fun things happen around that you can deal with better than others then that is more the Gm's fault than "the points"? isn't it?

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

DND does not use a poiint system for most things. It is an effect system using comparitive judgements, not a cost system using "points and formula."

[/b]

 

However the point system ties in all of the HERO mechanics into a simple format. How cumbersom would it be to have 10 different mechanics for building a character and how would you exchange values for them?

the Problem with ANY D&D system is that _all_ of the mechanics are separate, and are _all_ point systems. A spell cannot be bought with hitpoints, a feat does not equate a stat increase many of the levels are "Blanks" to build up to better levels and the thing is you have to follow the same road to get anywhere.

Too much multiclassing is a bad thing.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

You guys can keep slamming it for not using points, but that sort misses that that is an understood difference right away and that "the points" hero uses are subjectively determined before the math and subjectively enforced in play after the math. Every time you refute a "cost question" with saying that the Gm can or maybe should adjust the base costs for the campaign specifics, you point to how much of a effect-comparitive-judgement system hero is.

 

[/b]

 

Actually If you really want me to slam AD&D3Rd I will, here goes:

 

Not enough Social systems to handle a real society.

 

the challenge factor (ever heard of Tuckers Kobolds? Direct problem with cf 's).

 

Wealth being tied directly to Class levels but not influencing Monsters

 

NPC only Classes. Don't _EVEN_ BRING THIS ONE UP IT HAS BEEN A SORE POINT SINCE 1ST ED AD&D WITH ME. IF A GM CAN'T CHALLENGE/BEAT A PARTY WITH THE STUFF THE PLAYERS CAN BE/DO THEN HE SHOULD NOT BE RUNNING A CAMPAIGN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry verry old problem.

 

Combat intensive system, especially the rewards system.

 

Tower Shields

 

Index System

 

Attitude written in the book.

 

Points or no points 3RD has problems. They have slowly solved some problems but since what 2-3 years ago they released 3 now they are releasing 3.5 and they now want more money out of me for being stupid and buying their krap in the first place? Uh no.

 

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

You guys keep referring to the math as looking under the hood so you know whats going on, but in truth the subjective-comparitve-judgement system is the "under the hood" or "behind the curtain" for the math!

 

[/b]

 

And HERO is more open than the D&D system, heckaroonie it wasn't until much later (just pre 3.5 press release ) that I found out that Magic Missle is supposed to be the "best first level spell in the game" period end of sentence. HERO at least suggests you think about what the hell you are doing when you play with the system.

What curtains do i have to look behind to find out that fact in 3RD?

At least with some math rather than a fiat based system I can relativistically change things and have some concept of making them make sense. If I take MB and make it cost 5 points per level I dang well need to make MD _at least_ as common as ED or PD, adding it into Armor and Force Field would also not be a bad idea. even going so far as to add range mods and other quirkyness. Uhm where in 3RD is there a real discussion of adding new stats and creating new powers and what you need to do to concern yourself with game balance?

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

WOW, twice the price is not important enough to worry with? Does that include 5 for each d6 of eb vs 10 for each d6 of mental blast? The difference between 1 pd and ED and 2 armor is only 1 point. Can i buy armor at the same cost of PD and ED? its not worth quibbling over,

right?

 

[/b]

 

Sure I'd let ya have "Armor" of 1 PD and ED _non resistant_ and you can call it "Armor". _NOW_ that you are arguing about red apples and not quite so red apples here is _exactly_ where your argument breaks down. All of the above examples like EB vs MB, Armor vs PD and ED, you get something extra for those points with Armor you get resistant defenses, those defenses (and many others) suddenly apply with but a single point of resistant defense. a MB will affect many things and has many more advantages that an EB does/will not. Is it worth twice the price? quite possibly. In fact arguably so since _at the least_ MB is an AVLD attack.

Straw man knocked down.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

of course, in all these cases that "per unit" cost difference might seem not worth quibbling about when looking at the base cost. It will quickly add up to real points when you start taking more potent abilities, in other words, the BASE COST is worth quibbling about once you start applying that vaunted HERO math.

 

[/b]

 

Aha! Im seeing part of your problem, you are talking about two different things

You are really talking about a Movement based power vs. a Life support. You are simpy taking a comparing of things that in some ways don't really compare. The more movement based powers you have the better clinging gets. Clinging gets enhanced _by_ other things.

WB typically does not get enhanced by other things. Now then in the grand scope of things WB is worth less than SCB? I would think so since there are many things that SCB protects against that WB would not. is SCB =to Clinging in most cases, yes. The ability to survive most environments vs the ability to execute certain difficult movement manuvers is probably approximately the same. is Clinging worth 5 points of flight? quite possibly, in fact probably so. You get certain defenses vs having no need to rely upon surfaces.

 

Now you are going to try to prove me wrong by pointing out exceptions, well there are exceptions to 3RD being right too. Clinging and WB abilities don't compare in 3RD either. There is a reason why there has never been a mass Spider Climb Spell without the Spider Climb spell disadvantages. It is too powerful for the limits of the D&D system, any version. Heck even the name is a misnomer it should be Sticky Climb, not Spider Climb(read the spell). There is a reason why there has not been a mass WB spell or SCB.

 

Wow I can build an argument that you are wrong.

Straw man Knocked down.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

Say i want spells that provides water breathing (clinging) to all my allies within a certain radius and i start applying it as using area effect (so i dont have to hit each one one by one) and useable by others (say something like 16 more people maybe) then the vaunted hero math tells me (I will roguh out the combined mods as being a +3 advantage) 20 points for the water breathing and 40 points for the clinging.

 

You just dismissed the relative values, base values, for these two as they did not matter enough for you to quibble over. Low and behold, apply the vaunted hero math to create a power from these unimportant base values and now we have a 20 point difference. Thats enough of a difference to buy +2 combat levels (all combat 16 points) and +2 OCV levels with your main attack.

 

Is that enough for you to quibble over? (hey, 20 points happens to be in the same ballpark as weak tail vs strong tail shown above.)

 

The base power costs in HERO are VITAL to the system. They are not "things not worth quibbling over." They are the foundation upon which the rest is built.

 

Barage in garbage out, as they say.

 

The key thing that HERO players who play the arbitrary card whenever they want is that these values are "arbitrarily" or rather subjectively assigned and should be assigned varying from campaign to campaign based on the challneges expected to be presented. (Then of course comes the in play enforcement.)

 

[/b]

 

Hmm lessee, lets negate the cost differential by upgrading WB to SCB. Now I have a choice between giving the ability to my friends the abilty to through superior tactics use terrain and avoid traps and thereby negate the advantages of or create a disadvantage for others, vs the ability to ignore poison gas attacks, being strangled/suffocated etc. WB would do half that, and would allow a retreat into water, Hmmm seems pretty fair to me. Yep your argument is sure solid. Clinging _IS_ twice as effective as WB, why thank you for proving our system with all of your hard work.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

WOW, now thats a wonderfully unsupported parting shot.

 

Well done. it speaks volumes about your position.

 

[/b]

 

Why thank you !!!

 

I try

 

BTW Waterdeep is a major City in Forgotten Realms Setting, you might have heard of it. One of the big three settings being pushed upon hapless players and Gm's by D&D?

 

Last shots: D&D is an absolute system.

Hero is a non-abasolute system.

 

Learn the difference, Hero aint for everyone, neither is D&D. Stop trying to push your Crack at me and ill try to do the same.

 

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

I dont have the quotes set up right so just deal with it.

Apparently. Tho if you need help with that as well i can be of service there too. In the mean time, until you get the hang of it, i can clean it up some. No biggie.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Right so you mr. I have rewritten much of 3rd edition are a follow the crowd kinda guy just like me? suuure.

All in all i don't think i will be rushing out to claim being like you in any way.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Im not sure how you would define a naked 16th level fighter vs 12 Tuckers Kobolds as being a no xp situation. I cannot see how the D&D system could get so convoluted as to assume that every person has all of their monetary value on them at all times in good order.

It doesn't.

