Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

[zornwil]

Perhaps the answer is an obvious yes...or maybe it's worth discussing...not sure...but since I don't recall an explicit conversation on it figured I'd introduce it...

 

Okay, so I was thinking, lots of games out there that dedicated HERO gamers have often referred to as leaving in the past have seemingly goofy or otherwise non-cinematic or non-realistic mechanics. Original Traveller not only featured dying during character creation but tended to have rather crude damage levels which could quickly kill, almost encouraging many groups to turn it into a game of space trading and rather petty, lower-risk piracy. D&D had (and has) its constrained character classes with limits based entirely on a choice of profession/lifestyle.

 

Most people from what I hear and read prefer HERO for having the options to get to more realistic detail as well as its customizability. I'm more into the latter, although I also like the former.

 

I was thinking of how if I wanted to play Traveller, I'd play Traveller the original way, because the goofy stuff can often be just given small tweaks (like ignoring the more heinous results in character creation), and I like the flavor of those old games. Another example is Boot Hill, which I heavily tweaked. I wouldn't want to HERO-ize them as that sucks the flavor out of them, to me, OR to get that flavor I end up spending a lot of time customizing HERO to a degree that I wouldn't feel adds as much value as tweaking the original game would. Same with Deadlands, even to the point where I wouldn't personally run Deadlands using Savage Worlds' newer rules except for a few tweaks; I think DL just isn't the same in its newer incarnation and some of the critical flavor is lost. In fact, a lot of what are glitches in Deadlands are what makes that world seem more magical - because the results can be more irrational.

 

But I see most hardcore HERO gamers feel the opposite, they'd prefer to fix those old school (or even new school with undesirable traits) games by basically trying to embed the flavor into HERO.

 

But that, to me, means that the fundamental game world physics become HERO's physics...and that's just not the same game anymore (no surprise, I'm not suggesting people necessarily want to play the same game).

 

And I was thinking of how HERO rationalizes the fantastic, so I think that most people who are hardcore about HERO games probably have a fundamental problem with "unrealistic" games. Now, I put that in quotes because I'm not suggesting that RPGers using HERO want to have mundane games with purely real world mechanics, of course not. But for the most part I think people do want not just consistency, but also a game world physics that matches something more like (again, quotes) "realistic" action-adventure movies, with some unrealistic stuff but overall we can believe it not just because we suspend disbelief but because it "could" happen, however unlikely. With the more fantastic genres, such as supers and high fantasy, we suspend our disbelief only on the level of allowing for the fundamental shift to allow powers and magic, but immediately above that level of disbelief we rebuild belief by ensuring it's all consistent in a way not terribly different from our physics, on the whole.

 

Just a thought. It is terribly obvious, anyway? Or is there more or less to it?

[incrdbil]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Can I use the terribly cliché 'depends'?

 

For example, I ported my Morrow project group to HERO to get away from TMP's 'realism' focused system, to get to a more fun and less 'realism detail' focused system. It also made more balanced characters, and did a vastly superior job of moving the game along and helping tell the story than the original 'lack of a system' that did little for the GM beyond defining how to kill things or blow them up..

 

Maybe it's just a point of view, I but I see HERO as a tool often to get more of that flavor than another games system manages to do. Sometimes it works, sometimes, maybe not so much. A game like paranoia, or Ghostbusters doesn't need much of a system for its flavor. Hero is too much system for those type games. In games like that the words balance, character development really aren't that valuable, while the ability to provoke laughter or reduce traitors to a fine red mist as quickly and humorously as possible is what you are after.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I've always contended that HERO is better for Cinematic Action - i.e. Realistic but not quite Realism.

 

The system knows when to let Realism fade into the background in favor of lifting building and shooting beams out of your ears.

 

But it can be as realistic as you need it to be, allowing us as the Players to choose which aspects to be "realistic" and which to be other.

