Concerns about Champs Supplements

[djday38]

Although I would not mind modules (and E-Books are the way to go I think) I would love to see the CU universe fleshed out a lot more, we are already seeing this with Viper soon to be and UNTIL and Demon on the schedule.

 

My question to Steve and Darren is this, will we continue to see the official CU fleshed out over the years? In what directions do you wish to take this? I myself would much prefer to see this than a stream of modules.

 

rgds

Dean

[Agent X]

Originally posted by djday38

Although I would not mind modules (and E-Books are the way to go I think) I would love to see the CU universe fleshed out a lot more, we are already seeing this with Viper soon to be and UNTIL and Demon on the schedule.

 

My question to Steve and Darren is this, will we continue to see the official CU fleshed out over the years? In what directions do you wish to take this? I myself would much prefer to see this than a stream of modules.

 

rgds

Dean

I think we will have to disagree on this one. If there is anything more tiresome to me as a player than playing "Battle against the Evil Organizations" every week I don't know what it is. There is far more to the genre than that.

[djday38]

I think you misunderstood me, I did not mean I wanted more Eevil organisations fleshed out, justt that they were what has already been announced on the schedule.

 

I meant fleshed out in other ways, places, people, more villains, more city books, hero teams, settings like other continents, dimensions, other parts of space etc.

 

rgds

Dean

[Steve Long]

My question to Steve and Darren is this, will we continue to see the official CU fleshed out over the years? In what directions do you wish to take this?

 

Sure. A look at the schedule between now and the end of 2004 shows several CU related books -- some organizations, some concept/theme books, a city book, and so on. There's only so much we can do in any given year, since we have a lot of game lines to produce books for, but as time goes by you'll certainly see us poking around in various corners of the CU.

[zornwil]

I agree with the original poster that M&M does a great job with "self-promoting" presentation, a far better one than HERO really BUT...

 

HERO is a fully nuanced system. I do think 5th Edition was TOO dry in its approach and the writing a bit, well, "legalese". On that note, I feel Steve's writing for this sort of work has improved remarkably (as witnessed in the UNTIL Super Database), which isn't to say it was below part to start with, it wasn't, it just had some aspects that have been improved upon since. Anyway, although 5th ed. was "too dry" in my opinion, it includes a horde of usable examples, it fully details out rules, and it has an EXCELLENT index. It deliberately made a choice of using its space to make the rules as clear as possible, to present playability, and to generally expose the internal consistency of the system (although of course HERO does have some inconsistencies, many of which have been the subject of great debates among the HERO community).

 

M&M is new and is not fully nuanced by any stretch. There are a number of aspects of balance which are under scrutiny and even with its errata and faq a number of questions that really represent holes in the system - take a look at the level of questions on their board. They represent more fundamental questions than the ones you see in HERO. That's fine, it's a new system,this is NOT a criticism - compare HERO 1st ed. to 5th ed. and you'll see a massive gulf.

 

So the M&M book has less explication (because there was no real-world "okay, now we have to explain this given what peple ask" experience). Furthermore, much of the space is given to representations of the heroic genre (the little comic strip pieces and such). They willingly valued the presentation above giving more direct rules-related material. Their index is also far less helpful (just try using it during game play, I did in our first game and immediately saw the difference). And in fact I would argue the material is laid out less well, with some things in the "Characteristics" section that bear on "Abilities" or "Combat", requiring mucking about to find things. Just finding a simple ruling on how movement works outside of combat took more time than it should have and we ended up resting on using the vehicle table for simplicity during play - and I don't think that's right, writing this just reminded me to go back and flesh out the real non-tactical movement numbers.

 

Now that I've tried to really use the M&M book in the heat of gameplay, I can say that I have a solid opinion that the HERO book is much better, for all its "dryness" and lack of hype. Of cousre this is a personal opinion, I recognize others will not agree (but they're wrong ). Well, actually, I do go further and I would challenge anyone to prove that M&M's rulebook is really as useful (let alone more useful) in actual gameplay, if you have to look something up. (donning the sunglasses as there will be flash attacks now).

 

Furthermore, M&M and HERO are targeting different people. HERO targets gamer geeks and anyone who wants a "complete" system. M&M targets gamers who want something APPARENTLY simpler (let me tell you, I emphatically do NOT think M&M is a simpler system by the way) and value the "feel" of the system more. Neither approach is wrong, just different target audiences. To that end, I think if HERO weighed too heavily on the presentation/glitz side you'd see a loss in its current following, and given its rep it would take a few years to develop a new following. (I'm not suggesting the original poster wants such a change in direction, I understand they indicated nothing "radical").