 

It uses the assumption of a standard wealth level for standard CR. it then adjusts CR/EL for circumstances which make it harder or easier.

 

If you had actually read the section you misquoted, you would have already seen me reference adjusting CR up or down for more/less than standard equipment as already being used in DND products.

 

They do not assume every encounter will be the same, they just establish a benchmark, give you pointers on elements which adjust it and go from there.

 

So, for example, a naked high level guy would go way down in estimated level. A gang of many kobolds with good equipment and significant positional and situational advantages would go way up. It would likely not be a no xp situation if the gm assessed the elements correctly.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Most campaign situations i have been in the Gm strives, yes strives mightily, to remove the wealth factor from players in order to "challenge" them.

Thats covered by the situational adjustments. They have even published adventures where they adjust CRs because of low equipment for reasons similar to the ones you describe. The system you seem to be complaining about already addresses this issue.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

and that wealth beomes a mighty crutch. Heavily Experienced AD&D players look to their magical items first and Spells/feats second, attributes third then possibly Skills to get them out of a situation. There are so few skills it is not even funny.

In my experience, the degree of importance between gear and skills and powers is dependent on how they are handled in campaign (do you pay points for gear or is it finders keepers) and the importance the GM makes skills have in play. DND like heroic level HERO system does not make gear cost anything and is finders keepers. Like HERo it then comes down to the GM to make the relative importance show in play.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Hero charactes typically Look at Skills, Powers(which includes Spells Feats and racial abilities) and maybe magical items if they have them.

I imagine they do IF the GM makes those items the answers to the challenges. I also imagine they make items the importance if the GM does. Same as in DND.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

So what happens to the poor player who doesnt realise he needs some of the important skills untill third or later level. Play catchup?

i suppose that once the CHARACTER decides to work in a field he begins to do so and accumulate proficiency, yes.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Pretty difficult to do in 3rd.

Not at all.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Ah, so you agree that the publishers of D&D 3RD are fools? why thank you. Id better not buy anything of theirs then or anything based upon thier system! thank you very much you just saved me alot of money. Yes Im being sarcastic. big surprise there.

You now seem to just be ranting? is the froth in the keyboard an issue for you or do you have a keyboard guard?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

OKies lets _NOT_ bring in NPC Sh***T classes, okies? I have a LOoooooong History of having a biiiig B*t*h about the stupidities of the "great and Noble division" between PC and NPC.

Uhh.. so you do not feel you can discuss those elements without slipping into profanity? IS this perhaps a discussion you should not really be involved in, with that control problem?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

There also is a huge difference between _some_ combat capacity and heavy combat. all of the classes have significant heavy combat capacity. Try to deny it and ill laugh at you.

Now thats a wonderful discussion element!

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

This Decision by the makers to have hack and slash classes (yes that is what they really are)is problematic. Frequently an author (totally different medium) uses combat to bring uncertanity and excitement to the adventure. The more complex books with better writers can write adventures without resorting to violence. or by making the violence something to not only be avoided if possible but entirely worthless and detrimental to the missions.... in essecnce violence is not necessary to the story or plot at all and could be done away with.

Absolutely, but in mosy cases in the genre of fantasy, it isn't. The answer to the problem wasn't reaching an accord with the medusa and developing stronger relationships through understanding and embracing their cultural differences, it was finding out how to vut her head off without getting killed. Then that head was used as a weapon. Blinding the cyclops so he wouldn't eat you was the answer.

 

Anyway, its up to the GM to determine the challenges appropriate for his PCs. The fact that they realize their are more commonly in the genre combat oriented solutions does not seem like a misconnect to the genre, either in gaming, film, or lit or legend.

 

Maybe it seems that way to you?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

D&D has chosen an entirely different path. to get XP you need to face 13.3 equal rating challenge threats to "gain a level"... talk about a cold blooded points system. Now then it does not matter if these 13.3 apply to the quest or story line or not or even if the gm plays these threats appropriately. If a party of charcters at 12th level have a problem dealing with a pack of Kobolds and finally through a significant effort overcome the nasty buggers they are worth no xp.

Thats just so wrong. If the kobolds are in a situation which raises the El of the encounter to be a serious threat, then there is XP.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

ok Lets face this you like a fiat system,

if by fiat you mean a system where GM judgement and reason are the fundamental driving forces instead of points, yup.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

frankly I have seen fiats abused more often than not, also I find it real difficult to rules lawyer a gm into doing stuff in the hero system. 3RD is a piece of cake to rules lawyer.

I am fairly sure that both systems rely a whole lot of the GM for balance. Without classes and things broken down by development paths, HERo actually seems to me to need more GMing to maintain a semblance of balance. TMMV.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

3RD also habitually brings out the worst in people IMNSHO.

That seems to be true in your case. At least, i hope the almost rabid frothing at the mouth side you seem to be showing here is not your more widespread persona.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

look at the people on the WOTC board and the munchkin flamewars. Heck look at Artucks personality. Ever wonder why a sweet guy like that became the guy he is today? AD&D.

Heck, here i thought it was orbital mind control sattelites. or was it the devil that made him do it?

 

How far removed from the fringe "RPGs are the devils work" anti-gaming religious zealots are you when you make comments about how AD&D making peoples personalities into this or that?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Sure people are frightened of our rep unfairly given to us by D&D players. The same ones who moan about the points, the math etc. and really cant see the freedoms we are insituting. so sorry bud. When was the last time you could make a spell do something new on the fly? My answer is HERO 5th Edition, so far it cannot be D&D.

That would be called metamagic in DND 3e, where for instance on the fly my sorcerer changes his fireball into an ice ball so it can affect the red dragon.

 

The first one was AD&D about 18 years ago when we added that ability to one of the mage classes as a SETTING element of the campaign.

 

In any game where when a GM decides that type of magic is appropriate for his campaign.

 

Now, i know very little about AD&D 2e, but i seem to recall there being wild mages who could do wierd stuff. I also know that in Monte Cooks upcoming July release it will include variable effects for spells.

 

Now for the good part... it would not be in the spell colleges system for FH4th.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

First off lets find out what you are trying to do.

Ok i will snip the stuff here.

 

When i made a comment about examples where the hero math fails, you started pondering if i did not know how to use it.

 

So i quote a specific example and a specific rule cite which exactly tells you how to do the precise thing.

 

Now to refute this claim on how HERo did something, you just want to ignore that RULE. That rule is not a setting element. Its a mechanical rule of the accounting system.

 

Understand, i find that not uncommon at all.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

For example I can think of several different ways to build the character.

I imagine you can, but only one of them is defined precisely by the rules on HERO5.112.

 

HERo is indeed the perfect system when you refuse to count any of the cases where it isn't.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Now then you are trying to put the limit on the Str. How limiting is the limit on the actual Strength?

By the rule on HERO5.112, -1/4.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Frankly i would use that limit on a stat only in cases wherein i was building a tail that was significantly stronger/more agile than the rest of the body.

Thats fine, sounds like a wonderful house rule you have there to correct the error in the rules.

 

So it seems we have both agreed that the rule on HERO5.112 is in error. Cool. How do you feel about the partial coverage base rule?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

You are less limited by the rules and only your own imagination than in 3RD.

Not hardly.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Also Steve Has to watch out for rules lawyering punks who want to munchkin the rules. That is the main reason why we have such harsh and sometimes what appears to be unreasonably inflexible rules.

OK see that would make sense, even sound reasonable, except that the example at work here following Steve's rules makes the stronger character cheaper than the weaker character. The effect of Steve's rule is to make MORE cheaper, which seems to be playing to the munchkin, not away from them.

 

You really seem to just be ranting cuz the conclusions seem to just not follow from the examples?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

 

Being really strong means many thnigs.

Apparently, by your thinking, to prevent munchkinism, it means being cheaper too?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Uhmmm, Yeah, riiiight try looking at maps of every major city in the world most have some sort of water way inthem. I can get from Denver to Dallas dangably fast w/ 124" NCM. Crossing the Rockies/most mountain ranges would be tough admittedly, but then it is not the perfect form of movement either (nothing is ).

