tesuji Posted June 25, 2003 Report Share Posted June 25, 2003 Originally posted by Jhamin 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. Thats pretty much what I expected, that it was just a case of his misunderstanding the rules again, hence my unwillingness to take up his go fish for it notion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 25, 2003 Report Share Posted June 25, 2003 Originally posted by D-Man 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. Clearly such as radical an approach as trying to respond rationally does seem out of place in these parts. Live and learn. I will try and not make that mistake with your posts in the future. enjoy your games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 25, 2003 Report Share Posted June 25, 2003 Originally posted by Killer Shrike He's just a troll. I think if i am to continue actively engaging in discussions on these boards i really must get more into the "just call the other guy names" swing of things that seems to replace discussion round here. Hmmm... then again, there is much to be said for not only having people who don't like my posts and call me names but to have people who take time to actively try and warn others off from discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted June 25, 2003 Report Share Posted June 25, 2003 Originally posted by tesuji Clearly such as radical an approach as trying to respond rationally does seem out of place in these parts. Live and learn. I will try and not make that mistake with your posts in the future. enjoy your games. Maybe the "/Rant Mode On!" should have been your first clue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 26, 2003 Report Share Posted June 26, 2003 Originally posted by D-Man Maybe the "/Rant Mode On!" should have been your first clue. I usually consider rant mode on tags to be an indication of the tone to be expected within a post, but often find that even while the user is in this tone of post he often intends some of his points made to be actually points he means to make... ie inspite of the flavor, that posters often do have some little bit of substance. For example, the initial post in this thread seemed, in spite of being a rant, to be expressing a concern over his players and he with a miscommunication issue. Taking a sec to familiarize yourself with the thread, you will see that the posts in respoinse to his rant did indeed take the notion of giving serious responses, even though it was a thread where he put rant warning in his title. I actually thought you were trying to make a point about your perception of the folly in discussing so heatedly as subjective a topic... and that you just decided to wrap making that point in a rant... much like the thread starter himself was making a point wrapped in a rant. Anyway, it seems clear that some posters do sometimes wrap points in their rants and that others do not. I wont make the mistake of assuming your posts have a point in the future, so there wont be any such misunderstandings. Enjoy your games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted June 26, 2003 Report Share Posted June 26, 2003 I have been out of town for a while, so I haven't had a chance to respond: The fireball weilding fighter was not my idea. I would have to see the rationalization of such a character before I allowed it. Even then, I wouldn't have considered it magic. As to the question of whether someone can have the 22 combat skill levels or whatever without training, the answer seems rather logical to me. Skills are LEARNED. Therefore, you have to do something to learn them. Training may be one of the ways you get them, but experience (you know, actually doing it) is also a good reason to get better at a skill. The multiclass penalty that was referenced was ONLY in 3rd edition, as multiclassing worked completely differently in both 1st and 2nd ed. The rule (IIRC, this is not a direct quote) is that all classes have to be within 2 levels of each other or they take a penalty. The exception is if the higher class is the racially preferred class. For humans and half-elves, the preferred class is any, so they in effect have to have 3 classes for this to kick in, and the top one is ignored. This means that you would need 3 classes, the two lowest level classes being 3 or more levels apart before you hit this penalty. Of course, this really isn't a rule, anyway. Races are arguably more part of the setting than the classes are, not part of the system. This means referencing them in any way as part of D&D is immaterial, because it isn't D&D, its Greyhawk. I'm sure that I saw THAT caveat in the rule book somewhere. As to arguing tesuji's post as to how to reference how my world works within the confines of the system, I use the Campaign Creation worksheet that was in the Fantasy HERO book for 4 ed. I can explain the magic system, skill changes (I now state for all new players that Security Systems covers finding and removing traps for my fantasy game), and any other system items in about 15 minutes for those who are familiar with HERO. It obviously takes longer if you aren't familiar. Of course, it would take a little bit longer to explain my world in D&D, as I would have to go over the magic system (10 minutes, tops), all of the class differences (don't know how long that will take), as other minor system items (I can't think of any, right now). I am still unsure where you are getting that I created my world specifically for HERO. I don't use HERO that way. I create ideas for worlds and then pick a system to do it in that works for it. For example, I have a game based upon the setting published in The Everlasting. The system is not complete, specifically, the power creation and magic systems. I also had a real problem with the skill system (although not the skill resolution system). Since this game is very similar to the White Wolf World of Darkness, I figured that I'd try it in the Storyteller system. However, there were problems with the importing of set powers and the freeform magic that the setting required. In effect, I would need a combination of Werewolf and Mage (the rituals and gifts worked well, in concept, with the powers in how they worked, where the Mage magic system is very similar in style to that proposed in the Everlasting). The major issue came when I had to figure how to rank the gifts vs. magic in terms of costs. The relative values became pretty messy, and my wife said that it was too confusing (she's good at making me explain stuff). I then put it into HERO. The skills and powers were easy, but the only way to get the magic to work would be VPP's, which is only easily done if you have experienced HERO players, in my experience. It is a solution, but the learning curve is pretty high. In my opinion, the system that comes with the Everlasting would be the best solution, if only it were complete. The second best was HERO, since it already had some relative point costs already done for me and I knew the system would work. The Storyteller solution was still viable (in my mind), but needed more polish, which was time I'd rather spend on other things. I'd actually never considered d20, although considering the high-magic setting, I suppose it is possible. However, there would have to be some sort of power creation system for me to use, along with a freeform magic system somewhere. I don't want to write my own system for this thing, so I can't see how I would even attempt it. So, right now I use HERO for it. When (if) they ever publish the complete system for it, I'll see how it goes. Personally, I think that it will work better, but who knows? That is the same thought process I used when I created my fantasy world. I knew that I didn't want to use a published setting, but I did want to use a published system. So, I created my world concept and tried doing it with several games (Palladium, RuneQuest, 2nd ed AD&D, HERO, and even ARIA). The one that was the most functional for me was HERO. So, that's what I use. Just as a matter of reference, I never once stated that D&D wasn't a good system. As a matter of point, I stated that D&D is perfectly good for what D&D is good at. I have stated, over and over, that if your world is modelled by D&D, then you should use D&D. I will say, however, that people on any D&D forum would do more than shout down someone who posted that D&D was inferior in any way to any other fantasy system. In addition, I can't think of a forum where people wouldn't object to someone coming on the board and stating that the system supporting the forum was as bad as tesuji has made it out to be. And, finally, I do not understand the point that we should take a psychological limitation concerning math, difficulty in math, or whatever. The biggest criticism for HERO is how complicated it is, mathwise. I just don't understand the problem here. We are talking about multiplication and division, here. These are things I learned in 3rd grade, when I was eight. If you don't want to calculate 45*2.25/1.75, on paper, I can understand that. Use a calculator. Use HERO Designer. Use a spreadsheet. It isn't really isn't that bad. We aren't talking differential equations here. This isn't algebra, geometry, statistics, or calculus. This is arithmetic. I will have to state, however, that D&D does not have nearly the math that HERO does, especially in the character creation system. While HERO uses 3rd grade math, D&D uses 1st grade math, for the most part. It is only addition and subtraction, with very minimal multiplication and division, usually using very simple numbers. Nightshade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 26, 2003 Report Share Posted June 26, 2003 Originally posted by Nightshade And, finally, I do not understand the point that we should take a psychological limitation concerning math, difficulty in math, or whatever. The biggest criticism for HERO is how complicated it is, mathwise. I just don't understand the problem here. We are talking about multiplication and division, here. These are things I learned in 3rd grade, when I was eight. If you don't want to calculate 45*2.25/1.75, on paper, I can understand that. Use a calculator. Use HERO Designer. Use a spreadsheet. It isn't really isn't that bad. We aren't talking differential equations here. This isn't algebra, geometry, statistics, or calculus. This is arithmetic. Since this is the area you admit to not understanding i will try and explain it... I will use your quote as was done already once... Nightshade said from about page 5... "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" This is a not atypical HERO poster response to criticisms about hero having too much math. The immediate response, usually snide in nature, about the complexity of math and the relatively simple aspersion to the complainers math level. The key is this... "too much math" and "too complex math" are, except in the eyes of HERO gamers, two completely different topics. In another thread, I likened ot to going to get groceries and having the choice between one store which makes you add up your own bill and calculate your sales tax and another store which scans the prices for you and computes tax. It has nothing to do with whether thats 3rd grade math or Ap calculus, its not a measure of who is smarter or not or any of the silly "i learned how to do division in 3rd grade" nonsense that HERO players throw out in reasonse to the "too much math" complaint. It simply has to do with the effort and time spent. 