 

As far as modules go, I looked at (but did not buy) the Crisis book and I really didn't find it any better than some of the better HERO modules. But this area is hard for me to comment on because I almost never buy modules.

 

Now, as far as the CU vs whatever the M&M universe is called (M&MU I guess), ah, well, I must say...I like M&MU characters much better. Maybe I'm just seduced by the color - maybe. But I really really like Gimmick and the Pugilist and Protonik, even just the text bits, far far better than anything I've seen in SAS or CU (any version, including the original Champions, though I sort of liked that early early version however dorky). I also like Lady Hex ten times better than the CU sorcerers past or present, although I wouldn't say I really am that excited about Lady Hex per se. I also browsed Freedom City or whatever that is (again, didn't buy it though I might actually though I don't but those sorts of books either usually) and there's a couple promising characters in there as well. I browsed Millennium City and was less interested in those characters, although I will say that some of them seem a bit more interesting than the Champions. Anyway, my point is that I actually WILL use the M&M characters (which is why I might even buy their universe books whereas I've never bought a Champions universe book) in my games and I've never used (I think) a Champions character.

 

Why the difference to me? Hard to say. Some of it is artwork. The characters "look" more interesting to me. But some of it is also the quotes and actions attributed to the M&M characters. They seem just as genre-correct but somehow less bland to me. Defender and Ironclad and the like seem like overt ripoffs of characters. Gimmick seems entirely original even though she's just as clearly an archetype. By the way, I also like the fact that the artwork presented Gimmick in both her anime-ish look and her "realistic" representation - that went a long way for me in seeing the character in different lights. Oh, and speaking of artworik, the picture of Gimmick playing a game while disarming a bomb was just priceless. Anyway, same with Protonik, the single panel of him far above the world looking down was great, it really made a convincing feel for the character and all it included were a couple paragraphs and a picture. I don't think the deciding factor was the literal color at all, either.

 

Obviously this is way deep into personal taste. I mean no offense to Steve or anyone else at HERO, I think it's possible they're interested in knowing this sort of reaction as it may influence how they present characters and what choices they make in artwork and writing. But frankly it would make no difference as far as me buying the core books and I suspect for what HERO presents it really is AND SHOULD BE a secondary consideration. In fact I think that HERO will stand for a considerable period of time on its merits as a truly coherent and usable set of rules, something which will require a more detailed, more dry body of work (at least for the rules and genre books that is).

 

I bring up the characterization of universe archetypes as I think (?) the original poster of this thread is reacting to much the same thing - or at least I'd be interested to hear if he is.

 

Sorry for the lengthy post, hope it's of interest though.

[zornwil]

Brief PS - re the USPD, the "color" commentary in it was outstanding, and the panels that showed the supers' acting out and the commentary was VERY well-done. It was in fact "M&M-ish" per the comments I made above. A couple or maybe more of those characters mentioned/viewed in passing in USPD will make it into my world at some point I imagine. It would have been great to have seen a little more on a few of them, using them for examples of different things or just some panels from different perspectives (like "we found this video-tape of these 2 supers talking" and showing a couple panels where they discuss powers or one shows another a weapon or whatever).

[Lord Liaden]

Interesting critical analysis, zornwil. I haven't played M&M so I can't really comment on your comparison of in-game utility and clarity, but I'll keep your observations in mind.

 

Since you're thinking of picking up Freedom City, I'm not sure whether you're aware that FC author Steve Kenson posted HERO System versions of many of the characters from that book as a free dowloadable RTF file. As you seem to prefer HERO to the M&M system, that might make the book more worthwhile to you. You can find the stats here:

 

http://members.aol.com/talonstudio/freedomcity/fchero.html

[lemming]

zornwil, nice critique there.

 

Though you didn't mention the biggest flaw of M&M:

 

YOU ONLY ROLL ONE DIE! ONE DIE! WTF! WHERE'S MY HORDE OF DICE!!!?

[Enforcer84]

Originally posted by lemming

zornwil, nice critique there.

 

Though you didn't mention the biggest flaw of M&M:

 

YOU ONLY ROLL ONE DIE! ONE DIE! WTF! WHERE'S MY HORDE OF DICE!!!?

 

No kidding, if I try to throw just one die these days after years of playing hero, I throw out my elbow...

[zornwil]

Originally posted by lemming

zornwil, nice critique there.

 

Though you didn't mention the biggest flaw of M&M:

 

YOU ONLY ROLL ONE DIE! ONE DIE! WTF! WHERE'S MY HORDE OF DICE!!!?

 

Powergamer...

