What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

[JmOz]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

20+ on prime characteristics are suppose to be legendary but still achievable by humans

 

Think of it th is way, if there was a historical Hercules his str would be somewhere in the 21-30 range, probably middle of it...

 

same with the COM of helen of troy

[Lucius]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

One minor correction regarding this common misconception.

 

20 is not the upper human limit. 30 is. 20 is the limit before x2 cost applies. 30 is the hard limit for normal humans. 31 and higher is in the super-human range.

 

Can you give us a citation on that?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes "Preferably one in FRED, so he can actually look it up."

[Hyper-Man]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

I don't have 5e or 5er handy at the moment but I'm pretty sure the 30 hard cap I was referring to is listed within the first 15 pages of either book as well as being referred to under the Normal Characteristic Maximum disadvantage.

 

Yes, GM's can change this and the breakpoint for paying double cost for their games. I was referring to the system defaults which are biased towards the extraordinary even in Heroic games.

[Vurbal]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Adjustment Powers

Make all Adjustment Powers have a default Target SFX specified at purchase. If the player can give some reasonable explaination why his power affects a mechanic instead of a SFX and the GM accepts it, then they take the advantage "All SFX Of Power Mechanic +2" on top of any other advantages.

 

But that just me... (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

Nope, not just you Chris. This is the only thing in the system that I actually consider broken.

 

If I were designing the system from scratch I'd probably change some other things like how the size of a character is bought and how size affects attacks, perception, and the like. I'd probably also use either 3d10 or 3d12 for things that used 3d6 now because I like the curve better and would prefer a wider range of results.

[ghost-angel]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

I don't have 5e or 5er handy at the moment but I'm pretty sure the 30 hard cap I was referring to is listed within the first 15 pages of either book as well as being referred to under the Normal Characteristic Maximum disadvantage.

 

Yes, GM's can change this and the breakpoint for paying double cost for their games. I was referring to the system defaults which are biased towards the extraordinary even in Heroic games.

no hard cap is listed anywhere in the Characteristics sections of FREd, Sidekick or 5ER.

 

All it mentions is Normal Characteristic Maximum is 20. In a Heroic Campaign or when you take the NCM Disadvantage you pay double points for each point over 20. With no upper limit mentioned.

 

Sidekick p20 gives a comparison table for Characterisitcs where Physical Stats of 31+ (STR, CON, DEX, BODY, COM) or Mental States of 51+ (INT, EGO, PRE) are considered Superhuman in a basic Hero Campaign.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

no hard cap is listed anywhere in the Characteristics sections of FREd, Sidekick or 5ER.

 

All it mentions is Normal Characteristic Maximum is 20. In a Heroic Campaign or when you take the NCM Disadvantage you pay double points for each point over 20. With no upper limit mentioned.

 

Sidekick p20 gives a comparison table for Characterisitcs where Physical Stats of 31+ (STR, CON, DEX, BODY, COM) or Mental States of 51+ (INT, EGO, PRE) are considered Superhuman in a basic Hero Campaign.

 

ok, so my use of 'hard cap' was off but the numbers I was mentioning are there.

[Kristopher]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

There's nothing fundamental I'd change.

 

Nothing.

 

And very little that isn't fundamental.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Hmm, it was fun to see all of the comments about various aspects of characteristics both figured and primary. There are huge problems associated with characteristics and their costs because they break some of the fundamentals of the system - they are black box powers with semi-arbitrary costs.

 

Personally I would abolish characteristics. Characteristics as has been pointed out streamline the making of a character but they do introduce all of the skewed problems.

 

Instead I would make everything be bought through powers and skills - you want to do damage? Buy it through EB. You want to hit more easily? Buy skill levels. You want to be tough? Buy Armour FF etc. You want to be able to lift more weight? Buy limited TK.

 

I think that the only characteristics that would have to remain would be STUN, BODY, END and REC. They play a role in the game seperate from anything that the other stats do.

 

 

Doc

[Hyper-Man]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

 

Instead I would make everything be bought through powers and skills - you want to do damage? Buy it through EB. You want to hit more easily? Buy skill levels. You want to be tough? Buy Armour FF etc. You want to be able to lift more weight? Buy limited TK.

 

I think that the only characteristics that would have to remain would be STUN, BODY, END and REC. They play a role in the game seperate from anything that the other stats do.

 

 

Doc

 

Hmmm.. maybe in 6e ?