Swimming gives you access to over 75% of the earth's Surface plus a ton beneath it.

Read the comment... it only becomes important if the GM scripts it to be. Thats my point. its worth 60 points if and only if the GM makes it so.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

If the Gm can't/won't let your character shine by having some fun things happen around that you can deal with better than others then that is more the Gm's fault than "the points"? isn't it?

You are close oh so close. Absolutely it comes down to does the GM "let you shine"... does he let you see value for your investment by scripting the scenarios the allow you to see benefit from that power.

 

That should tell you something... if swimming cost 30 instead of 60 for that same movement, it too would boil down to did the GM "let you shine." Which should tell you the cost is not some objective figurer arrived at by precise calculation... but rather a purely subjective measure, a judgement, a fiat, a CHOICE made by the Gm as to how much he will allow that power to be a significant element.

 

So why have all the math?

 

It all comes down to the relative values of A vs B represented by the cost the GM told the players and the factual value in play he shows them. Whatever those values are, if they coincide, then its running fairly good. if not, it isn't. All the math in the world between those two stages matters not a whit.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

However the point system ties in all of the HERO mechanics into a simple format. How cumbersom would it be to have 10 different mechanics for building a character and how would you exchange values for them?

Not sure what you mean by exchange values.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

the Problem with ANY D&D system is that _all_ of the mechanics are separate, and are _all_ point systems. A spell cannot be bought with hitpoints, a feat does not equate a stat increase many of the levels are "Blanks" to build up to better levels and the thing is you have to follow the same road to get anywhere.

Why should you be able to buy a spell with hitpoints? Reading a book doesn't make you weaker. Would you allow a mage to sell back body to buy a magic missile in hero as a routine choice or would you just allow it for a mage whose concept allowed him to spend his life essense in that way?

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Too much multiclassing is a bad thing.

I think in general we can say that once you have reached "too much" of whatever the subject is we can assume its no longer a good thing. The definition of "too much" seems to cover that without saying much at all about the subject.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Actually If you really want me to slam AD&D3Rd I will, here goes:

Apparently there is no stopping you, regardless of my wants.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Not enough Social systems to handle a real society.

But perhaps enough to run an action-adventure story in a genre of myth legend and fantasy.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

the challenge factor (ever heard of Tuckers Kobolds? Direct problem with cf 's).

See above. Els are supposed to handle situational and scenario modifiers.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Wealth being tied directly to Class levels but not influencing Monsters

NPCs have gear, monsters have treasure and both can use it. Both are related to their CR/level. Wealth per level is a benchmark, not a mandate.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

NPC only Classes. Don't _EVEN_ BRING THIS ONE UP IT HAS BEEN A SORE POINT SINCE 1ST ED AD&D WITH ME. IF A GM CAN'T CHALLENGE/BEAT A PARTY WITH THE STUFF THE PLAYERS CAN BE/DO THEN HE SHOULD NOT BE RUNNING A CAMPAIGN!

Ok, realizing you have control issues here, i will tread lightly. I think you missed what NPC classes are all about. They are not about providing some sort of uber challenge. They are classes to reflect various useful NPCS who do not really fit the adventurer mold and as such are not often going to make great PCs. They are not there because the Gm cannot challenge the PCs at all. They are there to help flesh out thwe world with more of those people who are just not heroes, but more normal folk, yet who for various periods play roles in the adventure or quest. If you thought NPC classes in 3e were about new challenges, you just missed the boat.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Combat intensive system, especially the rewards system.

The nature of the rewards is determined by the challenges presented by the GM. They can be combat or not, as he scripts.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Points or no points 3RD has problems.

No argument there. My point has never been that DND is a perfect system... although if i adopt HERO critical technique 101 and chose to not count any of those when i analyze it, i could be deluding myself into thinking so... but i dont so i am not.

 

My point is that HERO is not overall a better system. HERo overall doesn't balance better. HERO overall isn't more easily customizable. In short, i am just refuting the "HERO is better" claims.

 

Personally, for my uses, i find HERO to be a worse system, because its problems are more trouble for me to handle than the DND ones are. But thats just me. Like i said, some GMs will believe they need the math... and while i think they are wrong, i do try not to overestimate hero players that often.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

They have slowly solved some problems but since what 2-3 years ago they released 3 now they are releasing 3.5 and they now want more money out of me for being stupid and buying their krap in the first place? Uh no.

The 3.5 rules will be available online and according to wotc on the release date for the books. They are hoping you will choose to buy the books, seeing enough balue in them, but they are not requiring it.

 

I figurte once HERO places its core rules for free download, HERO fans might actually have a reasonable position to start seriously talking about pricing issues for rules between HERO and DND.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

And HERO is more open than the D&D system, heckaroonie it wasn't until much later (just pre 3.5 press release ) that I found out that Magic Missle is supposed to be the "best first level spell in the game" period end of sentence. HERO at least suggests you think about what the hell you are doing when you play with the system.

It was discussed as such for years. It was one of the cases where they intentionally and openly violated the design rules for sake of "history." If you did not catch on until recently thats just speaking to how current your information is.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

What curtains do i have to look behind to find out that fact in 3RD?

They talk about alterations and such in the system in both the DMG and PHB.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

At least with some math rather than a fiat based system I can relativistically change things and have some concept of making them make sense.

you need to do the same thing in DND, you just don't need points to tell you.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

If I take MB and make it cost 5 points per level I dang well need to make MD _at least_ as common as ED or PD, adding it into Armor and Force Field would also not be a bad idea. even going so far as to add range mods and other quirkyness. Uhm where in 3RD is there a real discussion of adding new stats and creating new powers and what you need to do to concern yourself with game balance?

In the DMG, in the PHB, and so forth.

 

matter of fact, in the DMG for a spec of specifics, there is a section on adding new spells and it even iirc includes damage benchmarks divided by magic source. Also in the DMg there is a discussion of addinf new magic items. Also in the DMG there ...

 

Did you miss all of these? I think they are even online in the SRD for you to peruse for free.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

a MB will affect many things and has many more advantages that an EB does/will not.

and an eb will affect many things a mb will not. a Mb wont break down that door or blow off your shackles or help you escape spideys webbing. Whats the ratio of entangles vs robots with no egos to villains who are more vulnerable to MB than to EB? An AVERAGE supervillain, using hero 5 standards will have 20 defense vs the eb meaning a 12d6 guy will see 22 stun thru. The 6d6 MB guy will see 21 stun thru assuming NO mental defense. Against an entable... the ratio is useful to useless. Against a robot with no ego, the ratio is again useful to useless even if i assume immune to stun and a 7 PD/ED. Against a wall... the ratio is again useful to useless.

 

Now, i am not saying that the ratio is 1-1 or 1-3 or 1-2. i am saying that ratio varies with the challenges presented and is not a static figure. Now, IMO, many of the values are off from what i would run as a typical campaign or what i see in the comics... i do not normally see the area attacks in comics being grossly less effective than their single target counterparts, the way hero often works them out.

 

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Is it worth twice the price? quite possibly. In fact arguably so since _at the least_ MB is an AVLD attack.

Straw man knocked down.

Actually not at all. unfortunately i don't think you are seeing that.

 

But it is at least gratifying enough to know that some 5 point dsifferences you do find worth quibbling about. Amazxingly, it seems the COMBAT ones are wirth quibbling about while the ones such as water breathing and clinging aren't. Some might have suspected that with all your going on about non-combat and DNDs combat orientation being so bad you might have went the other way, considering non-combat as much worth quibbling about as the damage ones.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Aha! Im seeing part of your problem, you are talking about two different things

You are really talking about a Movement based power vs. a Life support. You are simpy taking a comparing of things that in some ways don't really compare.

Yet the system does compare them and make me compare them because they assign both a cost and taking one is taking points away that could go to the other. Also, weren't you just a moment ago talking about the DND problem being having different things not linked together in a common framework so that for instance hit points were not put in spending opposition with spells?