 

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

Interesting critical analysis, zornwil. I haven't played M&M so I can't really comment on your comparison of in-game utility and clarity, but I'll keep your observations in mind.

 

Since you're thinking of picking up Freedom City, I'm not sure whether you're aware that FC author Steve Kenson posted HERO System versions of many of the characters from that book as a free dowloadable RTF file. As you seem to prefer HERO to the M&M system, that might make the book more worthwhile to you. You can find the stats here:

 

http://members.aol.com/talonstudio/freedomcity/fchero.html

 

Thanks much!

[Tim]

Re: Re: Concerns about Champs Supplements

 

Originally posted by Monolith

. There is also Reality Storn debutting at Gen Con

 

Interesting flub here. Reality Storn, Wow, he gets his own adventure.

 

TimS.

[assault]

Re: Re: Re: Concerns about Champs Supplements

 

Originally posted by Tim

Reality Storn, Wow, he gets his own adventure.

 

Of course. He gets to fight Foxbat.

 

Alan.

[Tim]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Concerns about Champs Supplements

 

Originally posted by assault

Of course. He gets to fight Foxbat.

 

Alan.

 

I still put my money on Storn

[Agent X]

Originally posted by djday38

I think you misunderstood me, I did not mean I wanted more Eevil organisations fleshed out, justt that they were what has already been announced on the schedule.

 

I meant fleshed out in other ways, places, people, more villains, more city books, hero teams, settings like other continents, dimensions, other parts of space etc.

 

rgds

Dean

I see your point.

 

You know adventure modules can actually be used to provide a great deal of that kind of information. To Serve and Protect is an excellent example.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by zornwil

I agree with the original poster that M&M does a great job with "self-promoting" presentation, a far better one than HERO really BUT...

 

HERO is a fully nuanced system. I do think 5th Edition was TOO dry in its approach and the writing a bit, well, "legalese". On that note, I feel Steve's writing for this sort of work has improved remarkably (as witnessed in the UNTIL Super Database), which isn't to say it was below part to start with, it wasn't, it just had some aspects that have been improved upon since. Anyway, although 5th ed. was "too dry" in my opinion, it includes a horde of usable examples, it fully details out rules, and it has an EXCELLENT index. It deliberately made a choice of using its space to make the rules as clear as possible, to present playability, and to generally expose the internal consistency of the system (although of course HERO does have some inconsistencies, many of which have been the subject of great debates among the HERO community).

 

M&M is new and is not fully nuanced by any stretch. There are a number of aspects of balance which are under scrutiny and even with its errata and faq a number of questions that really represent holes in the system - take a look at the level of questions on their board. They represent more fundamental questions than the ones you see in HERO. That's fine, it's a new system,this is NOT a criticism - compare HERO 1st ed. to 5th ed. and you'll see a massive gulf.

 

So the M&M book has less explication (because there was no real-world "okay, now we have to explain this given what peple ask" experience). Furthermore, much of the space is given to representations of the heroic genre (the little comic strip pieces and such). They willingly valued the presentation above giving more direct rules-related material. Their index is also far less helpful (just try using it during game play, I did in our first game and immediately saw the difference). And in fact I would argue the material is laid out less well, with some things in the "Characteristics" section that bear on "Abilities" or "Combat", requiring mucking about to find things. Just finding a simple ruling on how movement works outside of combat took more time than it should have and we ended up resting on using the vehicle table for simplicity during play - and I don't think that's right, writing this just reminded me to go back and flesh out the real non-tactical movement numbers.

 

Now that I've tried to really use the M&M book in the heat of gameplay, I can say that I have a solid opinion that the HERO book is much better, for all its "dryness" and lack of hype. Of cousre this is a personal opinion, I recognize others will not agree (but they're wrong ). Well, actually, I do go further and I would challenge anyone to prove that M&M's rulebook is really as useful (let alone more useful) in actual gameplay, if you have to look something up. (donning the sunglasses as there will be flash attacks now).

 

Furthermore, M&M and HERO are targeting different people. HERO targets gamer geeks and anyone who wants a "complete" system. M&M targets gamers who want something APPARENTLY simpler (let me tell you, I emphatically do NOT think M&M is a simpler system by the way) and value the "feel" of the system more. Neither approach is wrong, just different target audiences. To that end, I think if HERO weighed too heavily on the presentation/glitz side you'd see a loss in its current following, and given its rep it would take a few years to develop a new following. (I'm not suggesting the original poster wants such a change in direction, I understand they indicated nothing "radical").

 

As far as modules go, I looked at (but did not buy) the Crisis book and I really didn't find it any better than some of the better HERO modules. But this area is hard for me to comment on because I almost never buy modules.