[Teflon Billy]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Really? The current weightlifting record (according to Wikipedia) is 472 kg' date=' whereas a 30 STR is nearly 4 times this much (1600 kg). This is the normal human max? Those weightlifters are all wimps! [/quote']Your lift max for your strength is not the same as bench press strength. In Hero, you strength max lift is the maximum weight you can barely lift off the ground, stagger forward with, and then drop. Normal people (though incredibly strong normal people) have gotten within the range of 30 STR under this definition of max lift.

 

The type of strength you are describing is the definition that AD&D uses for max lift.

 

TB

[ghost-angel]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

The only change I'd make is to make the cover of the book out of metal plates....

 

oh you meant to the mechanics. Ah. i'd change nothing.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

I'd probably also use either 3d10 or 3d12 for things that used 3d6 now because I like the curve better and would prefer a wider range of results.

Yay! Someone besides me says this, too! Although I've yet to use this method, I would recommend 3d12 - just because it's easier to simply double the numbers in the book than to multiply them all by 1 2/3. And BTW, it really doesn't change the shape of the bell curve at all; it only increases the granularity, which is why I like it.

 

But is it really a "fundamental" change?

 

I like figured stats as-is, though I might get rid of the "You can only sell back one figured CHAR" rule. That would allow you to get rid of the -1/2 "No Figureds". But I don't consider that "fundamental" either. (Clarification: retaining or getting rid of figureds is fundamental. Retaining/removing the "sell one figured" rule is not.)

 

In other threads, I have also advocated changing KAs to work more like normal attacks, for those who want to reduce or eliminate the STUN Lotto. But even this isn't fundamental. DC's is still DC's.

 

I would change STR to 2 for 1. I've said this before in other threads, so I won't go into it here. Yes, it is fundamental, seeing as how heated these discussions get. And just from the fact that STR is such a basic element of the game. More so than just about any other characteristic other than DEX. And more central to the game than almost all powers.

 

But for a truly fundamental change:

I'd change the metarule that says "The most expensive build is the correct one," to "The simplest/most straightforward/least complex build is the correct one." Yes, it's a bit more subjective, but I think it works better. Simplicity/complexity can be measured to an extent by counting the number of Advantages and Limitations on the power.

 

Maybe something about the Active Point limits in a Framework... Fundamental? Probably not.

 

Everything else is a fairly minor house rule or GM tweak, even the really blasphemous ones.

[Teflon Billy]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

ok' date=' so my use of 'hard cap' was off but the numbers I was mentioning are there.[/quote']Page 19 second to last paragraph in Sidekick and the chart on the following page, says that you can't get greater than a 30 in a primary CHAR without being superhuman. It may not say "hard cap" but it does say that for game purposes having a physical primary CHAR above a 30 for a normal human is not possible.

 

This chart was carried over into 5ER but I don't have mine around to verify the page number at the moment.

 

TB

[ideasmith]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Page 19 second to last paragraph and the chart on the following page, says that you can't get greater than a 30 in a primary CHAR without being superhuman. It may not say "hard cap" but it does say that for game purposes having a physical primary CHAR above a 30 for a normal human is not possible.

 

This chart was carried over into 5ER but I don't have mine around to verify the page number at the moment.

 

TB

 

Pages 19-20 5ER

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Yay! Someone besides me says this, too! Although I've yet to use this method, I would recommend 3d12 - just because it's easier to simply double the numbers in the book than to multiply them all by 1 2/3. And BTW, it really doesn't change the shape of the bell curve at all; it only increases the granularity, which is why I like it.

 

But is it really a "fundamental" change?

 

I'd argue it is, though not as extreme as changing to a linear roll. It increases the role of random chance in determining success or falure, and reduces the role that skill (OCV, DCV, skill level) plays. the likelihood of failure when, for example, you currently need a 14- to succeed is significantly enhanced if you now need 23- on 3d12.

 

But for a truly fundamental change:

I'd change the metarule that says "The most expensive build is the correct one," to "The simplest/most straightforward/least complex build is the correct one." Yes, it's a bit more subjective, but I think it works better. Simplicity/complexity can be measured to an extent by counting the number of Advantages and Limitations on the power.

 

This is, to me, the single biggest misconception shared by Hero players. The ACTUAL metarule, from 5er page 559, is:

 

If two powers (or other game elements) are equally valid ways to create a particular ability' date=' you must use the more expensive of the two.[/quote']

 

As I read this, it doesn't say "Figure out every possible build, then pick the most expensive one", as many on these boards commonly suggest. It says "If two builds are equally simple, equally straightforward and equally complex, the tie is broken by selecting the most expensive one". Otherwise, you use the MORE valid way of creating the ability, and need never apply this metarule.