 

besides, you did not have a problem with comparison when it was just clinging and water breathing.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

The more movement based powers you have the better clinging gets. Clinging gets enhanced _by_ other things.

WB typically does not get enhanced by other things.

seems to me that Wb would be better if you had swimming in more than the base or bision that helped or free movement stuff to allow you to avoid the other penalties. or did i miss something?

 

But either way, are you suggesting clinging should be cheaper is you dont have movement or that clinging's value is dependent on movements? isn't clinging a flat cost, only adjusted uward by added strength?

 

Doesn't clinging with 10 strength and 6" of wall crawling cost 10 points for a character with those traits, while clinging with 60 strength and 30" wall crawling cost the same 10 points for a character with those traits.

 

if indeed clinging is more effective based on these other traits, shouldn't its cost reflect that and adjust accordingly?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Now then in the grand scope of things WB is worth less than SCB? I would think so since there are many things that SCB protects against that WB would not. is SCB =to Clinging in most cases, yes.

OK which one of use said just a moment ago that life support and movement could not be compared?

 

oh wait, it was you when you said "You are simpy taking a comparing of things that in some ways don't really compare. "

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

The ability to survive most environments vs the ability to execute certain difficult movement manuvers is probably approximately the same.

Isn;t that actually really related to the situations you face, and only true if the Gm scripts the encounters to make this a reality in play?

 

That seems such an obvious point.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Now you are going to try to prove me wrong by pointing out exceptions, well there are exceptions to 3RD being right too. Clinging and WB abilities don't compare in 3RD either. There is a reason why there has never been a mass Spider Climb Spell without the Spider Climb spell disadvantages. It is too powerful for the limits of the D&D system, any version. Heck even the name is a misnomer it should be Sticky Climb, not Spider Climb(read the spell). There is a reason why there has not been a mass WB spell or SCB.

Here again we come to the part where your assumtions and lack of knowledge gets you into trouble. See the basic Wb spell in DND 3e allows multiple people to be affected. At the basic level a 5th level wizard could affect himself and four other for two hours each with a single casting of the spell. he actually can affect more but for less time... like say a total of 10 people for an hour each.

 

So it seems perhaps that its not quite as fragile a system in danger of simple mass spells as you suspect.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Wow I can build an argument that you are wrong.

Straw man Knocked down.

You sure can if you just want to base it on supposition and incorrect knowledge of the system.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Hmm lessee, lets negate the cost differential by upgrading WB to SCB.

Why? Didn't you just say the difference wasn't worth quibbling about? Why can you not deal with the example built on your claim without deciding to change it to some other point?

 

Oh well, it seems like you are unable or unwilling to back up your claim. OK. i will now take it that you do feel the 5 points difference between Wb and clinging IS worth quibbling about.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Now I have a choice between giving the ability to my friends the abilty to through superior tactics use terrain and avoid traps and thereby negate the advantages of or create a disadvantage for others, vs the ability to ignore poison gas attacks, being strangled/suffocated etc. WB would do half that,

How do you arribe at half? It seems to me that is directly related to the relative frequency of drowning in water threats vs gas, choked, suffocated etc.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

and would allow a retreat into water, Hmmm seems pretty fair to me. Yep your argument is sure solid. Clinging _IS_ twice as effective as WB, why thank you for proving our system with all of your hard work.

Well i must say it does not surprise me in the least that that little bit of showmanship passes for proof in this neck of the woods.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

BTW Waterdeep is a major City in Forgotten Realms Setting, you might have heard of it. One of the big three settings being pushed upon hapless players and Gm's by D&D?

I am aware of it i just have never used it and as such dont want to pretend to know a lot about it. If i had, it would have led to me making uninformed claims in all likelihood and i will try and leave that to your hero guys when ever possible.

 

As for pushed, sold maybe, but i have yet to see DND pushers.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Last shots: D&D is an absolute system.

Hero is a non-abasolute system.

HERO starts with an H.

DND starts with a D.

 

The HERO rulebook is mostly black, and black is the color of evil.

The DND rulebooks are multicoloered and multicolors are used creatively to make fun things.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Learn the difference, Hero aint for everyone, neither is D&D. Stop trying to push your Crack at me and ill try to do the same.

But, in case you missed it, I am not trying to push anything on you. i am for the most part trying to refute and explain the fallacies of the HERO is better nonsense started here by someone else. In spite of misunderstandings, i did not come here and start a thread pushing DND. I came here and responded to a thread someone else began about the differences and their views and so forth.

 

perhaps you should ask steve to create a forum where the rules are nothing good can be said about other game systems and nothing bad can be said about hero but bad things can be said about other games systems?

[AnotherSkip]

Shoo!

im tired of your straw men

 

go way.

id post a more intelligent answer except Oh gee willikers I tried allready to point out that _some_ of the rules are not totally useful to characters being built for points rather than a concept.

 

built to concept not munchkining powergaming ruleslawyering and you wont need D&D.

[tesuji]

you seem to use the term straw man a lot. I think perhaps it does not mean what you think it means.

 

but if you are saying, in a rather odd way, that sometimes when following the hero rules the math and procedures give you illogical or inconsistent results and that for all its math and process it needs a reasoned judgement made as to whether the values produced are correct or not, then we are of course in agreement.

 

Obviously, no one examinging cases like weak tail/strong tail or a tale of two bases, except it seem Mr Long, would judge those to be correct if looing at the final product as a case of juedgement and reason, the so called fiat you were so hot on. Only when one is led to believe the process verifies the result would one come to those being treated as correct.

 

Thanks for the conversation, or at least, for parts of it. When you get a handle on your control issues perhaps we can continue this more constructively?

 

 

 

 

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Shoo!

im tired of your straw men

 

go way.

id post a more intelligent answer except Oh gee willikers I tried allready to point out that _some_ of the rules are not totally useful to characters being built for points rather than a concept.

 

built to concept not munchkining powergaming ruleslawyering and you wont need D&D.

[AnotherSkip]

Bubba Tetsujii Here is the simple of it.

 

Build two characters just like you did then throw out HERO5.92.

Here ill do it for you.

 

STR 60

Dex 30

CON 30

BOD 30

Int 10

EGO 10

PRE 10

COM 10

PD 12

ED 6

Stun 75

REC 18

speed 5

end 60

 

Extra limb tail (60 strength)

 

This character costs 205 for these traits.

 

Now if i buy the character with a strength 30 tail without he costs less

 

STR 60 (-1/4 on 30 strength)

Dex 30

CON 30

BOD 30

Int 10

EGO 10

PRE 10

COM 10

PD 12

ED 6

Stun 75

REC 18

speed 5

end 60

 

Extra limb tail (30 strength only)

 

This guy costs 199.

 

Rules to know...

HERO5.112 Limited manipulation which specifically spells out the way to point out extra limbs that use less than the full strength as a -1/4 limit on the STR or DEX.

HERO5.92 under characteristics which specifically states the if the limitation on the primary does not effect the figureds, then you dont get the figureds. However to show what would actually happen if you dropped this rule it was (of course) dropped

 

Now then what happened?

Ill 'splain it to you Lucy.*

 

you built a character that in the end is just as powerful as the guy without the 30 strength tail for six points cheaper, or to look at it differently got the extra tail for free and got a one point reduction for buying his strength just as high as the other character by taking a non-limiting limit.

If you built your character without the "limited" tail would you feel good about this? That is the reason why some limits are set to where there _is_ no benefit to them _unless_ it is for character concept.

 

i suspect that when you found the problem you were really looking for mathmatical problems with the system you have found what, two? everthing else is subjective. Just like your much vaunted D&D system.

 

It would be possibly be more accurate to do a chart and show how the actual diasadvantage should be scaled to the level of STR it is just easier to set it at the minimum level and be done with it.

HERO has better things to do than subbalance a fairly minor rule, I f you _really_ think it is a problem then subbalance the thing yourself show _all_ the math and then post it. Steve reads many of these posts himself and if he can see your logic and your math is sound you will be making a good game better.