[John T]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Definitely in the same boat as Incredibil here; depends, in my case primarily on the genre I'm trying to enforce. The differences between, say, Hard Science Fiction and Space Opera call for a very different handling of the campaign rules, even if drawn from the same system. When coming from different systems, it (again) depends on how well the original system represents the genre in question. For example, IMO 7th Sea (original d10 version) handles high-spirited swashbuckling much better than ANY other system I've had experience with, while the same goes for HERO in (not surprisingly) superhero settings.

 

A lot of the system tweaks and outright setting conversions (porting a game from one system to another) seem to come from two causes: how well the GM in question believes a particular system handles the genre at hand (or how a different system would handle the genre "better"), and how "broken" the GM perceives the base system to be. These two causes aren't too far separated once you think about it, based as they are on the GM's perceptions.

[GamePhil]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Not realistic, no, but consistent, stable, and familiar. I don't use a game system to give flavor, I do that myself. So, I want the system to be largely transparent, if not in the sense of being unnoticable then in the sense of not getting in the way of doing what I want. Hero does this better than any popular game, so I use Hero.

 

Yes, sometimes another system will have an idea that I will convert into Hero. I do this for several reasons. One, I have never seen a genre- or setting-specific system that worked for me across the board: there is always something that the writers put into it that doesn't jibe with the game I want to run. Two, by figuring out how to do a mechanic in Hero rather than just playing the original game, I have a new tool for my games that is not married to a specific genre or another game system of limited utility. Finally, I don't have to keep learning, and getting my players to learn, new rules whenever I want to run a different style of game.

[David Johnston]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Hero is a game where people can, and often do create things like a character who can pick up a road and crack it like a whip. I'm not sure what you mean by "realism" in this regard. In fact Traveller's quirky "weed out the bad randomly generated characters by having them die in action before the start of play" is _more_ realistic than a design driven system. It's just that people find it annoying, particularly if the character who happens to bite it happens to be one of the good ones.

[GamePhil]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

In fact Traveller's quirky "weed out the bad randomly generated characters by having them die in action before the start of play" is _more_ realistic than a design driven system. It's just that people find it annoying' date=' particularly if the character who happens to bite it happens to be one of the good ones.[/quote']

 

Further, there was no system that makes the good ones less likely to be killed than the bad ones, which doesn't seem logical on the face of it if the purpose is a sort of in-game evolutionary force.

[CBikle]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Can I use the terribly cliché 'depends'?

 

For example, I ported my Morrow Project group to HERO to get away from TMP's 'realism' focused system, to get to a more fun and less 'realism detail' focused system. It also made more balanced characters, and did a vastly superior job of moving the game along and helping tell the story than the original 'lack of a system' that did little for the GM beyond defining how to kill things or blow them up..

 

Maybe it's just a point of view, I but I see HERO as a tool often to get more of that flavor than another games system manages to do. Sometimes it works, sometimes, maybe not so much. A game like Paranoia, or Ghostbusters doesn't need much of a system for its flavor. Hero is too much system for those type games. In games like that the words balance, character development really aren't that valuable, while the ability to provoke laughter or reduce traitors to a fine red mist as quickly and humorously as possible is what you are after.

 

Just because you reminded me of this, I wound up adding additional character classes/races for Morrow Project personnel and Paranoia clones for a Gamma World game I had planned to run.

[Lucius]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Snap answer: Probably.

 

Now I'll go back and see what everyone else had to say.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Writing a hit location chart for a palindromedary

[schir1964]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I liked Classic Traveller and I also enjoyed Mega-Traveller.

 

A couple of differences about the systems that should be noted.

 

1) Experience Points: With Traveller, once you rolled your character up, the Stats were set in stone. They could not be improved or increase in value and there was a definate max range that could never be exceeded. In Hero, Stats are not set and technically could be increased ad infinitum.

 

2) Death: With Traveller a character can die during character creation as was pointed out. But even more so, after character creation, death is an ever present possiblity since the game focuses on "Hard Core Science Fiction". This means everythng must have an expanation and works consistently in the rules. If a character is thrown out the spaceship without a space suit, that character will die unless the GM specifically chooses not to let them die. So characters (players) tend to be more cautious in taking rash actions as a result.

 

So now we come to the term "Realistic".

