What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

[SteveZilla]

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

 

number of female players.

 

Hear, hear!

[NinjaGeek]

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

 

number of female players.

Unfortunately, I can't rep you yet.

[Dust Raven]

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

 

What about the number of female players should be changed? In my circles, I seem to have an over abundance. Maybe that's an exaggeration. Let's see, over the years I've had in groups I've played in regularly (including myself) - male: 19 (5 GMs); female: 13 (4 GMs). These games were mostly Champions or other Hero System games, but occasionally D&D, Cyberpunk 2020, Amber Diceless or recently 7th Sea. In the three groups I'm currently playin in - Champions 4 male, 2 female (male GM); 7th Sea: 4 male, 2 female (female GM); D&D: 3 male, 1 female (male GM).

[Lxndr]

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

 

Is that really fundamental to the HERO system, though? I don't recall seeing any rules about gender demographics... maybe they added that in 5ER?

[zornwil]

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

 

Fundamental change:

 

I would more or less yank pre-set values for most things.

 

Instead of seeing Armor piercing at +1/2 or water breathing at 5cp, you would see each with a list of example costs, possible grouped thematically, so the notion of "cost matches with benefit and benefit is very very much campaign dependent" would be an ingrained thing.

 

Limitations and disadvantages would be similarly "unlocked" and mostly defined by the core "frequency" + "severity" logic. heck, power limitations might become ONE big limited power kind of notion, with f+s being the rule and the notion being "at chargen Gm and player discuss how this limits" or maybe "player submits several examples of how this limits and such" as a part of the core rules. its entirel possible that "power lims" would dissappear and become "character disadvantages". you pay points for "everything at its best" and get disads for how far away from "everything at its best" you normally see.

 

I would make SFX bigger, probably dropping any advantage/limitation below 1/2 and letting all the way from 0 to "not quite +1/2" be a matter of SFX/power skill. This could expand even further to let power skill effectively gain you "a multipower slot" worth, enabling a very simple build to be versatile using the skill. So with a good enough power skill roll you could turn your 12d6 firebolt into a 6d6 fire cone, though that would likely be 8d6 under my scale.

 

Finally the most fundamental change would be to move from "our costs are right" to "you make the costs you choose for your game right" as the focus of where the system balance works and is derived from. The nonsense of "use hero to balance other games systems" kind of thinking would go away entirely.

Great catch, I to a large agree as that is more compatible with the toolkit mentality. However, I do think some mechanical-only type Advs/Lims belong in a more strict mode, so I don't know if AP is a good example or not. But some sort of flexi-approach would definitely be superior when it comes to stacking advantages and limitations.

[zornwil]

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

 

I've run 4 or 5 differnt genres with HERO and never found them ruined.

Whereas GMs in our group have migrated to Savage Worlds for pulp, Western-horror, and similar heroic level games...I think that HERO has created too stronga predilection towards a one-size-fits-all that is not working by and large. I venture a guess that you and others would just as easily have characters fit across your genra because you would define it that way, using the examples straight from the book and common values that fit most instances. I see Tesuji's suggestion as merely building strength by adding flexibility, without limiting the ability to "go vanilla".

[zornwil]

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

 

Well, while I'm still reading through, I will say that as pointed out early on, I think first by Derek, it depends on what you call "fundamental". I don't think even Tesuji's suggestion is a fundamental AXIOMATIC, MECHANICAL, or SYSTEM change, it's a fundamental GAME RULE change. All depends what level we speak of.

 

I would, on a mechanical level, strive for a universal power framework, even if it altered (rather depite the fact it would alter, really) costs. I would also like to see an utter reworking of Adjustment Powers at least similar to what schir1964 has suggested. They are way too complex and I don't see a payback for that complexity.

 

My primary change would be bringing the system back to a more basic and concise core that leaves a lot more to the GM to decide. I see no weakness in that from the old days, and I see increased weakness with a "here's every possibility" approach that is creeping in.

 

I think Tesuji is fundamentally correct in his statement that we are bending genra to fit HERO rather than vice-versa. This is neither good nor bad, intrinsically, but I do think that it is the weaker approach. I simply don't see the "bad old days" accusations re the divergence in rules of Justice, Inc. versus Champions versus Fantasy HERO. Heck, the current genre books themselves suggest such divergence!