100 simple calculations can become very tedius. I created over 90 characters as NPCS so far for a current game i am running, for a system i have been using for just a few months. I would NOT DREAM of doing that much work in HERO if i only had a few months experience with it. So, in spite of almost every HERO player response i have ever seen which somehow fails...even when they themselves type both in the same paragraph... it is about the amount of math... not the complexity. But in reasponse after response, just like yours, the hero community seems to feel amount and complexity are the same thing? Sounds like a psyche lim to me. Do not take it personally. i have seen this very same switcheroo in mid statements over and over again on these boards. You are seeming typical round here, and should not take this observation as a personal insult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 26, 2003 Report Share Posted June 26, 2003 Plonk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamo Posted June 26, 2003 Report Share Posted June 26, 2003 tesuji, Listen, this is a very simple concept, and while I believe you may be feigning ignorance of it in order to facilitate your trolling, I don't believe for a second that you don't understand it. This is a HERO SYSTEM board. It's very, very clear that you like Dungeons & Dragons and lot more than you do Hero System. Well, guess what? Yeah, that's right: Nobody cares. Why? Because it's not proper to come here just to repeatedly (and, might I add, unimaginatively and monotonously) put down Hero System in favor of some other game. I don't know of anyone here who has nothing better to do than try to get their jollies by whizzing in other gamers' Wheaties the way you do. We don't go to the D&D boards just to tell them how inferior their silly system is to HERO. You do just that here, and it's childish and unseemly. So take it elsewhere. Putting down system X in favor of system Y on a system X-dedicated forum is textbook trolling plain and simple and it's not making you any friends here. Grow up a little. And welcome to my ignore list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Originally posted by Yamo tesuji, Listen, this is a very simple concept, and while I believe you may be feigning ignorance of it in order to facilitate your trolling, I don't believe for a second that you don't understand it. This is a HERO SYSTEM board. It's very, very clear that you like Dungeons & Dragons and lot more than you do Hero System. Well, guess what? Yeah, that's right: Nobody cares. Why? Because it's not proper to come here just to repeatedly (and, might I add, unimaginatively and monotonously) put down Hero System in favor of some other game. I don't know of anyone here who has nothing better to do than try to get their jollies by whizzing in other gamers' Wheaties the way you do. We don't go to the D&D boards just to tell them how inferior their silly system is to HERO. You do just that here, and it's childish and unseemly. So take it elsewhere. Putting down system X on a system X-dedicated forum is textbook trolling plain and simple and it's not making you any friends here. Grow up a little. And welcome to my ignore list. Here here! Welcome to the "Ignoring Tesuji Club" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Originally posted by Killer Shrike Here here! Welcome to the "Ignoring Tesuji Club" Who? I went looking and couldn't see any of their posts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Originally posted by D-Man Who? I went looking and couldn't see any of their posts... I wonder, do we need a secret handshake? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 [/b] Originally posted by Yamo I don't believe for a second that you don't understand it. Of course i understand it. That is not the issue. I don't agree with it. I don't believe the hero board is intended by most users and the creators to be a board where only happy hero thoughts are allowed and where criticisms of the hero system are verbotten along with the posters that make them. Instead, i find it much more in keeping with the other posts i see and the board policies for those who do not like participating in such discussions, who just want to avoid such to simply not participate in them. personally, i think loud ranting about why someone should not be posting and trying to drive them away and telling them to go post somewhere else etc etc etc to the point of making the name calling go away posts disrupt and interfere with other disucssions to be much more unacceptable than criticism. But, that may be just me. i see a huge difference between saying someone who decides "i dont like this guys posts so i will ignore them" and who does so and someone who decides that as his cute parting shot he must make a post decalring to the world how he is now going to ignore the guy and at the same time lets slip in some name calling... or even worse, the guy who after deciding he would ignore a poster goes out and actively recruits others to do so. I mean, in what world is criticizing a system worse board courtesy than the above? Originally posted by Yamo This is a HERO SYSTEM board. It's very, very clear that you like Dungeons & Dragons and lot more than you do Hero System. Well, guess what? Yeah, that's right: Nobody cares. Why? Because it's not proper to come here just to repeatedly (and, might I add, unimaginatively and monotonously) put down Hero System in favor of some other game. I don't meet your definition of proper? Gosh, then it is probably a good thing I am not posting on your boards. Originally posted by Yamo I don't know of anyone here who has nothing better to do than try to get their jollies by whizzing in other gamers' Wheaties the way you do. We don't go to the D&D boards just to tell them how inferior their silly system is to HERO. You do just that here, and it's childish and unseemly. Suffice it to say that your interpretation and characterization of what I do is not the same as mine. Originally posted by Yamo So take it elsewhere. Putting down system X in favor of system Y on a system X-dedicated forum is textbook trolling plain and simple and it's not making you any friends here. Grow up a little. Actually some would consider exhorbitant name calling to be trolling. I understand that you think i am trolling. I do not agree. Originally posted by Yamo And welcome to my ignore list. Thats the best news i have gotten all day. Thanks, and i sincerely mean that. I figure frankly that once enough of the "speak ill of hero and i will grow enraged" frothers get to the point that they don't step in and try to derail discussions i am involved in with their overbearing "thou should not be posting here" rhetoric things will go a lot smoother and more discussion will be had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Let's see if there's a difference in ways to respond here: Question: I really dislike how the Fantasy HERO book did the Spell College thing. I'd like a magic system that allows more spell effect freedom, so that my mages have more of a variety of spells. I also want them to have access more spells, especially as they get more experienced. How do I do that, yet make them so that they aren't too powerful compared to non-magic characters? Option 1: Post a magic system that uses some sort of power framework, but with limitations, such as charges, required use of endurance reserves, or other required limitations to make them more balanced. Option 2: Suggest that they use D&D (or any other system) to play their game because they have a better way of doing it. Okay. They posted the question on the HERO forums. This usually means that they are expecting something similar to option 1. Now reverse the situation: Question: I really hate how the PHB does magic. I want a more focused magic system that allows wizards to have fewer spells, but more powerful ones. I also want them to be able to cast more often per day. Option 1: Point them to a d20 book that has a different magic system. Option 2: Point them to a different system that has that type of magic. Again, if this were on a D&D board (or d20 board, for that matter), I would assume that they are looking for something similar to option 1. Why? Because they posted it on the D&D/d20 forums. As to your math rant. The first part of your post, you complain about the tedious nature of the math. The next part, you state that you created however many NPC's for another system, something you would never do with only a couple months of experience with HERO. Hmmm.... You wouldn't do it with only a couple months of experience. I'm sure its due to how tedious it is. That's certainly the implictation there. But, I will say this. I find using a calculator to figure out the power costs 6 or 7 times much less tedious than being limited in what characters I can create, use, play, and develop. I have written up many NPC's for my Fantasy HERO game, by hand, on paper and can do any character in about 45 minutes, most of which is actually spent writing. It isn't particularly tedious, because the only time I need to do any calculating is when I have spells. The rest of the time, it is stats, skills, perks, and talents, which mostly have fixed costs. The only math involved is addition and subtraction for most non-wizard characters, much like d20. I don't believe the hero board is intended by most users and the creators to be a board where only happy hero thoughts are allowed and where criticisms of the hero system are verbotten along with the posters that make them. I also don't believe that the HERO board is intended by most users or the creatores to be only about happy HERO thoughts and without criticism. However, that is NOT what you are doing. At its heart, you are advertising for a competitor's product, which I highly doubt DOJ is looking for here. In addition, you are not criticizing HERO in any meaningful manner. These are all arguements that have been heard before on GENERAL RPG forums, such as rpg.net and others. HERO is too complicated, HERO is too easily abused, its too hard to make your character, there's too much work because there are no prebuilt spells, etc. The response on these are always that same: HERO isn't as complicated as most people think it is, ANY system can be abused (the GM must be able to say no), the character generation is only difficult if you think that the math is difficult, and there are prebuilt spells in some books, it's just that some people didn't particularly like the way that they did it. Nightshade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 [/b] Originally posted by Nightshade Let's see if there's a difference in ways to respond here: Question: I really dislike how the Fantasy HERO book did... Option 1: Post a magic system that uses some sort of power framework, but... Option 2: Suggest that they use D&D (or any other system) to play their game because they have a better way of doing it. Okay. They posted the question on the HERO forums. This usually means that they are expecting something similar to option 1. OK, Nightshade i apologise for the bluntness of this response, but have you read this thread? I mean, your examples are all well and good as to how you would like others to post and, if i had chimed in on the end of this thread i would think you were somehow likening my participation in this thread to option 2. Unfortunately, for you, i have been here since the beginning. In response to the first poster's questions, a rant in which he did reference D&D, i responded with an answer to his questions that DID NOT REFERENCE DND AT ALL! Here it is from page 1.. in its entirety... Originally posted by tesuji Actually, while people keep talking about