[Lucius]

What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Which leads us to –

 

One fundamental thing I’d change is to abolish Normal Characteristic Maxima.

 

Most of this I have already posted elsewhere; it’s just easier to recopy it than to write a whole new essay on the subject.

 

This is an opinion I came to slowly, but I have seen the whole concept of Normal Characteristic Maxima generate so much controversy, that I am of the opinion that it is an idea the game can do without. It simply does not do what it was designed to do, and merely adds needless complication to the game. It should be a guideline only, and up to each Game Operations Director to set limits on the characteristics of characters. Not "it costs double past this point," a mechanic used nowhere else in the game to restrict skills, powers, or anything else, but a hard limit - "no, you cannot play a 'normal Human' with a STR of 24!"

 

What it does is create yet another artificial breakpoint in a game that already has too many of them, and results in every warrior taking a STR of 20.

 

It does not, in and of itself, prevent anyone from taking an unreasonable or unrealistic characteristic.

 

Say I am creating a pair of flower-selling monks in a heroic game with 75 base points and up to 75 disadvantages. Brother Rose has a Dex of 20 (costs 30) and spends 50 pts on SPD (10 pts ups it to 4, the "Max," and another 40 ups it to 6.) That costs 80 pts, and if he sells off 3" Running for -6 pts he still has a ground speed half again a normal Human's, and has all his points from Disads to pay for botany, flower arranging, and what the heck, he'll study some canon law too. His sidekick Brother Orchid has a STR of 40 costing 50 pts, and uses some disad points to buy his flowery skills, and still comes in as a "weaker than character" DNPC.

 

Now, is any sane Game Operations Director going to permit this pair? No, they will probably change their names to Brother Ragweed and Brother Crabgrass and tell the player to toss them on the compost pile. But that is exactly what they would have had to do if there WERE no "Normal Characteristic Maxima," except that the outrageous characteristics would have been an 8 SPD and a 60 STR.

 

The message to G.O.D.'s is - You, and only you, can prevent florist friars. The Characteristic Maxima rule can't do it for you. And if it doesn't, what good is it?

 

It accomplishes nothing that could not be better and more simply done without it.

 

At the risk of repeating myself - eliminating the Normal Characteristic Max rule will streamline and simplify the rules, make them fairer, and takes absolutely ZIP from the game. YOU DON'T LOSE ANYTHING. Where you set the limit and how you enforce it becomes just like the campaign limit on active points - you either say "That's the limit, that's it" or "That's the limit, exceptions judged on a case by case basis."

 

If it were such a good idea, why wouldn't it be applied to everything else? The active points limit, the damage class limit, the defenses limit – all these are

A. Set campaign by campaign, game by game, by the person running the game – not arbitrarily set at a certain point that’s assumed to be good for everyone.

B. Never exceeded by something as simple as “just pay double points.â€

 

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Markdoc

"the idea that NCM applies with the same levels to pixies and ogres, but not to horses, elephants and palindromedaries is, well, just silly"

[keithcurtis]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

I have done a little thinking and I think I would get rid of the players. I have noticed that all the players do is break this perfect system. All their complaining about broken arch types and too many dice. What a bunch of jerks.

This would fix almost every system.

 

Silly players, ruining my perfect worlds and carefully-conceived plots.

 

Keith "bah!" Curtis

[Eosin]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

I would like to see the Hero system become a household activity like watching TV or eating dinner... Families that didn't game would be shunned and viewed as maybe more than a little weird.

[ghost-angel]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

I would like to see the Hero system become a household activity like watching TV or eating dinner... Families that didn't game would be shunned and viewed as maybe more than a little weird.

Wrong System, but a nice thought.

[Eosin]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Real Answer - Increase granularity at "normal" levels. The range is way too tight and the differences between many characters is often semantical only.

[Vurbal]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Yay! Someone besides me says this' date=' too! Although I've yet to use this method, I would recommend 3d12 - just because it's easier to simply double the numbers in the book than to multiply them all by 1 2/3. And BTW, it really doesn't change the shape of the bell curve at all; it only increases the granularity, which is why I like it.[/quote']

Exactly the reasons I like the idea. Nightshade and I have talked about using this method, but we have yet to try it either.

 

But is it really a "fundamental" change?