 

That said we do get into a sticky wicket as to the question of what is a core product for HERO Games. I would advocate, still, a Sidekick-like product, though would prefer to see it wrapped with some "example setting" of sorts. I think a good bit of money could be made with an accompanying "HERO for the expert" rulebook that is much more "toolkit" oriented and gets into a stripped-down core mechanical version with lots of suggestions and ideas and "rules for how to make rules" along with a specific tale of how the Sidekick-like product was built from this core.

[zornwil]

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

 

(snip)

eg: if you are playing super high level then you will be rolling 20+ dice for an attack... does anyone really do this?

 

I think lots and lots of people do this. Our supers game has been a this point for a little while, and I have heard of many others with 20+ dice standard attacks. Just to answer your question

[Zeropoint]

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

 

The fact that 5ER doesn't come with a complimentary catgirl.

[Harakani]

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

 

Waaaaaaaaay back here...

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40568

...there was talk of an "Ultimate Customisation" book.

I'm guessing that such a book would never be published (but would be delighted to be told otherwise).

Possible the community could do it as a website - maybe a wiki?

Could be in this format (I made up an example - please don't debate that)

 

 

OPTIONAL RULE: graduated Haymaker.

Effect of rule: Increase effectiveness of high OCV.

Level of change: local.

Summary: A character may sacrifice 2 points of OCV for +1 DC on an attack. This increased DC is subject to the same limits as DC gained by CSLs (may not more than double attack's base DC).

Impacts:

CSLs, especially low ones, now ALL give 2:1 for DCs.

Dexterity is more useful.

Haymaker no longer needed.

Can also replace Hit Locations.

Highly accurate characters can now do far more damage against immobile objects.

[GamePhil]

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

 

Mainly, I would eliminate all alternative character types. Everything built using the character building rules would be built the same way, and have access to all the same abilities that every other character-like thing has. So, PC's could buy Cargo, or Does Not Bleed, or that odd thing in FH that allows you to re-roll to hit rolls if you miss by one but can only be bought on equipment (actually, I'd probably drop that one altogether, but that's another issue). Vehicles just take Running rather than having a new Power, and take PD, ED, and Damage Resistance (or Armor) like everyone else. And so on and so forth.

 

This also puts me firmly in whatever camp includes Derek's suggestion on Foci, since they would also be bought this way.

 

This change also implies a number of other changes through the system that I could go on for quite a while about but won't at this time. You lucky people It does though require the introduction of some new concepts. And, no, not necessarily the Incomplete rules for those that have heard this before, though that is one alternative.

 

There are a number of less fundamental changes that I would also make, but that's probably the one with the most ramifications.

[Dust Raven]

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

 

OPTIONAL RULE: graduated Haymaker.

Effect of rule: Increase effectiveness of high OCV.

Level of change: local.

Summary: A character may sacrifice 2 points of OCV for +1 DC on an attack. This increased DC is subject to the same limits as DC gained by CSLs (may not more than double attack's base DC).

Impacts:

CSLs, especially low ones, now ALL give 2:1 for DCs.

Dexterity is more useful.

Haymaker no longer needed.

Can also replace Hit Locations.

Highly accurate characters can now do far more damage against immobile objects.

That's an interesting suggestion, but shouldn't it convert DCV rather than OCV. Haymaker uses the character's normal OCV but reduces DCV by 5.

[Harakani]

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

 

Yeah, probably should do something with DCV. I made it up pretty quickly as an example.

 

What about the idea of the site/books/wiki/whatever, though?

[Curufea]

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

 

Waaaaaaaaay back here...

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40568

...there was talk of an "Ultimate Customisation" book.

I'm guessing that such a book would never be published (but would be delighted to be told otherwise).

Possible the community could do it as a website - maybe a wiki?

Could be in this format (I made up an example - please don't debate that)

 

See my sig for a Wiki. It's for resources in the hope that in a similar manner to Paraonia and living rulebooks - the online collaboration of fans and players can enhance the system and possibly lead to published supplements.