flexible "systems" this is actually a world definition thing. Wizards cannot wear armor and only clerics can heal and rogues dont learn greatswords often is a small set of world defining aspects. They show the players how things work in the world. Your players are naturally falling back on the "fantasy worlds" they have the most experience with and its probably for a very simple reason. "you do not seem to have defined your game world and its limits for them. The entire notion of "Only limitations are the ones you want " is practically anti-defining. For example... if they want to play a toddler "normal human" who is as smart of the worlds smartest sage and has strength of 8 men, would you go sure? if they wanted to play a "normal human" who had six arms and a tail, would that be OK? Or are you going to stop and say "well that doesn't make sense?" At the point that you stop them and say "that doesn't make sense?" you have just admitted "well there are some limitations... i just haven't told you about them." Can your player choose a strength based skill for his magic skill roll? This way he can be a fighter mage and not have to fret with watsing points boosting int or ego. ****************************** It boils down to something very simple... if you, the gm, had given your players a guide to "how things work in this fantasy world" they would know these things and try to play within your world as it makes sense and is explained. lacking a world definition, lacking a sense of things, and lacking any instructions as to what should be expected as normal... people are going to fill in the blanks with what is comfortable. Should they expect normal squirrels to rush at them wielding two handed swords? Should this be seen in your world as just another hazard for those who do not drop adequate nutly offerings to the squirrel god? What he described seemd to me to be a communication issue and I addressed it as such, trying to point him to ways he can improve on the situation. I did not tell him to go use DND. I did not mention DND in my answer to his question. The first time i mentioned DND was in response to SOMEONE ELSE who was making claims about DND... it comes from page 2 and here it is in its entirety... EDIT: Adding the quote i responded to... "There are a fair number of game systems (Gurps, Palladium, Shadowrun, etc.) where it is theoretically possible (but maybe extremely difficult) for a character to advance without ever having entered combat once. This is impossible in D&D (definitely impossible in the first two editions, I have not extensively played the third)." END EDIT Originally posted by tesuji In DND 3e experience and advancement comes from one thing... overcoming the challenges presented. if your Gm runs a scenario where the challenges are all combat based, where the key to freeing the princess is killing her captors, then thats the way they will advance in that game. If the Gm however scripts the challenge so that other means are possible, even perhaps required, then those become the possibilities. For example, perhaps her captors are not just mindless fiends but crooks out for loot. then acting as a go between working out the ransom would be an option. Also, if your party is stealthy not brutish, then perhaps sneaking in and stealing her back might be it. Or, if the princess was kidnapped for some other reason, perhaps in retaliation for a kidnapping of the "villain's" son, then finding the son, exposing the root cause may well be the solution and the means of beating the challenge with social or investigative means. Now, this said, the makers of DND 3e were not morons. They realized something that most people here may secretly admit to when they think no one is around... most oif the time, fantasy stories and legends and films and the like tend to favor stories where fighting the bad guy plays a vital role... and yes, even among the roleplaying purists who wax poeteically about character who NEVER enter combat, have to admit they those characters are rarely the stars, the heroes, the PCS of those stories, films, and legends. So, not being morons, the guys at WOTC did spend a bit more on detailing the challenge system and xp for combat encounters and combat oriented challenges than they did for the non-combat ones... because they figure that would be more frequently the case. Its not impossible to advance without combat. The nature of the challenge is set by the GM when he defines his scenario, not by the rulebook. You will note that i did not feed a Go use DND answer to someone looking for hero advice. I did not even reference DND until someone ELSE made inaccurate comments about the DND mechanics. Originally posted by Nightshade Now reverse the situation: Question: I really hate how the PHB does magic. Option 1: Point them to a d20 book that has a different magic system. Option 2: Point them to a different system that has that type of magic. Again, if this were on a D&D board (or d20 board, for that matter), I would assume that they are looking for something similar to option 1. Why? Because they posted it on the D&D/d20 forums. And... that has any bearing on what I posted here on this thread...how? I did not answer a question about "how to hero" with "go dnd" at all. I answered the question without mentioning DND at all. I only answered comments ABOUT DND with DND... then the whole thing snowballed into DND vs HERO thing. If i was running round these boards answering "how to hero" questions with "go DND" I would understand your complaint. I typically, however, answer HOW TO HERO questions with HERo answers or if they are more GMing in nature with GMing advice. Heck, there is a thread on damage shield in the rules forum right now where i have participated actively and debated strongly and i never once mentioned DND. Know why? No one in that thread started tossing anti-DND barbs or making inaccurate references to DND system stuff. Can you get that distinction? You haven't so far. Originally posted by Nightshade As to your math rant. The first part of your post, you complain about the tedious nature of the math. The next part, you state that you created however many NPC's for another system, something you would never do with only a couple months of experience with HERO. Hmmm.... You wouldn't do it with only a couple months of experience. I'm sure its due to how tedious it is. That's certainly the implictation there. Is it so hard to believe that more math involved in a process, significantly more math, can make some people not enjoy the process as much? Originally posted by Nightshade But, I will say this. I find using a calculator to figure out the power costs 6 or 7 times much less tedious than being limited in what characters I can create, use, play, and develop. In both system, you are limited by which characters, races, abilities et al the Gm is willing to allow into his game. Originally posted by Nightshade I have written up many NPC's for my Fantasy HERO game, by hand, on paper and can do any character in about 45 minutes, most of which is actually spent writing. It isn't particularly tedious, because the only time I need to do any calculating is when I have spells. The rest of the time, it is stats, skills, perks, and talents, which mostly have fixed costs. The only math involved is addition and subtraction for most non-wizard characters, much like d20. I would argue that, from the spells i see in FH, the math involved for wizards in HFH is much greater in amount that that needed for DND wizards... and DND wizards are the most accounting heavy class in my experience in DND. However, the math issue was to bring to light two important points.. one, which you ignored again, was the difference between amount and complexity and the repeated hero player switch of the two when complaints are made... the second was that the amount of math makes hero problematic to some in terms of the work involved... Again, i am not alone in thinking the hero system so ponderous it gets in the way of bringing new players in... start searching these boards for references to sidekick, the hero lite product designed to attack new players by reducing the system to something more new user friendly. Maybe, for you, a veteran, the system math is not "in the way", maybe for you, a veteran, the system is not too ponderous to teach new players, certainly for gaming greoups with hero veterans making up the group, the learning curve has already been breacked... But, AS I SAID, for me, who makes a point to bring in a new player with every campaign, a heavy system is a PROBLEM not an advantage. This is even avoiding the whole issue of whether the math does anything meaningful or just seems to. Anyway, your points about answering hero questions with go dnd and so forth are really wonderful points... they may even have some merit... but they do not appear very much related to this thread and my posts at all. i answered non-dnd question (even tho it did mention DND) with non-DND answers (which even got some praise from the non-say-bad-hero-stuff-hulk-get-madder-than-hornet crowd) and did not even mention DND until DND issues were raised BY OTHERS. Sorry if my facts get in the way of your rage. It was a good rage, a well done rage. Kudos for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 I am not angry. I have never lost my temper, and I have never called you any names. I am also the only person who has stated that you have had some good points. Again, and I'm sure that I have stated this more than three times now, I got into this thread by AGREEING WITH YOU. Particularly as to your points with D&D. However, you have since gone completely off the topic (admittedly with help) and have bashed HERO in every possible way. That is simply rude. The reason isn't because we are rabid fans of HERO and can't stand criticism. It's simply because these are the HERO boards and you have attempted to slam everyone who even attempts to defend the system. I will also point out that I have read all of the thread, and really, what does your initial post have to do with what I was talking about? Just to say it again: You are being rude. You are being insulting. You are being a poor guest on these boards put up by a company to promote their products. Now, to your points: I get the distinction. I understand your point. Here is my point: Just because someone insults D&D on the HERO boards does not give you the right to insult, annoy, and belittle people as you have done. Many people have posted rebuttles to your claims. If you had a good point, I have stated so. If I had a good point, you have either ignored it or attempted to wave it away as a nuance or triviality. Many times you have done with D&D what you are accusing me of doing for HERO. Is it so hard to believe that more math involved in a process, significantly more math, can make some people not enjoy the process as much? No. That isn't hard to believe. What I find difficult to believe is that people make and buy programs to make their D&D characters easier, and HERO makes a product to do the same, and then people complain about the math in HERO. If the math bothers you so, get the program. I also find it difficult to believe that it is THAT much more difficult. It really doesn't take me much longer to make a Fantasy HERO character than a 3rd ed. D&D character on paper without the programs. I understand that this is/can be a hang up, but with a calculator, I really just don't see it. Maybe it is because I have done so many. I think you may be right on that point. I agree with your point that it is the GM that should limit what is