In a way it is and in a way it isn't. It doesn't change the way those rolls work fundamentally, but moving from d6 being the only die used in the system to using a different die for a large number of rolls seems pretty fundamental to me.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

One fundamental thing I’d change is to abolish Normal Characteristic Maxima.

*********************************************************

It does not, in and of itself, prevent anyone from taking an unreasonable or unrealistic characteristic.

********************************************************

The Characteristic Maxima rule can't do it for you. And if it doesn't, what good is it?

 

It accomplishes nothing that could not be better and more simply done without it.

 

On the one hand, I agree with some of the logic. The issues with NCM become even more pronounced when one considers that stats bought as a power don't count for NCM, nor to stats acquired through adjustment powers. So we might now have three characters:

 

- Conan is just unnaturally strong. He comes from a long line of tough barbarians, and he's toughest of all. He pays 30 points for a 30 STR.

 

- Hercules is unnaturally strong because his father is a God. So he buys 20 STR, then buys a power "Divine Heritage: +10 STR - 10 points". He has the same 30 STR, but pays 20 points.

 

- meanwhile Samson is built like Hercules, but his +10 STR applies only "not if hair cut", so he has to buy it as a power because it has a limitation. he pays 18 points (20 if I decide not if hair cut is a -0 limitation).

 

All three have a 30 STR. Maybe Samson gets a small point break since his STR can be taken away. Maybe I tell hercules "Nice try - that's just rules manipulation". But why should Samson get the equivalent of a -1 1/2 limitation on his +10 STR because he slapped a -1/4 limitation on it? Just making the characteristic a power means a -1 limitation, since it halves the cost of over NCM points.

 

As Lucius notes, the problem is that NCM aplies to stats, but not to anything else.

 

This creates another issue with NCM. Many types of skill levels are inferior to stat bonuses if we have no NCM, but superior if we have NCM, and their pricing doesn't change. Why buy +1 level with PRE rolls for 5 points when I could just buy +5 PRE? It only makes sense if NCM kicks in and +5 PRE will cost 10 points.

 

On the other hand, however, I think NCM can provide a guide to players as to what is truly an extraordinary stat in this particular game. It discourages, to some extent (the precise extent will vary) stats above that level. Should I really buy my DEX up from 20 to 30 (for 60 points, or 50 after the Speed Rebate), or would +3 levels in all combat (24) and +3 DCV (15), plus some selected bonuses for certain skills with the extra 11 points I save, do the trick as well as, or better than, that extra DEX? But, as Lucius says, I can just as easily set some ground rules for my game which mature players will follow ("my character is fast, but not superhuman, so a 20 DEX will do") and which can be enforced by the GM on the immature.

 

On that basis, are NCM really needed? I'd say no. They're just a holdover from when Hero wasn't a single system applicable to multiple genre, but was a number of different games using similar, but not identical, rule systems.

[Talon]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

There are a lot of things I would change. The most fundamental one: altering expectations for XP awards. IMO Hero is still a bit close to the D&D model of steadily increasing power. I prefer a game where the focus is on the story, and characters gain in power only slowly.

[Dust Raven]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

One fundamental thing I’d change is to abolish Normal Characteristic Maxima.

I'm in favor it this.

 

Actually, I'm in favor of an optional Maxima Rule which applies to everything a character buys in levels or increments. Heavy on the optional.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

 

Page 19 second to last paragraph in Sidekick and the chart on the following page, says that you can't get greater than a 30 in a primary CHAR without being superhuman. It may not say "hard cap" but it does say that for game purposes having a physical primary CHAR above a 30 for a normal human is not possible.

 

This chart was carried over into 5ER but I don't have mine around to verify the page number at the moment.

 

TB

 

Pages 40-41 in ER.

And it also says

For purposes of analyzing characterrs and their characteristics, many HERO system campaign use seven chatagories.

Snippage

Each GM determies for his own campaign what numbers fall within these seven catagories. In one game an Average person might have Primary Characteristics in the 6-10 range, and Superhuman ones in the 31+ range. In another game, Average mgith be 10-15 and Superhuman is 51+. It all depends on GM and player preference, the nature of hte campaign, and other such factors. The Accompanying Characteristiscs Comparison Table lists some suggested guidelines that should apply to most campaigns but he GM can cchange the ranges listed for each category if he wants [/Quote]

 

Added emphasis mine. The chart is lifted strait from Champions Universe page 28.

It is the actual guidelines for the Champs Universe setting.

It is a "here is one you could use" for any other setting or game.