 

Steve has done this before with lowering the Sun multiplier cost.

 

However it would be better if you kept the attitude right out of there and presented it as straightforward as possible.

 

 

/humor on

*End result we like to call powergaming munchkinism. We try to cut down on that alot. Happens when we get these darn D&D players though.

/humor off

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Now then what happened?

Ill 'splain it to you Lucy.*

No need, we have already covered this ground. it seems both you and i agree that for this case the results produced by the rules make less sense than if you just waive the rules, by fiat, until you get a more reasonable result.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

That is the reason why some limits are set to where there _is_ no benefit to them _unless_ it is for character concept.

In this case the weaker tail concept, which you described as a nightcrawler thing and appeared ok with as a concept has nothing to do with whether the rules point it as more expensive as a strong tail or not.

 

The key is the strong tail should not be cheaper. Yet, by the rules it is, which just goes to show that a subjective judgement and assessment after applying the formula is a good thing, a needed thing, to handle these cases. (some heretics, like me, even go so far as to not see the reason for having a formula, and can skip straight to the judgement.)

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

i suspect that when you found the problem you were really looking for mathmatical problems with the system you have found what, two?

Thats one heck of an assumption.

 

These are two exmples of ONE core principle error... the principle of buying a lim. The two most obvious examples are here in the extra limb and in bases.

 

That is just one organic flaw. There are others. i invite you to go examine the archives and you will find the threads and qna on others.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

everthing else is subjective. Just like your much vaunted D&D system.

Then we are at last getting somewhere. Its good we have gotten past the tired "hero is better" and are finally on more equitable ground.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

It would be possibly be more accurate to do a chart and show how the actual diasadvantage should be scaled to the level of STR it is just easier to set it at the minimum level and be done with it.

Easier? Sure. But if now in a rulebook of over 400 pages or so we are assigning some values based on convenience and others on merit, it seems we have delved even further away from objective and towards subjective... why we are even close to the neighborhood of fiat.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

HERO has better things to do than subbalance a fairly minor rule, I f you _really_ think it is a problem then subbalance the thing yourself show _all_ the math and then post it. Steve reads many of these posts himself and if he can see your logic and your math is sound you will be making a good game better.

Uh the fix is to throw out the buying a lim principle. Do not let a purchase of trait A allow you to place a limit on trait B. Thats the flaw, not the value of the lim or its scaling but the principle in the model of allowing two disparate purchases to affect each other. it will fix bases at the same time.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

However it would be better if you kept the attitude right out of there and presented it as straightforward as possible.

After your recent posts, you cannot believe how seriously i take this bit of advice from you regarding controlling the attitude while posting.

 

Thanks a lot.

[Nightshade]

Why are you here?

 

Fine!

 

You don't like HERO. It is heavy handed and includes too much math. I think that D&D is EXTREMELY heavy handed and includes so many rules of the "because that's how it works" variety and forces players into situations that they and GM's may not like. The math involved in HERO I learned in 3rd grade. It is obviously truly difficult, since 8 year olds are expected to master it, but whatever.

 

You prefer D&D. As I have stated many, many times, GREAT! I am so glad that you like the system that you prefer.

 

Now, do us all a favor, and go play it. Go to the D&D forums and have a blast. As annoying to you as my posts that didn't give the EXACT rules (which you, of course, ignored the points to), it is much more annoying to everyone to go to a forum and extoll how annoying HERO is and D&D is so much better when the forum is for Fantasy HERO. If you don't like the system, and you prefer something else, by all means play it.

 

But please don't sit there and write post after post extolling the wonders of a system that the majority of the members of this forum finds inferior, for WHATEVER REASON. Who cares what the reason is? What difference does it make. You obviously like a linear skill resolution system and it makes more sense to you. Great. I personally like a system where skill matters more over the magic modifiers.

 

In the end, there is only one question: Does the system do for you what you want?

 

But, just so we can continue the endless silliness of people attempting to prove the unprovable, I will give you what I had to do in HERO and in D&D to make it work for my game:

 

In D&D, I have to do the following:

 

Delete and create 5 basic character classes, modify the remaining.

Create a new magic system.

Create about 40 or 50 prestige classes (I have a pretty large world).

Create all of the races, including modifiers.

Create religion(s) for the world, including all of the gods, politics, important churches, etc.).

 

Now, these steps are individually pretty hefty.

 

Here is what I had to do in HERO:

 

Create a new magic system.

Create all of the races including modifiers.

Create religion(s) for the world, including all of the gods, politics, important churches, etc.).

 

That's it. The only difference, and the thing that will take pretty much all of the extra time, is the classes. And, just to head the obvious next statement off at the pass, I don't use package deals for professions, only for races. This leads to much less time for HERO for me than in D&D.

 

If you can use a lot of the published material for D&D and it fits your world, I'm happy for you. I really am. Most of it is not useful for me or my world. If I had a different world concept, then the answer might be different.

 

Nightshade

[tesuji]

Re: Why are you here?

 

[/b]

 

Originally posted by Nightshade

and includes too much math... The math involved in HERO I learned in 3rd grade. It is obviously truly difficult, since 8 year olds are expected to master it, but whatever.

Yet another HEROism... the apparent inability of HERO players to rationally see, even when they type it, the difference between the quantity of the math and the complexity of the math. One day, perhaps, its advocates can buy off that psych lim? Maybe replacing it with a psych lim PHOBIC reaction to criticism of HERO by DND players or maybe an enraged?

 

Of course, if they were advocates of a system that did not make personality accounting an element of how strong their energy blast is, they could just get over the psych lim through roleplaying and not need to buy into a new phobia or enraged at all, not have to weaken their energy blast, not have to stifle their character growth until it was bought off.

 

Originally posted by Nightshade

Now, do us all a favor,

Why in the world should i do you a favor? I mean, i like to be helpful and all, but if you really seek a favor you might want to have a look see at your tone. That whole honey vs vinegar flies thing is true.

 

Originally posted by Nightshade

and go play it. Go to the D&D forums and have a blast. As annoying to you as my posts that didn't give the EXACT rules (which you, of course, ignored the points to),

I do post on the DND boards. Fortunately i can sometimes find time for both. I expect i will be posting there less in the future as i wont be getting 3.5, except online, and wont be using it. it will really depend on how much the boards transitions to only 3.5 discussion. So, who knows, i might find more time to post here.

 

I adressed your rules errors when necessary. i mean when your complaint is about the probability of success a given skill gives yet you fail to understand or get that MULTIPLE successes are required and to see how that affects the probabilities, that deserves mention, doesn't it?

Originally posted by Nightshade

it is much more annoying to everyone to go to a forum and extoll how annoying HERO is and D&D is so much better when the forum is for Fantasy HERO. If you don't like the system, and you prefer something else, by all means play it.

Again, in case you missed it, someone using these forusm started this thread to discuss DND and HERo. I did not start this thread, i just responded to it IN TOPIC. If you want to complain about having a thread on the Fh board that is about HERo and DND, then you should be taking it up with that poster, not me.

 

On the other hand, if you and others want to get the forum policy changed so that posts which have criticisms of HERO are against the rules so that you get a "only nice things said about hero" fan site, then that is again something to be taken up with the board people, not me.

Originally posted by Nightshade

But please don't sit there and write post after post extolling the wonders of a system that the majority of the members of this forum finds inferior, for WHATEVER REASON. Who cares what the reason is? What difference does it make. You obviously like a linear skill resolution system and it makes more sense to you. Great. I personally like a system where skill matters more over the magic modifiers.

The relative value of skill vs magic is a setting issue, not a system issue. HERo is surely flexible enough to allow for a story where magic items which go beyond the scope of skills and are more important to the resolution, if the Gm wants to set his campaign up that way. Similarly, the d20 engine can support magic poor worlds, just look at D20M and the multitude of other genres covered. For instance, i really doubt StarGate SG-1 will have a lot of magic.

Originally posted by Nightshade

In the end, there is only one question: Does the system do for you what you want?