available for characters to play. However, the correlary to this is that it is the GM who should do this, not the system. I have argued the point from the beginning of this discussion that it is easier to do this with HERO than D&D. Not that it isn't possible to do this in D&D, just that it isn't as simple to do. I would argue that, from the spells i see in FH, the math involved for wizards in HFH is much greater in amount that that needed for DND wizards... and DND wizards are the most accounting heavy class in my experience in DND. However, the math issue was to bring to light two important points.. one, which you ignored again, was the difference between amount and complexity and the repeated hero player switch of the two when complaints are made... the second was that the amount of math makes hero problematic to some in terms of the work involved... Again, i am not alone in thinking the hero system so ponderous it gets in the way of bringing new players in... start searching these boards for references to sidekick, the hero lite product designed to attack new players by reducing the system to something more new user friendly. [\quote] I never argued that HERO didn't require more math. I would argue that a high level wizard will require more work than a High Fantasy HERO wizard (I assume that is what you mean by HFH). The reason is that the experienced wizard creation rules don't exist for number of spells they get. You could go the 2 per level thing and assume that they never got access to anyone's spellbook, but as a player I would argue that. If what you mean is that a beginning wizard in HERO takes longer than in D&D, I again would argue that, since once a player has a concept for the magic, it really isn't hard to create. I will address the math issue once again, and use the exact same idea that I stated before: If you are not using magic, the amount (not the complexity) of math is the same. Number of points total, subtract skills, talents, stats, perks, etc. vs. number of points for stats, number of points for ranks, pick feats. The only time the advantage/limitation system (the one most often complained about) ever occurs in my fantasy game (this obviously isn't always the case) is with spells. D&D only requires wizards to pick their spells (set number). HERO requires players to make their spells, which indeed takes more math (simple math, but math). Here is my point, though. Most of the time (the exception is if you are using power frameworks for magic, which I do not), the character only has a few spells. This means that the amount of math involved really isn't that much. A starting wizard may only have something like 6 or 7 spells. That means doing the math 6 or 7 times. I'll grant you that this is 6 or 7 times more than D&D, but that is not excessive in my mind. As to the HERO lite threads, I have never agreed with that approach. The complexity of the system is over 90% in the character creation and advancement system (since a point is a point). The way to make it easier for people to play HERO, IMO is by releasing more products like the Until superpowers guide book. The Fantasy HERO Grimiore will greatly help me with new players get their spells much more easily. I have taught 13 and 14 year olds to play HERO. People who have not played any game at all, as well as those who only played D&D. I did the character creation, though, since that was too much all at once. Once they got the hang of how other mechanics worked (increasing skill rolls, experience, attack rolls, skill rolls vs. stat checks, etc.) they started to create their own spells, and then their own characters. They were very happy with that (and now pretty much only play HERO). Anyway, your points about answering hero questions with go dnd and so forth are really wonderful points... they may even have some merit... but they do not appear very much related to this thread and my posts at all. i answered non-dnd question (even tho it did mention DND) with non-DND answers (which even got some praise from the non-say-bad-hero-stuff-hulk-get-madder-than-hornet crowd) and did not even mention DND until DND issues were raised BY OTHERS. I think that you get a lot of the credit for degrading the thread to the D&D sucks, HERO is better; no its not direction this thread took. I would also give you a lot of the credit for why people got so upset. Just from your last post: "Unfortunately, for you, i have been here since the beginning." "Can you get that distinction? You haven't so far." "non-say-bad-hero-stuff-hulk-get-madder-than-hornet crowd" "Sorry if my facts get in the way of your rage. It was a good rage, a well done rage. Kudos for that." Now, if someone did that to you, would you get upset? Of course, and IMO reasonably so. But you will notice that my posts have not done any of this. The only time I may have even given you a jibe was when, in response to a snide comment from you, I reworded a snide comment back, or when I posted that I thought it was amusing that most of the current discussion started by people (not only you) flying off the handle partially from a post I sent AGREEING WITH YOU! I still find that hilarious, btw. I haven't raged against you. I never have. I'll admit that some have, and I will say that I don't agree with some of the responses from them, but you have to admit, some of the venom unleashed was from your side of the fence. Actually, now that I say that, I'll also take some of the responsibility for that. I will admit that sometimes I did not explain myself properly, did not have a full grasp of some of the rules, and put up some very bad examples. That lowered the quality of the discussion and can be very annoying. For that, I appologize. I think I can sum up where we disagree. If you would like to continue this conversation, I am more than willing to address the following points: 1) I believe that a class based system is too constrictive for the character development, even the vastly improved system used in D&D. 2) I believe that the classes in the PHB (but not in the DMG or any of the various supplemental books) are an inherent part of the "official" d20 fantasy game called D&D. Therefore, it is fair to discuss them as part of the D&D system, but not part of the d20 system. My interpretation is that it is the prestige classes that are setting specific and the basic classes are genre specific. 3) I believe that in some circumstances, HERO is a better fantasy system than D&D because it is more easility customized to fit your game than D&D. 4) I believe that HERO's skill resolution system is better than D&D, as it is less likely that in an opposed skill vs. skill contest that a low skilled character to beat a much more skilled character. 5) I believe that HERO has a better character development system as the players have a more uniform way to increase and obtain skills with experience than in D&D. 6) I believe that HERO does have more math and a steeper learning curve than D&D, but that it is not something that is particularly difficult to overcome, given the opportunity. 7) I believe that D&D is a good system for those fantasy worlds that D&D is good at, such as high magic, high fantasy games. These are what I believe, and a short description of why I believe it. I invite all of those who are ignoring me or tesuji to stop that and join in a constructive discussion on the topic. What I don't want is for this to get into a shouting match or lots of insults. If you would like, I can start a new thread just for this purpose. I'd like to know your thoughts. Nightshade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 I agree with all of your final points/beliefs Nightshade. However, its not worth discussing because tesuji is not, regardless of how often he claims to be, interested in an actual exchange of ideas. He is firm in his beliefs and will not unbend. He ignores or marginalizes points he cant address, and spends the rest of the time alternating between belittling any who disagree with him and accentuating any actual points he may have beyond thier original context or out of proportion with thier actual impact. As Yamo pointed out, going onto a board dedicated to a particular topic only to bad mouth it, "play devils advocate", or detract from it is classic troll behavior. Its similar to a a person of 1 religion going into a church of a different religion to point out all the reasons why thier religion isnt as good as his, from his perspective. Its tactless, rude, and irritating. Continuing to converse with people like that only encourages them. Personally I cant imagine wasting my own time trolling on some other game board; Ive got 10000001 better things to do with my time. Nevertheless, some seem to have nothing better to do than antagonize others. Please stop feeding tesuji; let him spin his wheels and eventually when he realizes that nobody cares he'll lose interest and leave. Thanx! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 I hope you guys don't mind a newbie butting in in the discussion, and also trying to relate to the problems the original poster of this thread was talking about, that discussion about fantasy paradigms and D&D cliches and all that... Even though I owned Champions 4th Edition, I've played much more D&D than HERO. I'm still learning HERO. Sincerely, I don't think it's the math that scares away some serious players from HERO (and I mean serious here, not "let's kill some monsters this afternoon" players). No, the biggest difficulty with the HERO System is the "reasoning from effect" stuff, IMO. People aren't used to that and most never quite get the knack of doing it. They're just too hang up on "laundry list" kind of thinking. I've seen intelligent, resourceful players that just can't wrap their heads around "reasoning from effect". They'll play HERO, but only if the GM comes up with a VERY detailed description of possible "professions" of the game-world and very detailed lists of available powers. So I don't think HERO will ever be the kind of pop phenomenom D&D is. And I think that is fine. I see the two games as appealing to different people. If you want to play a action-heavy game and you don't mind company-made worlds, then why bother with HERO? Of course, HERO has it's niche too. D&D is more flexible now than it has ever been and you can change and create a great many things with it. But still it's D&D, and it has some built-in paradigms. Some D&D players don't even notice the paradigms anymore, they seem to think the fantasy genre *is* D&D, because they're so much into D&D. It is not. Get a dozen of the best fantasy writers working today. Read their books. You just can't use D&D to simulate a single one of them. And that is HERO's niche. Me and some friends, we were thinking about doing a campaign based on George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire". They all knew D&D, so we tried using D&D. And then we came to the conclusion that we'd had to discard 80% of D&D and make everything ourselves. We made some progress in devising a whole new magic system, tons of new classes, changing most of the combat rules, making new feats to represent social advantages, etc. And most of it felt pretty wrong anyway, despite our best efforts. We got to the point of thinking about discarding the whole concept of classes and levels and using only d20 basic rules. And then I had an idea. I was the only one who knew HERO. "Hey, we're not using D&D anymore, we're pratically trying to write a whole new system, so we might as well use this big book I have. It's designed just to create tailor-made campaigns." And almost