 

Now, as far as the CU vs whatever the M&M universe is called (M&MU I guess), ah, well, I must say...I like M&MU characters much better. Maybe I'm just seduced by the color - maybe. But I really really like Gimmick and the Pugilist and Protonik, even just the text bits, far far better than anything I've seen in SAS or CU (any version, including the original Champions, though I sort of liked that early early version however dorky). I also like Lady Hex ten times better than the CU sorcerers past or present, although I wouldn't say I really am that excited about Lady Hex per se. I also browsed Freedom City or whatever that is (again, didn't buy it though I might actually though I don't but those sorts of books either usually) and there's a couple promising characters in there as well. I browsed Millennium City and was less interested in those characters, although I will say that some of them seem a bit more interesting than the Champions. Anyway, my point is that I actually WILL use the M&M characters (which is why I might even buy their universe books whereas I've never bought a Champions universe book) in my games and I've never used (I think) a Champions character.

 

Why the difference to me? Hard to say. Some of it is artwork. The characters "look" more interesting to me. But some of it is also the quotes and actions attributed to the M&M characters. They seem just as genre-correct but somehow less bland to me. Defender and Ironclad and the like seem like overt ripoffs of characters. Gimmick seems entirely original even though she's just as clearly an archetype. By the way, I also like the fact that the artwork presented Gimmick in both her anime-ish look and her "realistic" representation - that went a long way for me in seeing the character in different lights. Oh, and speaking of artworik, the picture of Gimmick playing a game while disarming a bomb was just priceless. Anyway, same with Protonik, the single panel of him far above the world looking down was great, it really made a convincing feel for the character and all it included were a couple paragraphs and a picture. I don't think the deciding factor was the literal color at all, either.

 

Obviously this is way deep into personal taste. I mean no offense to Steve or anyone else at HERO, I think it's possible they're interested in knowing this sort of reaction as it may influence how they present characters and what choices they make in artwork and writing. But frankly it would make no difference as far as me buying the core books and I suspect for what HERO presents it really is AND SHOULD BE a secondary consideration. In fact I think that HERO will stand for a considerable period of time on its merits as a truly coherent and usable set of rules, something which will require a more detailed, more dry body of work (at least for the rules and genre books that is).

 

I bring up the characterization of universe archetypes as I think (?) the original poster of this thread is reacting to much the same thing - or at least I'd be interested to hear if he is.

 

Sorry for the lengthy post, hope it's of interest though.

I think you have done a very good job at explaining a problem I also identified with the approach to the Champions Universe. The Characters too often seem written more as examples than characters to run with, either as PCs or NPCs. I love the "how to do" approach in the Champions supplements and I am happy that they recognize that every character they present is a "teaching moment," but they need to sell the character as well. Too often, I feel like Champions, and often Champions players, are trying to be clever instead of interesting.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

Interesting critical analysis, zornwil. I haven't played M&M so I can't really comment on your comparison of in-game utility and clarity, but I'll keep your observations in mind.

 

Since you're thinking of picking up Freedom City, I'm not sure whether you're aware that FC author Steve Kenson posted HERO System versions of many of the characters from that book as a free dowloadable RTF file. As you seem to prefer HERO to the M&M system, that might make the book more worthwhile to you. You can find the stats here:

 

http://members.aol.com/talonstudio/freedomcity/fchero.html

Thanks for the tip.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Agent X

I think you have done a very good job at explaining a problem I also identified with the approach to the Champions Universe. The Characters too often seem written more as examples than characters to run with, either as PCs or NPCs.

That is a good point, but it happens to be one that I disagree with. I do not think NPC characters should be written in a way that makes them too interesting. IMO, the purpose of the game is to make the players' characters shine, not to make the NPCs fascinating. While something like that can make for fun reading, it can make for very bad gaming when the players are always feeling upstaged by the NPC characters, both in power level and personal development. When I read Freedom City and start thinking that I would rather be playing Daedelus or Seven instead of The Immortal or Ms. Arcane then that seems like a flaw to me.

 

The Freedom City material is fun to read, and might even make an interesting comic book, but I would not want to game in that enviroment.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Monolith

That is a good point, but it happens to be one that I disagree with. I do not think NPC characters should be written in a way that makes them too interesting. IMO, the purpose of the game is to make the players' characters shine, not to make the NPCs fascinating. While something like that can make for fun reading, it can make for very bad gaming when the players are always feeling upstaged by the NPC characters, both in power level and personal development. When I read Freedom City and start thinking that I would rather be playing Daedelus or Seven instead of The Immortal or Ms. Arcane then that seems like a flaw to me.