Right and i think that was in part a subject in this thread, covered in greater detail than you like perhaps.

 

BTW, i don't recall seeing you jumping those "why hero is better" guys for posting their stuff? So is this egalitarian "whatever works for you is cool dont post specifics" only reserved for anti-hero-is-great posters?

Originally posted by Nightshade

But, just so we can continue the endless silliness of people attempting to prove the unprovable, I will give you what I had to do in HERO and in D&D to make it work for my game:

Haven't we already established that your game was very much different from dnd and very close to hero, so the point has already been covered?

Originally posted by Nightshade

 

Create a new magic system.

Create all of the races including modifiers.

Create religion(s) for the world, including all of the gods, politics, important churches, etc.).

 

That's it. The only difference, and the thing that will take pretty much all of the extra time, is the classes. And, just to head the obvious next statement off at the pass, I don't use package deals for professions, only for races. This leads to much less time for HERO for me than in D&D.

I would describe that world as woefully incomplete at the point that you stopped. I mean as a player i would want to know if i can buy a laser rifle, if i could have a PC who is a scientist, if i can buy magical powers with no magic skill, if i can use the delayed advantage to get spells really cheap, and so on and so on and so on... is +22 OCV with my main attack reasonable for a untrained warrior? is it low?

 

etc etc etc.

 

Now you seem to be ASSUMING that the answers to these are all known by your players or that as you go thru it you will tell them ad hoc. I prefer to give them this information ahead of time, so they have a basis for comparison so that when they conceive of a "this guy served as a city guardsman for three years" character they have some sort of an idea how to represent that in game terms. (BTW, thats why package deals for professions are a good thing... like classes they give your players invaluable info on what to expect.)

 

YMMV, I just like to do more work upfront so the players have a better understanding of their world going in.

Originally posted by Nightshade

If you can use a lot of the published material for D&D and it fits your world, I'm happy for you. I really am. Most of it is not useful for me or my world. If I had a different world concept, then the answer might be different.

I actually use almost nil, other than maps of course, which i swipe from anywhere i can get them. I often swipe an idea from a product, whether its 3e or some other product is irrelevent, the idea is the thing.

 

Thanks for chiming in, but, i will recommend you probably should not chime in too much on threads about DND and HERO is seeing posts about DND and HERO are so offensive to you. Maybe a little self-control on your part would not end up with you ranting in a froth about how other people should not be posting, when they are well within the board's scope and when, in this case, they are actually just replying to a thread others began.

 

Just a suggestion.

[AnotherSkip]

Wow Tesujii. Naww ill rename you Tetsubo.

 

Congratulations i now never want to look at another 3RD book so long as i live.

 

You are Soooo wrong and here is why.

Math.

 

You just reminded me there is _more math_ in a 3RD character than a

FH character!!!!!!!!!!

 

OKies first off the odds of my FH character (which is what we are _really talking about_ 3RD has nothing else for it) will have a lim or an advantage on a stat is really very small. you have to add them up and cross index , Just like in 3RD.

 

Skills have points Just like in 3RD.

 

BAB=CSL's

 

and imdone.

 

in addtion I can build powerful characters that_never_

have an adjustment that requires fractional equations.

 

However in D&D if my Primary stat(s) exceed certain limits I have to multiply my xp by 10%. and If my gm gives them out weekly i have to do the same bsic calculation weekly. most Xp totals come out to things like 1537 or 2462. in a low campaingn that xp calculatin can mean the difference between one week and the next of leveling.

 

I can build a character that does not ever need to do that adjustment either, but he would be lacking in several primary areas.

 

hmmm Tetsubo,

Probably be better for you if just quit on the math subject. I would suggest you try the Amber diceless roleplaying system. Little math to hide the subjectivity behind, which makes it verry different from AD&D.

 

YAWN.

try again.

[AnotherSkip]

Re: Re: Why are you here?

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

BTW, i don't recall seeing you jumping those "why hero is better" guys for posting their stuff? So is this egalitarian "whatever works for you is cool dont post specifics" only reserved for anti-hero-is-great posters?[/b]

 

Oh wait, I have an answer!!!! They aren't arses, so they don't get jumped.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

 

YMMV, I just like to do more work upfront so the players have a better understanding of their world going in. [/b]

 

So now then you prefer to do more work upfront? I thought you did not like to do alot of work upfront? Isn't this a contradiction fo your previous posts? Yep it sure is.

 

 

What is Tetsubo's problem?

Perhaps it is a lack of concentration.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

I would describe that world as woefully incomplete at the point that you stopped. I mean as a player i would want to know if i can buy a laser rifle, if i could have a PC who is a scientist, if i can buy magical powers with no magic skill, if i can use the delayed advantage to get spells really cheap, and so on and so on and so on... is +22 OCV with my main attack reasonable for a untrained warrior? is it low?

 

etc etc etc.[/b]

 

Uhhh I _SERIOUSLY_ doubt that you have covered those in your campaign notes. If not and you feel uncomfortable with just answering a few questions in front of your players off the cuff then you need the 3RD thought crutch of playing out of the book. If so then it describes the average intelligence of your players as being worrisome. Get new players.

 

Besides can I have a 22 BAB in a 1st level fighter? Oooh can I have a Magic Missile spell that ignores the armor casting restrictions because im a Scientist? can my Rogue have an X-ray laser rifle?

 

That is the level of intelligence you are showing for your players and yourself.

 

*pats Tetsubo on the head and leaves*

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Wow Tesujii. Naww ill rename you Tetsubo.

OK, if you have such a problem with my handle, sure, whatever makes it easier for you is fine.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Congratulations i now never want to look at another 3RD book so long as i live.

OK.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

You are Soooo wrong and here is why.

Math.

You just reminded me there is _more math_ in a 3RD character than a

FH character!!!!!!!!!!

Not in my experience. In my experience having everything weighed against each other turns character creation into a much more mathematically in depth process. DND and D20 usually produce less math in order to get the character down. IF nothing else, not having personality and person being a part of the accoutning system by using disadvantages makes for less math, as these elements can be freely defined and described without having to assess their impact on one's punch or sword swinging.

 

if you find it to actually be the case that less math is done in FH, thats cool.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

in addtion I can build powerful characters that_never_

have an adjustment that requires fractional equations.

How did you figure out his stun? Isn't stun still STR/2+CON/2+Body in yourbFH game? Isn't recovery still STR/5+CON/5 in your FH game? Isn't PD still STR/5 in your FH game?

 

You seem to be using some house rules designed to streamline the Fh core system to eliminate some of the more tedious math. Thats cool! i found that served me well as well when streamlining FH to new player friendly mode as well some years ago.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

However in D&D if my Primary stat(s) exceed certain limits I have to multiply my xp by 10%.

I have no earthly idea to what you are referring here. Some class/levek combos (in settings where this is the case) will cause 205 xp penalties. Some races have level equivalents which cause you to be trested for leveling up as a higher level character, effectively making race levels.

 

But i may be missing something but i do not know of any primary stat vs XP awards 10% rule.

 

Oh well, this could be just another misunderstanding you have of how DND works, or it may be something I am unaware of.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

hmmm Tetsubo,

Probably be better for you if just quit on the math subject.

Not really, in spite of your confusion about DND and how it works, I am quite confident in my position and my points. Once we figure out what you are actually talking about, we can address your issue easily enough.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

I would suggest you try the Amber diceless roleplaying system. Little math to hide the subjectivity behind, which makes it verry different from AD&D.

BTW are you back to previous versions of DND?

 

FWIW, I loved the Amber system. I consider it to be a great system and recommend it for those with the right types of players and good GMs.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Oh wait, I have an answer!!!! They aren't arses, so they don't get jumped.

Well, now that is an interesting reply. IS this the level of name calling we can expect?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

So now then you prefer to do more work upfront?

I prefer to give my players the information they need to get into the world and have a frame of reference to use.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

I thought you did not like to do alot of work upfront?

Then you were mistaken. i never said that. Given that i have repeatedly referenced cretaing classes for the setting and altering classes for the setting, i cannot imagine where you got the idea i was against doing the work that is needed.