everything from "A Song of Ice and Fire" worked wonderfully well in HERO. Real smooth. And I'm not even a expert in HERO. Anytime I read any fantasy novel I can easily visualize most of the characters and abilities and the world in HERO. I can't do the same with D&D. And when I have completely original ideas about worlds and stuff, HERO feels way more confortable as a tool to make them real, much more than D&D can ever hope to be. I don't say this to put down D&D or to imply you can't "change" stuff in D&D. I've know GMs that run D&D campaigns that are very unique and contain lots of details that differ considerably from the official books. Still, they're all inside what I call the "D&D subgenre" of fantasy, a subgenre that feels limiting to me. It don't feels limiting to them, because they're so into it that they see D&D as the whole of fantasy. But that is fine, they're having fun. Good for them. So I see HERO as a system for those of us hoping to simulate worlds taken from fantasy literature, or original worlds more influenced by fantasy literature than gaming-company concepts. Or the veteran players tired of laundry-list systems who want to go really wild. For the newbie player who don't read fantasy literature or even the more experienced guy who is quite happy just with the experience of swinging a sword or casting a spell, D&D is way better. BTW, Dragon Magazine recently published some "A Song of Ice and Fire" conversions done with D&D. Pretty much every ASOIAF fan I know think it's horrible, jerry-built and downright nonsensical, even the ones who actually like D&D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Schtroumpf Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 Personally? I like feeding the occasional troll. It can be very interesting to see how they will insult themselves next. And sometimes they do kick loose some good points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 [/b] Originally posted by Killer Shrike However, its not worth discussing because tesuji is not, regardless of how often he claims to be, interested in an actual exchange of ideas. He is firm in his beliefs and will not unbend. He ignores or marginalizes points he cant address, and spends the rest of the time alternating between belittling any who disagree with him and accentuating any actual points he may have beyond thier original context or out of proportion with thier actual impact. As Yamo pointed out, going onto a board dedicated to a particular topic only to bad mouth it, "play devils advocate", or detract from it is classic troll behavior. Indeed it is an this portrayal is fascinating, but inaccurate. As i tried to point out with nightshade when he made specific examples, all you have to do is look to THIS THREAD and see this characterization is not what happened here. Did i jump in this thread and start bashing heor or DND? Nope. My first post was solely about the Gms role in defining his world. i did not mention DND. i did not bash HERO. When did i start talking about DND? After someone else started making claims about the system that I found to be inaccurate. Maybe its some other thread that Shrike is so beefed about? Hard to say because all we get is rambling non-sprcifics and name calling. Its really not that much worth responding to, except that at the end of a large thread there is the risk that some people might read it and think it a summary and not a fiction. Originally posted by Killer Shrike Its similar to a a person of 1 religion going into a church of a different religion to point out all the reasons why thier religion isnt as good as his, from his perspective. Its tactless, rude, and irritating. Contrast this to going to another church, conversing with them calmly about their religion andonly mentioning yours when someone there MISCHARACTERIZES it. Thats what happened in this thread. Shrike seems to have missed that. Originally posted by Killer Shrike Please stop feeding tesuji; let him spin his wheels and eventually when he realizes that nobody cares he'll lose interest and leave. Thanx! yes, apparently you have the time to zip into threads just to do the "tesuji is bad dont answer his posts" and name calling bit. I gotta say, that seems much ruder behavior. I must admit though, i have never had a stalker before following me around to try and keep people from talking to me before, so it is a unique experience. However, as an aside, i can understand why Shrike's description seems so incredulous given the actual posts into the thread... if i am truely on his ignore list, then he did not see my messages and posts and is arguing perhaps only from the snippetted quotes from other people's responses... so it may well be he does not even know enough of what was posted to know what i did say. So it may not be self-delusion, only self-imposed ignorance that misgiudes his posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 [/b] Originally posted by Nightshade I am also the only person who has stated that you have had some good points. Are you sure you have read the whole thread? From page 1, before you chimed in iirc... Originally posted by Captain Obvious Good points, Tesuji. and also from page 1... Originally posted by Citizen Keen While tesuji has solid points, -cK I dont know whether this is just another example of your tendency for innacuracy or simply a case of trying to use hyperbole to bolster your case. You tell me. Originally posted by Nightshade However, you have since gone completely off the topic (admittedly with help) and have bashed HERO in every possible way. This is, even if simply taken as hyperbole, simply not true. Originally posted by Nightshade That is simply rude. The reason isn't because we are rabid fans of HERO and can't stand criticism. It's simply because these are the HERO boards and you have attempted to slam everyone who even attempts to defend the system. Sigh. Originally posted by Nightshade I will also point out that I have read all of the thread, and really, what does your initial post have to do with what I was talking about? Well, you posted as examples of rude behavior, which by implication i took to mean examples of my being rude in context, that involved people chiming in to answer questions about HERo with DND. I felt the example that i asnwered the initial question with no reference to DND or using another game system to be precisely on point, disproving your example as an example of what happened here. I felt the second example, of my only bringing up DND after someone else made inaccurate claims about DND as also disproving your points relevence to what has been going on here. Originally posted by Nightshade You are being rude. You are being insulting. You are being a poor guest on these boards put up by a company to promote their products. Again, i disagree with your characterizations. As i did just a few posts ago with your answer with DND examples, I do not believe the facts support your characterizations. They seem grossly hyperbolic even when not simply factually inaccurate. Originally posted by Nightshade Just because someone insults D&D on the HERO boards does not give you the right to insult, annoy, and belittle people as you have done. Interestingly, the vast majority of my comments were about the system. Originally posted by Nightshade Many people have posted rebuttles to your claims. If you had a good point, I have stated so. If I had a good point, you have either ignored it or attempted to wave it away as a nuance or triviality. If i wanted to start discussing ignoring points, i would bring up your shifting subjects when an inaccuracy is found in your arguments. How many times did i have to correct your mischaracterization of DND rules? Where is your response to the "answer with dnd" argument you made corrected by my actually showing you the posts? Let me ask some very direct questions (by the way, the "Nightshade is the even level headed one schtick" is goin good.) 1. Is your recent "answering hero Q with DND answers" post an accurate example or characterization of how i answered the original posters queation or did i in fact answer him without BASHING HERO or PUSHING DND? 2. is it accurate to say that i only started up with DND on this thread after a specific claim about DND was made by another poster? Originally posted by Nightshade I also find it difficult to believe that it is THAT much more difficult. It really doesn't take me much longer to make a Fantasy HERO character than a 3rd ed. D&D character on paper without the programs. I understand that this is/can be a hang up, but with a calculator, I really just don't see it. So that would put you not in the camp who believe that Sidekick would be a good product needed to help HERO grow. Personally, i agree with Mr long and the others. i think it would be a great thing. Now that he has placated the hardcore HEROmaniacs with 5e, another attempot at what fuzion tried to do, streamlined system easier for newcomers, is a great idea IMO. Originally posted by Nightshade Maybe it is because I have done so many. I think you may be right on that point. As i have stated AND AGREED WITH YOU ON... for a group comprised of HERO veterans, HERo does fine in the complexity issue. matter of fact, people like Yamo in fact have even gone on record against the "anti-newbie" learning curve as a bad thing... in response to a post about the imbalances between capabilities of a novice build vs a veteran build i believe his response was akin to "the day i dont get more out of hero by putting more in is a bad day." Me, since i prefer to bring new players into each campaign, i do not want the "time in" for vetereans making them get "more powerful characters" simply because they know how to milk the system more. I prefer, apparently unlike yamo, to bring the newbie is at full capability and not at a character disadvantage. A less weighty system allows me to do that more. Originally posted by Nightshade However, the correlary to this is that it is the GM who should do this, not the system. I have argued the point from the beginning of this discussion that it is easier to do this with HERO than D&D. Not that it isn't possible to do this in D&D, just that it isn't as simple to do. And my counter point is that it IS simpler to do. More to the point, the amount of work involved really depends much more on how similar it is to the setting within the system already. Note that even while HERO professes to not have a setting, it really does have much of one ingrained in. its setting is one where water breathing SHOULD BE half as useful as clinging (which makes an assessment of how often water issues and climbing issues occur and their importance) and where a 4d6 blast over a 4m radius is on par with an 8d6 blast against a single target (which makes an assessment of how often groups are adversaries, how high the defenses are and how wide open the engagements are) and that flight is on par with running in effectiveness (even in a game without knockback)and that stun only is as effective as does stun and body for a shockbolt or a club and so on and so on and so on. As i have stated before... If the world you envision is more similar to how hero does things, so that these core setting elements ingrained within the system do not have to be addressed and evaluated and changed... then rendering that world in HERo will likely be easier than doing so in DND. The reverse is also true... if it is closer to DND than hero, then it will be easier to do there. Frankly, creating a class in DND takes less time for me than creating a character in hero... and i am a veteran of hero. For games more or less in the middle, the level of experience with either system will likely be the determining element. This is where i come down with my basic premise... that HERO is NOT more customizable or less work to do a custom setting in than DND (or more precisely D20.) Originally posted by Nightshade Now, if someone did that to you, would you get upset? Uhh i have endured far worse in this thread. The parts which get me upset are when people do two specific things... 