 

The Freedom City material is fun to read, and might even make an interesting comic book, but I would not want to game in that enviroment.

I have to disagree vehemently on this one. I want the PCs and the NPCs to be as interesting as possible. I don't want my players feeling like they are meeting Generic Support Superhero #15 or Generic Evil Mastermind #41. The more interesting my NPCs the more motivated my players - and their characters actually become more interesting as their imaginations are sparked and they add greater depth to their characters.

[lemming]

I'll agree with Agent X here.

 

The more interesting thr NPCs, the more the PCs are going to start being interesting.

 

You don't want NPCs to overwhelm the characters, but you want to throw out many plot hooks that the PCs can hang onto.

 

Dull boring NPCs will just be so much cardboard scenery. That will just bring the PCs down to the same level.

 

Though the inverse plays the same way. If the players have boring characters, then the GM will not be inspired either. It's best when there are several sparks from both sides. This will bring out more from the other players as well.

[Starlord]

It's possible Monolith's point could be split up into Heroes and Villains. You don't necessarily want powerful and fascinating Hero NPCs all over the place. It is possible they will outshine the PCs. As time goes on they become synonymous with the gameworld itself, ala the characters of D&D's Forgotten Realms, and some players can become annoyed.

 

Interesting neutrals and villains I'm all in favor of.

[Crimson Arrow]

There's nothing wrong with interesting Hero NPCs. Making them intriguing and special adds flavour to a campaign. It is entirely different from making them outshine the PCs.

 

I look at this three ways. One, it "raises the bar" for the players. I'll admit that maybe some are not up to creating brilliant heroes (judging from some of the horror stories on this board, some don't appear to be capable of creating halfway decent ones, or heroes at all). However, giving them interesting examples is surely better than going for the lowest common denominator.

 

Two, they are not necessarily NPCs. You can give them to new players, people whose regular characters are badly injured etc. A bland character is difficult to get into for the player.

 

Three, even if they are only ever NPCs, interacting with them is more interesting if the characters are themselves. For example, would your PCs find it more exciting to liaise with Triathlon, or with Captain America? This is not the same as allowing the NPCs to dominate. It's a little like how Superman is almost always taken out first in any JLA story. He's most likely to overshadow the others, so he gets tied up elsewhere, hit by magic, or whatever.

[Starlord]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

Interesting critical analysis, zornwil. I haven't played M&M so I can't really comment on your comparison of in-game utility and clarity, but I'll keep your observations in mind.

 

Since you're thinking of picking up Freedom City, I'm not sure whether you're aware that FC author Steve Kenson posted HERO System versions of many of the characters from that book as a free dowloadable RTF file. As you seem to prefer HERO to the M&M system, that might make the book more worthwhile to you. You can find the stats here:

 

http://members.aol.com/talonstudio/freedomcity/fchero.html

 

Hey, that's a spiffy new avatar ya got there, LL.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Starlord

It's possible Monolith's point could be split up into Heroes and Villains. You don't necessarily want powerful and fascinating Hero NPCs all over the place. It is possible they will outshine the PCs. As time goes on they become synonymous with the gameworld itself, ala the characters of D&D's Forgotten Realms, and some players can become annoyed.

 

Interesting neutrals and villains I'm all in favor of.

Starlord is correct. Sorry I did not make my post clearer. I was referring to NPC Heroes. I think most of the Champions villains are far more interesting than those in M&M or Freedom City; in fact I do not like any of the villains in M&M, which is the Meta-4 Universe not the Freedom City Universe.

 

I think the NPC heroes should be interesting, but they should never outshine the PC's creations. The players are the stars of the show and they should not have to feel overshadowed by the likes of a Superman or Justice League in their hometown. That is why putting the Champions in Millennium City is such a good thing; the players never have a reason to feel overshadowed by them. They are equals.

 

I also did not mean to imply that the CU heroes were dull, because I do not think they are. I think the CU heroes are given in a simple format, and as with everything else in the HERO System, it is then left up to the GM to decide the actual tone. So, for instance, the GM can decide that Dr. Silverback is a happy-go-lucky Hank McCoy, or you can decide that he is a slightly disturbed Hank Pym, obsessed with finding a way to become human.

 

The HERO System and the Champions Universe has always been a foundation to a good campaign, a starting point for thousands of GMs to build upon. Freedom City is a finished product and is full of finished characters. I think that is the ultimate difference between the two games.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Starlord

Hey, that's a spiffy new avatar ya got there, LL.

Yeah, you both have spiffy new avatars. I am starting to feel left out here.