 

i am against doing needless work at anytime, up front or otherwise.

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Isn't this a contradiction fo your previous posts? Yep it sure is.

I would be thrilled to see you show that contradiction.

 

I have never been against work upfront.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

What is Tetsubo's problem?

Perhaps it is a lack of concentration.

nahh... perhaps an excess of people who think clever = making stuff up and claiming its what others believe.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Uhhh I _SERIOUSLY_ doubt that you have covered those in your campaign notes. If not and you feel uncomfortable with just answering a few questions in front of your players off the cuff then you need the 3RD thought crutch of playing out of the book. If so then it describes the average intelligence of your players as being worrisome. Get new players.

By giving them classes and equipment lists and such and not just handing them a character construction toolkit, i do cover these things. Remember, i am not the one who keeps listing a couple of things and then saying thats enough in order to make it look like its not that much work.

 

Try and keep up.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Besides can I have a 22 BAB in a 1st level fighter? Oooh can I have a Magic Missile spell that ignores the armor casting restrictions because im a Scientist? can my Rogue have an X-ray laser rifle?

Since there are classes which detail what is appropriate for that level, and equipment lists which detail items availabvle and costs... those questions would be rather contrary to the information given.

 

Its not like i gave you points, races, a magic system and then said go for it, after all.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

That is the level of intelligence you are showing for your players and yourself.

The ability to take information given on a setting and use it, yes.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

*pats Tetsubo on the head and leaves*

Why you feel the need to have changed from discussion to basic ranting and insulting escapes me. Did you really feel this type of post was one you wanted your handle on?

 

I guess so.

 

or perhaps thi is a new take... being insulting or belligerant in hopes it will scare me off, or hurt my feelings so i wont come back or maybe just get me to reply all huffy and blathering and maybe you could get the thread closed?

 

hard to say.

 

But if this is an example of good and proper HERO BOARD posting, the hey, i am not in any concern whatsoever about the tone and tenor of my posts. So, thanks for showing me a banechmark i can use.

 

You have indeed been most helpful!

[Vondy]

/RANT WARNING ON!!!

 

Dear God help me!

 

What is the point of debating wholly subjective preferences in relations to a somewhat geeky and perfectly enjoyable hobby?

 

Someone likes 3E better than Hero? Bully for them.

 

Someone likes Hero better than 3E? Bully for them.

 

This is almost as ridiculous as debating the which version of Star Trek is better.

 

Its COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE. What is the point of wasting all of this testosterone on a stupid freaking game system?!!!

 

If you used all of this testosterone in your professional and personal lives you'd have completed your PHd and acquired a HAREM of adoring women.

 

I personally loathe 3E, but if someone what to play it or likes it better that's their personal taste. The same goes for Hero enthusiasts. We love it, but that's our personal taste.

 

Its apples and oranges as far as the mechanics are concerned. I could understand GURPS V. HERO, but 3E?

 

The point is utterly unfathomable. The spider man is a brick debate, the batman has normal characteristic maxima debate, and the how to build caps shield debate are all understandable within the contect of uber-geek gamerdom, but this I honestly don't get.

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!

 

Plonk!

Plonk!

Plonk!

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!

 

/RANT WARNING OFF!!!

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by D-Man

/RANT WARNING ON!!!

Wow. here we go.

Originally posted by D-Man

What is the point of debating wholly subjective preferences in relations to a somewhat geeky and perfectly enjoyable hobby?

I assume that, based on my experience, people post here for one of two reasons... personal enjoyment or problem solving... and often those two are not exclusory.

Originally posted by D-Man

This is almost as ridiculous as debating the which version of Star Trek is better.

Well, now that you mention it...DS-9 of course.

 

But indeed, it is like that. If you go to star trek web pages you will probably find plenty of those, running over how well the lighting was here vs the sound was better there and so on and so on. Heck i once had a roommate who could go for 90 minutes non-stop about why TOS was so superior to Next Gen.

 

This is not much different.

Originally posted by D-Man

Its COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE.

In terms of preferences yes, but not necessarily in terms of analysis. For instance, if someone is looking for a start trek with great FX, you would not recommend them to TOS... thats not really that subjective... what is subjective is the relative value between good sfx vs good story.

Originally posted by D-Man

What is the point of wasting all of this testosterone on a stupid freaking game system?!!!

I guarantee you i have wasted no testerone on this forum. I have not even needed to clean froth from my keyboard.

Originally posted by D-Man

If you used all of this testosterone in your professional and personal lives you'd have completed your PHd and acquired a HAREM of adoring women.

Really?

Originally posted by D-Man

I personally loathe 3E, but if someone what to play it or likes it better that's their personal taste. The same goes for Hero enthusiasts. We love it, but that's our personal taste.

Thats cool.

 

So the only thing you apparently have a bad on for is letting other people debate what they want especially if it seems pointless to you? Thats the big bad that will get you going?

 

Here is a question for you...why is preferred gaming system merits something you feel is subjective enough but that preferred topics of debate is not, so that the former you dont feel is worth anyone doing but the latter is important enough to make you waste your valuable testerone on a rant whenever you see people doing it?

Originally posted by D-Man

Its apples and oranges as far as the mechanics are concerned. I could understand GURPS V. HERO, but 3E?

Contrast is as valid for comparison as similarity. I mean, if you limit your analysis to "just point buy systems similar to hero" that remains a rather closed comparison. You wouldn't look at "classed vs non-classed" or even diced vs diceless with that limited a scope.

 

Its kinda like the difference between discussing the choice of two pasta dishes vs the discussion of mexican or chinese.

Originally posted by D-Man

The point is utterly unfathomable. The spider man is a brick debate, the batman has normal characteristic maxima debate, and the how to build caps shield debate are all understandable within the contect of uber-geek gamerdom, but this I honestly don't get.

So it appears. I dont get the whole "what you ought not to be debating" thing is about myself. That seems even more subjective?

Originally posted by D-Man

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!

 

Plonk!

Plonk!

Plonk!

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!

 

/RANT WARNING OFF!!!

 

Ahh... more control issues.

 

Hmmm...

 

fortunately it does not seem to be contagious.

 

enjoy your games.

[Guest white peregrine]

3e vs Hero

rough call. each have their strengths and weaknesses. given the idea that we are creating a "new world" the decision on which system to use would best be served by looking at, not only the creator of the world, but the players of this world as well. I believe that given time either system would work...depends on how much work one is willing to put in in creating this new world and this applies to both hero and 3e.

 

the amount of material to be converted/generated is about the same all told in regards to the amount of work that is needed. then, this could also be due to my comfort level at taking on such a task.

 

3e is a simpler system, imo. it has predefined value that allow a person to pick it up and start playing immediately. it has the strength of a predefined world/worlds/specific genre that anyone can get into quickly. sure there are parts that need to be worked on but on the whole it works and the same could be said about any system out there, Hero included.

 

3e, in its defence, has made some great strides in incorporating the roleplaying aspect. the thing is though, it is built for combat...I'll admit that. they are trying to change it though. the inclusion of Feats and more Skills has done wonders for the system and makes it worlds better than 2E which had a few non-weapon prof and the rest was open. is it on the level of hero in complexity? nope, but like I said...it's a simpler system...it is easier for a new player to pick up and play or run 3e than hero...

 

changing things in 3e can happen, its just a matter of how much you want to do...but remember the system and the specific genre it is meant for and this will go a long ways. if you are looking to have a "levelless" "non-combat" orientated campaign it can be done but it may be done better by leaving the d20 system....although there are some other worlds in the d20 realms that could work...d20 modern was mentioned and the star wars system is not all that bad either...

...

I could ramble on some more but I am sure that I will get zapped for what I have said even so...

[AnotherSkip]

Ehhh dont worry abut me zapping you.

 

tetsubo seems to have a penchant for trying to beat people over the head like the club I named him after.