1. try and turn the discussion about why i should not be posting here at all. 2. When people simply make inaccurate statements or misleading examples about what has been said. Most often, it seems like those are just an attempt to stop the disucssion not to further it. i might admit tho, shrike's new tact of actively going round and simply telling people to stop talking to me and calling me names is one i still haven't digested yet. Originally posted by Nightshade I'll admit that some have, and I will say that I don't agree with some of the responses from them, but you have to admit, some of the venom unleashed was from your side of the fence. Your nightshade-the-middle-man angle would sound more convincing if it were not the fact that even when you apparently see rude behavior from both sides of the discussion you chose only one side to post commentary against their rudeness... if somewhere in between his name calling rants, you had posted a message to AnotherSkip telling him his rude posts should not be made here, i might be buying into this Nightshade easy going schtick. Actions speak louder than words, Nightshade. Originally posted by Nightshade Actually, now that I say that, I'll also take some of the responsibility for that. I will admit that sometimes I did not explain myself properly, did not have a full grasp of some of the rules, and put up some very bad examples. That lowered the quality of the discussion and can be very annoying. For that, I appologize. Thank you. Originally posted by Nightshade 1) I believe that a class based system is too constrictive for the character development, even the vastly improved system used in D&D. I believe, for worlds significantly removed from worlds the players are very familiar with, class based system, specifically loose class based systems, are immensely valuable tools to show the players much of what people in the world are like. I admit that in the hands of a GM who decided to be too constrictive, they are a means of it, but assert that he can be just as contrictive with the approval stage in a points-then-approve system such as hero. Classes are one way he can say no, but he can do so in many other ways. Originally posted by Nightshade 2) I believe that the classes in the PHB (but not in the DMG or any of the various supplemental books) are an inherent part of the "official" d20 fantasy game called D&D. Therefore, it is fair to discuss them as part of the D&D system, but not part of the d20 system. My interpretation is that it is the prestige classes that are setting specific and the basic classes are genre specific. i think you and i are getting a different take on this. I will agree completely that DND is the classes but the fact is that DND is greyhawk. The official setting is greyhawk and the DND book includes that. All that being true, the question of which classes are allowed for a custom game is the GMs. he is not obligated by the rules to allow sorcerers or paladins or any of them. Originally posted by Nightshade 3) I believe that in some circumstances, HERO is a better fantasy system than D&D because it is more easility customized to fit your game than D&D. I think the determinign elements there are the similarity of the cutom world to the two systems and the experience the user has with the system, not an ingrained element of the system themselves. Once you add "players" into the mix, i think the issue of newbies vs veterans shifts the balance more heavily towards D20 if newbies are involved. Originally posted by Nightshade 4) I believe that HERO's skill resolution system is better than D&D, as it is less likely that in an opposed skill vs. skill contest that a low skilled character to beat a much more skilled character. That is one element of the skill resolution system. Since i rarely see toddlers arm wrestling with strongmen come up as an element of my stories, I really cannot see that as as serious an issue as you seem to have with it. I see "circumstantial modifiers" which adjust the Dc play into practically every scenario i have ever run... and as such i find the d20 "i know what a +1 modifier will do... 1 more chance in 20" vs hero's "i don't know what a +1 modifier will do... is it 10 chances in 216 or is it 27 chances in 216?" to be much preferable. With take-10 and even take-20, d20 deals with the more extreme randomness quite well IMO. Originally posted by Nightshade 5) I believe that HERO has a better character development system as the players have a more uniform way to increase and obtain skills with experience than in D&D. through classes the Gm allows the characters to progress in a reasonable way, showing the players what comes first and a scope for how things are learned... you don't get ti fireballs without learning easier magics. For this to happen in HERO, the Gm has to provide this information to the players. Last HERO game i was in i saw a photographer, the session after we had picked up a enemy computer, spend his 3xp to gain computers skill which he had not had before. he went from little skill, maybe a everyman roll, to 13- in the course of a "in game weekend" by picking up, and i mean this literally was how it was descirbed, "the yellow computers for dummies nook" and was off and making 13- die rolls for computer stuff. That violated no HERO rule. So, you must forgive me when i say, when someone talks about how much better the adnavcement and experience and gaining abilities is in hero, i often don't get that. it seems much more reasonable to scale things in order of acquisition so that prerequisites occur before more advanced abilities. HERO does not do that. A GM might decide to add that for his game, but HERo does not do that for him. Classed system do that. Originally posted by Nightshade 6) I believe that HERO does have more math and a steeper learning curve than D&D, but that it is not something that is particularly difficult to overcome, given the opportunity. i find, as do other proponents of sidekick I think, that the system's learning curve does get in the way of new players being attracted to it. i know if i told my barbarian player, who took up roleplaying after she turned 50, that the HERO5 manual plus the megasized fantasy hero manual were the books needed for the play and chargen, she would have smiled and told me no. When i was able to give her the PHB and thats quite literally all she used to build her character... that worked. i think sidekick will go a long way towards bringing new players to HERO. Originally posted by Nightshade 7) I believe that D&D is a good system for those fantasy worlds that D&D is good at, such as high magic, high fantasy games. I agree. As stated earlier, i actually recommend D20 modern for low magic worlds. Truth be told, its even looser class system is IMO superior to DND's greyahwk class system. When i run another fantasy game using d20, i will likely as not utilize a lot of the d20 modern class structure by adding in the "stat hero" classes as more generics and removing any multiclass penalties in favor of prerequisites for 'advanced classes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShinDangaioh Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 (I've only read the first post, so if it has diverged from that. I wouldn't know) When Spelljammer came out, the classes weren't logical anymore for that setting. Sooo, I dug into the DMG and created my own classes that would feel right. The Jammnav class. d6 HD, spell power up to level 5 spells, an assortment of spells from both Cleric and Mage lists, the ability to shrug off the debilitating effects of a spelljamming helm. He filled a niche that was needed. I miss that ability from 2nd ed that should have been in D20. The ability to create your own character classes. I can't bring that character over to D20. Maybe BESM D20 will have that ability restored. At any rate, run an AD&D 2nd ed game and create a bunch of odd character classes to show them that things don't have to be the way the books say. After a few of those games, show them Hero and point out that what you had done with those odd classes, can be done in even greater degree with Hero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted June 29, 2003 Report Share Posted June 29, 2003 Originally posted by ShinDangaioh (I've only read the first post, so if it has diverged from that. I wouldn't know) Good call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshade Posted June 30, 2003 Report Share Posted June 30, 2003 I won't post any response to the stuff that you stated before the points that I said that I'd discuss, although I will say that insults, from any side, is rude. I would also state that I don't agree with Killer Shrike as to feeding tesuji is feeding a troll. Aside from the insults, I think tesuji is trying to make his point. If he simply wouldn't be so, shall we say, aggressive about it, specifically the name calling and whatnot (however, I don't think he started it), I think that this would be a very good discussion. If you look at the last part of his last post, he was very cordial, and again had some very legitimate points. I am of the opinion that if more people did this, it would be a more pleasant forum. Now, on to the (hopefully only) discussion: tesuji wrote: "I believe, for worlds significantly removed from worlds the players are very familiar with, class based system, specifically loose class based systems, are immensely valuable tools to show the players much of what people in the world are like. I admit that in the hands of a GM who decided to be too constrictive, they are a means of it, but assert that he can be just as contrictive with the approval stage in a points-then-approve system such as hero. Classes are one way he can say no, but he can do so in many other ways." I'm still not getting this quote thing down. Anyway, I disagree. My world is much closer to Earth than Greyhawk, as I don't have very much magic, and D&D worked very poorly for it, because of that fact. I will agree that the purpose of classes is to do exactly what you say. And, I also agree that there are circumstances where the GM must say no. My issue is that it is the GM's perrogative, not the systems'. I think that D&D takes this somewhat away from the GM. tesuji wrote: "i think you and i are getting a different take on this. I will agree completely that DND is the classes but the fact is that DND is greyhawk. The official setting is greyhawk and the DND book includes that. All that being true, the question of which classes are allowed for a custom game is the GMs. he is not obligated by the rules to allow sorcerers or paladins or any of them. " I agree with you there. There is nothing that states that I have to use sorceror or paladin, or can't modify them. However, when I changed or deleted pretty much every class, my prospective players had problems. It simply wasn't D&D to them. I understand that the base setting is Greyhawk. However, most of the setting books released for d20 fantasy use at the minimum the base classes, with maybe a few tweaks, deletions, and add-ons. All of the ones released that I have seen (granted not that many) have wholesale changed them the way I had to. Now, if they are going to, great. I just haven't seen them, and I think that is for a reason. tesuji wrote: "I think the determinign elements there are the similarity of the cutom world to the two systems and the experience the user has with the system, not an ingrained element of the system themselves. Once you add "players" into the mix, i think the issue of newbies vs veterans shifts the balance more heavily towards D20 if newbies are involved." I agree with you there. D&D is definately a more new player friendly game, especially if you have never roleplayed before. I will also agree with you that as the players become more experienced, that the shift is more towards more complicated, freeform systems like what HERO has. Okay, that isn't really what you said, but it could be inferred from your post. That has been my experience, however. tesuji wrote: "That is one element of the skill resolution system. Since i rarely see toddlers arm wrestling with strongmen come up as an element of my stories, I really cannot see that as as serious an issue as you seem to have with it. I see "circumstantial modifiers" which adjust the Dc play into practically every scenario i have ever run... and as such i find the d20 "i know what a +1 modifier will do... 1 more chance in 20" vs hero's "i don't know what a +1 modifier will do... is it 10 chances in 216 or is it 27 chances in 216?" to be much preferable. With take-10 and even take-20, d20 deals with the more extreme randomness quite well IMO. " The 3 STR vs. 18 STR example holds true for any skill. Let me give you an actual in-game example. I had a wizard in my game with a STR of 7. He got into some trouble with the town bully who had a STR of 15. He got wrestled to the ground and restrained. Basically, he couldn't cast any spells. The party was a couple rounds away, but were running to help. Now, the wizard tried to get out of the bruiser's hold, and whooped the guy good on the roll. After looking at the statistics of it, he actually didn't have a bad shot at doing it, either. I have also had archery contests and concealment vs. search checks. Anytime it is skill vs. skill, the player with the lower skill simply doesn't have that bad of a chance to succeed. In my experience, this doesn't occur as often in HERO as D&D. I don't mind it happening, but I don't like the frequency of it happening. I don't think that I have had anyone ever complain about the +1 to skill is better for him than me due to my higher skill. Personally, I prefer to have a diminishing returns system, where getting a +1 to a skill is not as good the better you get. It feels more real to me that way. However, I much prefer the linear system D&D has to the system White Wolf and some others use, where not only does getting another die to your roll not help as much, you had to pay more for it (a lot more in many cases). tesuji said: "through classes the Gm allows the characters to progress in a reasonable way, showing the players what comes first and a scope for how things are learned... you don't get ti fireballs without learning easier magics. For this to happen in HERO, the Gm has to provide this information to the players. Last HERO game i was in i saw a photographer, the session after we had picked up a enemy computer, spend his 3xp to gain computers skill which he had not had before. he went from little skill, maybe a everyman roll, to 13- in the course of a "in game weekend" by picking up, and i mean this literally was how it was descirbed, "the yellow computers for dummies nook" and was off and making 13- die rolls for computer stuff. That violated no HERO rule. So, you must forgive me when i say, when someone talks about how much better the adnavcement and experience and gaining abilities is in hero, i often don't get that. it seems much more reasonable to scale things in order of acquisition so that prerequisites occur before more advanced abilities. HERO does not do that. A GM might decide to add that for his game, but HERo does not do that for him. Classed system do that." They only do that for the powers and abilities specifically of the class. They don't do that for the skills, necessarily. For example, where in d20 does it state that when you gain your level you can't put all of the skill points into one skill that was previously untrained? As to the example you gave, as GM I would rule that a "for dummies" book may not qualify for the full roll, especially over a weekend. You have to have time to practice a skill (any skill) before you get the full skill. As to the getting fireball without easier magic in D&D, that may be the case if you assume that all magic has the same philosophy. I never liked that idea, personally, but it is inherent to D&D (wizards all cast the same spell the same way). There is no rule that states, however, that you need to have anything even remotely fire related to get fireball in D&D. You could have all enchantment, necromancy, and abjuration spells and still get fireball without restriction (unless you were a specialist and picked that one as a forbidden school). I will agree that D&D does a very good job of doing what you are talking about with feats, especially. The magic has a different philosophy than I would like on my world. I do classify my spells in terms of common special effect/common style, so I have an admitted prejudice there. HERO's spell college system did attempt to rectify what you are talking about, but IMO did it poorly. We'll see how they do it with the new addition. tesuji wrote: "i find, as do other proponents of sidekick I think, that the system's learning curve does get in the way of new players being attracted to it. i know if i told my barbarian player, who took up roleplaying after she turned 50, that the HERO5 manual plus the megasized fantasy hero manual were the books needed for the play and chargen, she would have smiled and told me no. When i was able to give her the PHB and thats quite literally all she used to build her character... that worked. i think sidekick will go a long way towards bringing new players to HERO. " I have already agreed that D&D is a much better system for people who have never roleplayed before. I don't understand why sidekick will help get people into the game. I know that I haven't read anything about what the Sidekick book will do, but I will say that the HERO system Grimoire will help me with my fanasy game MUCH more, as it eliminates a lot of the math associated with the spells. It makes it easier to play a wizard when you can just look the spell up and write it on your sheet. I'll have to look up what the sidekick book idea is, so I can't really comment as to your point there. tesuji wrote: "I agree. As stated earlier, i actually recommend D20 modern for low magic worlds. Truth be told, its even looser class system is IMO superior to DND's greyahwk class system. When i run another fantasy game using d20, i will likely as not utilize a lot of the d20 modern class structure by adding in the "stat hero" classes as more generics and removing any multiclass penalties in favor of prerequisites for 'advanced classes." I never got d20 modern, as I already had a system that I liked. How are you planning on doing magic with that? Do they have anything for that, our do you have to create the spell progression, etc? Anyway, like I said, I can't comment as to how well d20 modern will handle low magic worlds, as I don't own the product. I will say that I wouldn't use D&D, for reasons I have listed previously. Nightshade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted June 30, 2003 Report Share Posted June 30, 2003 [/b] Originally posted by Nightshade I'm still not getting this quote thing down. Anyway, I disagree. My world is much closer to Earth than Greyhawk, as I don't have very much magic, and D&D worked very poorly for it, because of that fact. Then you are not disagreeing with me at all. i will state it more clearly... classes are more useful the FARTHER the play world is from the world the players themselves know. So, a game more like earth with low magic would be less served by classes because the primary function of classes, to help define the world's inhabitants and give the players a better foundation, is less of a challenge. Honestly, i continually recommend D20 modern for a low magic world, even a dantasy one. It starts with the premise of less magic and less fantastic built in. The DND setting is definitely intended for HIGH MAGIC. Originally posted by Nightshade I will agree that the purpose of classes is to do exactly what you say. And, I also agree that there are circumstances where the GM must say no. My issue is that it is the GM's perrogative, not the systems'. I think that D&D takes this somewhat away from the GM. I think DND includes a high magic setting and bases its settings balance parameters, which need to be defined for a campaign ON THAT SETTING. This is, IMO, a great benefit to those wishing to run high magic games. It wont help those running substantially different games, but then, it doesn't hurt them either, IMO. I will add one thing... and i have seen this in print from the designers, and Collins seems the most egregious... for the DND setting there was for 3e and still is for 3.5e a goal of reducing the GMs role... that they want to provide so many benchmarks and cross references to keep many decisions from being what they tend to describe as "GM whim" by ironing the mechanics down. Monte Cook described it as doing what they could to remove the Gm from the picture, or similkar language. I UNDERSTAND this notion from the perspective of a game that is intended to reach inexperienced GMs as well as new ones, a sort of "training wheels" built in that later on the experienced Gm can remove to suit his purpose. I do not like it myself, as it serves me little purpose, and am as such looking very much forward to Monte's Arcana PHB which is specifically targetted to experienced GMs and has a much less "safeties on" mindset in its design. HERO5, to me, is a game definitely designed for experienced GMs. Originally posted by Nightshade I agree with you there. There is nothing that states that I have to use sorceror or paladin, or can't modify them. However, when I changed or deleted pretty much every class, my prospective players had problems. It simply wasn't D&D to them. This sounds to me like a miscommuniocation between you and the players. They wanted to play more traditional DND and you wanted to do something else. Thats just as bad as a MnM Gm who wants to run daredevil but has four players who build iron men clones impervious to bullets and clubs. I do not see that as anything, fault or favor, to the systems. Originally posted by Nightshade I understand that the base setting is Greyhawk. However, most of the setting books released for d20 fantasy use at the minimum the base classes, with maybe a few tweaks, deletions, and add-ons. All of the ones released that I have seen (granted not that many) have wholesale changed them the way I had to. Now, if they are going to, great. I just haven't seen them, and I think that is for a reason. I dont buy a lot of third party DND stuff. WOTC supports the same stuff they publish. I recall there being a third party one that used a universe with gunpower and guns and cannons and such. I think Malhavoc did one heavily psionic. I know monte Cook is about to release, at printers now, Arcana Unearthed, a completely new PHB with no core classes from the PHb and a different magic system and the like. i ANXIOUSLY await this. Why hasn't there