 

 

Since he cannot read his own posts however. as well as those of others especially when the Gm says "I have to create my own magic system" and then Tetsubo rants about

" if i can buy magical powers with no magic skill, if i can use the delayed advantage to get spells really cheap, and so on and so on and so on... "-tetsubo

When most of these questions would be answered By The Creation Of A Magic System.

Verry intelligent there Tetsubo. Im sooo proud of you.

 

Heck Tetsubo lessee here you build a "balanced" Scientist that is well balanced with the other characters in 3RD. Using only the stuff in the main book.

 

Good Luck.

 

I can in HERO.

 

As for your confusion about Xp you _must_ be having problems if you don't know 3RD edition SRD well enough to find the 10% xp Rule it relates to the Priamry stats of a class. I'd look it up and point it out to you except I dont ever want to pick up another 3RD book again. Very standard. A non optional rule. Been in the books for years and the 3RD ed rules lawyer GM I was under last sure as heck couldn't get rid of it.

 

Isn't there a multiclassing penalty for having multiclasses outside of your (whatever they called it? the racial preferred class? IIRC) if they are separated by more than 2 levels? IIRC it is 10% per class.

Geee that sounds like' a limitation on multiclassing which would lead to weaker characters.

 

However there is a problem with Tetsubo that perhaps tetsubo is not aware of.

 

tetsubo has managed to modify the 3RD system so much he is not playing 3RD anymore. Tetsubo has built the "Tetsubo system" and therefor he is happpy with it (though he has not renamed the system yet) and he is soo happy with it and cannot understand _why_ people are unhappy with 3RD after all it just took 10,000+ decisions to make his happy system. So poor misunderstood Tetsubo goes out and tries to suffer the slings and arrows and encourages the misunderstood masses to play the system he is so haapy with.

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

tetsubo seems to have a penchant for trying to beat people over the head like the club I named him after.

Ahh so it wasn't a name problem thing but just another try at being insulting? Oh welel, so much for giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

When most of these questions would be answered By The Creation Of A Magic System.

Verry intelligent there Tetsubo. Im sooo proud of you.

If you bother to read back further so as to help keep a context instead of skewing one, you will find a while back when that poster did describe his magic system the specific example of the fighter with just a fireball and no other magic skill was covered then not as an example of sillyness but as a viable character and so on. Thats why i chose to post that one again, showing it as an element of choice... not as you seemed to take as an example of stupidity.

 

However, since it seems clear you are more interested in barbing and insulting, and apparently have for some reason decided to take this to a personal level as opposed to a discussion, then all thats really relatively unimportant.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Heck Tetsubo lessee here you build a "balanced" Scientist that is well balanced with the other characters in 3RD. Using only the stuff in the main book.

From the information in the book, as well as any other setting material i would add, its not appropriate to have a scientist character. As described already many times by me, as you well know, available classes would be a part of the setting info provided for a campaign.

 

but again, since you just seem to want to focus on barbing and insults, this is really neither here nor there.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

As for your confusion about Xp you _must_ be having problems if you don't know 3RD edition SRD well enough to find the 10% xp Rule it relates to the Priamry stats of a class.

I am unaware of any 10% XP rule relating to primary stats of a class. Perhaps if you could clarify the rules definition it could be cleared up. Obviously, with your focus now being mostly on personal attacks i wont waste any of my time looking for an alleged rule that i have never heard of being used in chargen for PCs, which was the context you broguht it up in.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

I'd look it up and point it out to you except I dont ever want to pick up another 3RD book again. Very standard. A non optional rule. Been in the books for years and the 3RD ed rules lawyer GM I was under last sure as heck couldn't get rid of it.

Again, if you chose to provide relevent info, i will take a look. But until then, I am pretty much Ok with figuring it for just another misunderstanding of yours.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Isn't there a multiclassing penalty for having multiclasses outside of your (whatever they called it? the racial preferred class? IIRC) if they are separated by more than 2 levels? IIRC it is 10% per class.

As i mentioned when you first brought up your 10% primary stat "reference" there is a 20% XP penalty for multiclassing some class level race combos.

 

is that the rule you are trying to conjure?

 

you seem to be doing better with just barbs and insults?

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Geee that sounds like' a limitation on multiclassing which would lead to weaker characters.

The permissable multiclass combos and such are a matter of setting. They lift a number of class combo restrictions in FR for instance. I myself adopted a different multiclassing favored class system for my game. So if you don't like the greyhawk setting rules, if they are not appropriate for your campaign, then you provide the players with information on what is respresentative for YOUR SETTING. Its really quite simple.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

However there is a problem with Tetsubo that perhaps tetsubo is not aware of.

Yawn.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

tetsubo has managed to modify the 3RD system so much he is not playing 3RD anymore.

The effort required is a good reason i conclude that it is customizable.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

Tetsubo has built the "Tetsubo system" and therefor he is happpy with it (though he has not renamed the system yet) and he is soo happy with it and cannot understand _why_ people are unhappy with 3RD after all it just took 10,000+ decisions to make his happy system.

they presented a core system with a setting that was customizable to meet other setting needed. Thats what i have been saying. I have said repeatedly that if your do not like the setting provided it is customizable to meet your needs. This is in contrast to the hero spawned opinions which seem to see it as unalterable... they seem to want to compare the canned setting to their own setting, after they created it, and somehow to draw from that a conclusion about the underlying systems.

 

Then again, thats already been covered.

 

Even when you have degenerated into mostly barbs and insults, it seems you are having an easier time refuting what you want to imagine i said, as opposed to what the discussion actually was.

 

That figures.

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

So poor misunderstood Tetsubo goes out and tries to suffer the slings and arrows and encourages the misunderstood masses to play the system he is so haapy with.

 

Actually, i tend to refute claims of superiority.

 

But that actually starts to look at the discussions made and bypasses the whole insults and barbed stage, so i can understand how you missed that.

 

Look, i think even I can see you have long since left the realm of discussion and i am happy to leave you to wallow in your own little world of barbs and insults.

 

Maybe one day you will get a handle on your self-control issues and rejoin the land of discussion. I know that, for me, if your posts were taken as indicatiove of HERO gamers, and it seems for many they are, that it would not tend to make me wants to rush out and join that community by participating and buying into that game line.

 

Enjoy your games.

[Killer Shrike]

D-Man, just do what I do; "Ignore" tesuji. He's just a troll. A troll with a good command of the language and reasoning abilities, but a troll nonetheless. IMO he's just an "Im right and everyone else is wrong" kind of person. And he is occasionally right, which gives his posts just enough substance to bait you into responding. You cant get involved in a discussion with a person like that because they spend all thier efforts on convincing you that thier way is the only way; there is no actual sharing of ideas -- he starts off from a position and does not budge.

 

 

PLONK PLONK PLONK

[Jhamin]

Originally posted by AnotherSkip

However in D&D if my Primary stat(s) exceed certain limits I have to multiply my xp by 10%. and If my gm gives them out weekly i have to do the same bsic calculation weekly. most Xp totals come out to things like 1537 or 2462. in a low campaingn that xp calculatin can mean the difference between one week and the next of leveling.

 

In the "for whatever it's worth" catagory, this is a rule that existed in 1st & 2nd edition, but was removed for 3rd edition.

 

Some may still use it, but it isn't in the rules anymore.

 

I suspect we may be dealing with what folks remember from 10 years ago rather than what the rules actually say.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

D-Man, just do what I do; "Ignore" tesuji. He's just a troll. A troll with a good command of the language and reasoning abilities, but a troll nonetheless. IMO he's just an "Im right and everyone else is wrong" kind of person. And he is occasionally right, which gives his posts just enough substance to bait you into responding. You cant get involved in a discussion with a person like that because they spend all thier efforts on convincing you that thier way is the only way; there is no actual sharing of ideas -- he starts off from a position and does not budge.

 

 

PLONK PLONK PLONK

 

Yeah -- I just wanted to have one of those cathartic experiences one of my gamers [a psychiatrist] is always trying to induce in his patients.

 

I thought the priceless part was that he tried to respond to it in rational manner.