been more? Probably because the third party guys saw similar results to you... that the further away from the DND mold they went, the more restricted their audience became. They sell to the market... and its easier to make PrCs to provide your norm than it is to say "we dont use fighters" so if you want to drop this adventure into your campaign you cannot." The closer they stay to the core, the more potential buyers they get. That is however, speculation, but since it simply takes your experience and projects it to a larger stage, it makes some sense. Besides, quite frankly, many of the core classes such as fighter and rouge and barbarian serve fairly well across many different fantasy flavors. its their magic system guys that are fairly restricted in their application...especially the wizard and clerics. Originally posted by Nightshade I agree with you there. D&D is definately a more new player friendly game, especially if you have never roleplayed before. I will also agree with you that as the players become more experienced, that the shift is more towards more complicated, freeform systems like what HERO has. Okay, that isn't really what you said, but it could be inferred from your post. That has been my experience, however. I will add a third stage... Stage 1: learn to play quick and easy game system Stage 2: Desire for and move to much more complex and detailed system. Stage 3: In some cases, not all, move back to lower detailed system (not necessarily the ones you began with) for more system light don't-get-in-the-way gaming. i went to stage 3. In similar vein... i once played chess a lot. Then i got into wargames and got really good at Star Fleet Battles the -game-that-needs-its-own-weight-belt-to-allow-the-rules-to-be-carried. Later on, when i got tired of SFB being more about rules-ics than tactics, i came to find GO, a game whose rules can be boiled down to about 8 rules and for whom the play is simple but the game more complex than any other i have seen. In my experience, the values i believed i gained from the really huge honking games was an illusion. The success or failure of the games did not hinge on and were not really affected by the game having 50 pages of rules or 400 pages of rules or whether it used simple add/subtract or whether a falshlight was a mathproject. The success or fail depended fundamentally on two things... did i communicate well with the players at the beginning and did i live up to and show them in play what i promised them. To meet those goals, a lightweight clear system works better and doesn't need as much math. The downsides of the honking heavy system, 500 pages plus learning curve, are big if, like me, you want to bring new players to the table for each campaign. Nowadays if i want to bring new players to a board game of space combat, i whip out BFG or Silent Death... both of who i can have you up and PLAYING in 15 minutes. If i want to bring someone new to the table for fantasy rpg or supers, i gravitate to MnM or DND, or soon, perhaps, Arcana from monte or the "hungry magic" setting i am working on using DND or D20 Modern (which would also make for a good XFiles/Buffy etc...) Originally posted by Nightshade The 3 STR vs. 18 STR example holds true for any skill. Let me give you an actual in-game example. I had a wizard in my game with a STR of 7. He got into some trouble with the town bully who had a STR of 15. He got wrestled to the ground and restrained. Basically, he couldn't cast any spells. The party was a couple rounds away, but were running to help. Now, the wizard tried to get out of the bruiser's hold, and whooped the guy good on the roll. After looking at the statistics of it, he actually didn't have a bad shot at doing it, either. A lot of that will of course also vary with level. The "skill" primary for this task is BAB. Originally posted by Nightshade I have also had archery contests and concealment vs. search checks. Anytime it is skill vs. skill, the player with the lower skill simply doesn't have that bad of a chance to succeed. In my experience, this doesn't occur as often in HERO as D&D. I don't mind it happening, but I don't like the frequency of it happening. I get that. You like the skill vs skill probabilties better when skill ranks play more of a roll than in DND. i get that. However, that is one element of the skill resolution system. I find the "+1 means different things" to be a bigger annoyance as circumstantial modifiers occur in practically every scenario for me. Thus i prefer a flatter model. My simplest suggestion would be to replace d20 with a d10+5 for the skill checks you want to be flatter. That way you get less broad a range of results and keep the knowing what a +1 represents aspect. Originally posted by Nightshade I don't think that I have had anyone ever complain about the +1 to skill is better for him than me due to my higher skill. Personally, I prefer to have a diminishing returns system, where getting a +1 to a skill is not as good the better you get. It feels more real to me that way. Therein lies your problem... its not that the penalty/gain is less important the better you are... it varies... sometimes the +1 means less for the less skilled guy, sometimes it means less for the better skilled guy... it all comes down to where in the bell curve your base chance falls. If it was straightforward, one dimensional as you say, where the weaker you are the worst penalties were and the better bonuses were, that would make sense. Originally posted by Nightshade However, I much prefer the linear system D&D has to the system White Wolf and some others use, where not only does getting another die to your roll not help as much, you had to pay more for it (a lot more in many cases). While i cannot speak to modern WW systems, I can sayy that their first few editions of V suffered from one basic problem... it seemed like none of them could count to save their life and they did not care. great game... as long as you did not let their system get in the way. Originally posted by Nightshade HERO does not do that. A GM might decide to add that for his game, but HERo does not do that for him. Thats because HERO is a system, not a game. I like to play games. (In truth though, behind its scenes, there is a setting and in part a game behind even HERO5.) Originally posted by Nightshade They only do that for the powers and abilities specifically of the class. They don't do that for the skills, necessarily. For example, where in d20 does it state that when you gain your level you can't put all of the skill points into one skill that was previously untrained? It doesn't except that the skill ranks are limited in rank determined by level..So upon achieveing second level, a normal rogue cannot spend 8 ranks on bluff... he is still limited to 5. If he goes outside his class skills, he is limited to 2 net skill ranks costing 5 points. This prevents or limits the amount of skills you can achieve at once, particularly at low levels. In fact though, usually it is the skill points gained that limits you. Only a small portion of the "gain a level" benefits can be skills. If you equate a DND level with say 30 Xp in hero, the best i can get in DND is maybe putting 10 points or so in skills with the rest running into"buying" BAB, class features hit dice and the like... whereas in HERO i can in theory spend all the points on skills. DND has a lot more built in restrictions on abusive advancements, by dint of grouping things into classes. Originally posted by Nightshade As to the example you gave, as GM I would rule that a "for dummies" book may not qualify for the full roll, especially over a weekend. You have to have time to practice a skill (any skill) before you get the full skill. Then you have effectively written in that the player cannot 1. spend all his points on skills and use them... and establioshed a growth process by which you start at lower levels and work your way up... thats what the class system did too. Originally posted by Nightshade As to the getting fireball without easier magic in D&D, that may be the case if you assume that all magic has the same philosophy. I never liked that idea, personally, but it is inherent to D&D (wizards all cast the same spell the same way). There is no rule that states, however, that you need to have anything even remotely fire related to get fireball in D&D. You could have all enchantment, necromancy, and abjuration spells and still get fireball without restriction (unless you were a specialist and picked that one as a forbidden school). I agree... in DND it is more about learning to control more powerful magics in a general sense than it is working through specific spell trees. I also agree the any spell approach is not one i prefer... the learning fireball right off. My bet is that in hero, most of the time, and this is from my experience, the Gm will not allow, will write into his world, the similar notion of not having just one spell with no other magic skill. he is effectively working in a leveled magic system at various degrees of strictness. Originally posted by Nightshade I will agree that D&D does a very good job of doing what you are talking about with feats, especially. The magic has a different philosophy than I would like on my world. I do classify my spells in terms of common special effect/common style, so I have an admitted prejudice there. HERO's spell college system did attempt to rectify what you are talking about, but IMO did it poorly. We'll see how they do it with the new addition. I was anxiously awaiting Fh back in 4th and like you felt it worked poorly. Thats been one of my ongoing nagging issues with HERo and genres other than supers. FH felt like supers with swords. Western hero, cyber hero, horror hero etc all felt like a thin veneer of genre FITTED INTO a HERO supers genre. STAR HERO 3rd, which i dimly recall, was the last HERO supplement that came close to feeling like a genre and not a HERO expansion for supers to me. HERo is actually the game that drove me away from GENERIC systems... Originally posted by Nightshade I never got d20 modern, as I already had a system that I liked. How are you planning on doing magic with that? Do they have anything for that, our do you have to create the spell progression, etc? D20 modern includes magic as an option. Basically they provide details for three different settings in their core rulebook... a buffy ripoff, a urban arcana low magic hidden from normals, and a psi game (they include psionics too.) The urban arcana sourcebook provides even more. I just deleted a lengthy explanation... Here is the link to the d20 modern SRD...you can read the rules online. It is so cool to have the core books online so you can show them... http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=msrd Originally posted by Nightshade Anyway, like I said, I can't comment as to how well d20 modern will handle low magic worlds, as I don't own the product. I will say that I wouldn't use D&D, for reasons I have listed previously. Nightshade In short, it presents a lower power and shorter list of spells and delays the magic classes with prerequisited until even starting until say 5th level of character or so. So, for example, a magus might well only get first level spells as a sixth level character and will not get topped out with 5th level spells until 14th or so. Ab occultist class is an example of lower powered magic classes, who never develops spell casting but instead develops the ability to use items like scrolls and IIRC gets lots of arcane knowledge skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.