 

Magic is not "Realistic" per se, but the rules that govern how Magic works and can be used may be "Realistic" in that they are consistent and work in a would be considered a rational method.

 

- Chirstopher Mullins

[Catseye]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Simple answer: hero gamers are "wedded" to nothing as the last rule in the Hero rules is, if a rule doesnt work for your game then as a GM you are prefectly free to chnange it 8)

[David Johnston]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Further' date=' there was no system that makes the good ones less likely to be killed than the bad ones, which doesn't seem logical on the face of it if the purpose is a sort of in-game evolutionary force.[/quote']

 

Well the second generation of the game did have your stats affect both your survival chances and your promotion chances. But even the first generation, it worked out that way just because everyone put their junk characters into the Scouts where there was no fear of someone surviving for 7 terms straight.

[OddHat]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Well, I see a few issues here:

 

Q) Do the rules contribute to the flavor of the Setting?

 

A) Yes, of course they do.

 

Q) Can you convert a setting from another rules set to HERO and keep the flavor?

 

A) To a certain extent, yes, but not always entirely. Deadlands Hero is still about Cowboys and Spell Casting Gamblers in the Weird West, and it can still be fun, but no matter how much tweaking I do it's not going to feel exactly like playing Deadlans, even if In Game what happens to the characters is close to identical. Same with Feng Shui or GURPS Voodoo or the many other cool RPGs out there I steal ideas from. I like to think that what I end up with is still entertaining, but it's not the same.

 

Q) Are HERO Physics realistic?

 

A) No.

[David Johnston]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Generally speaking when I convert another system to Hero (or GURP), it's because that system makes things difficult to adjudicate or just has a flavour which is simply incompatible with the supposed campaign. For example, Bureau 13 had a light-hearted attitude to it's world, and a combat system that put characters in wheelchairs for life. And I simply found Space 1889's combat system impossible to fathom.

[TheRavenIs]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I for one just take what I like in a game, the system it started in doesn't mean alot to me. I might not be able to get the exact feel, but as long as it's close, I am happy.

 

I alter what ever I play anyway, if it started in Hero it still get's changed, that's why I use the HERO System it allows flexibility you don't find in other systems.

[Funksaw]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I would honestly say that HERO is one of the few games out there that does allow for realism; but the game does do cinematic stuff quite well.

 

Knockback, for example, is a purely cinematic consideration.

 

You usually end up with more "realistic" characters - and therefore campaigns - by scaling down the point totals.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I can't say that I like HERO because it's 'more' or 'less' realistic.

 

I like it because it's ridiculously flexible, and because choosing to include or ignore bits and pieces -- or even whole chunks!-- of it doesn't require a lot of down-the-road compensation. For that alone, it seems even more flexible than intended.

 

And while it's not always possible to get the 'exact' flavor you wanted from an outside source-- the often-discussed 'magic missle always hits' thing, for example-- I find that careful consideration of both what rules to use or exclude and the construction of common items allows me to come pretty close.

 

For example, when original Traveller became a 'never gonna find it again' type thing years ago, we gutted Champions and used it for Traveller (this was second ed; it wasn't HERO yet. Sorry for the confusion).

 

Things like the 'deadliness' of combat were easy to reproduce: ignore the 'negative Body' rules and make laser rifles 3d6 RKA. While a single shot might not kill you, it has a good chance of it. Two or three probably will.

 

Just one example, for clarity; I wasn't trying to lead this converstation in a particular direction.....

 

 

So to sum up:

Personally, I find that HERO is only 'more realistic' when you decide to make it that way. Consider the STR v Gravity discussion going on elsewhere....

[zornwil]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Thanks, you might be shocked but I don't have much commentary to make so much as just wanted to listen. Interesting responses (and more than I expected on a Saturday)!

[Krieghandt]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Since I was around for the original genre conversions, I got to see how little it takes to tweak Hero rules to get "flava". In fact, the easiest way to make "missles that never miss" is to make it a +2 add, requires reduced penetration over 3DC. Bang, done:thumbup: . Even leveling isnt that hard to create.

But some systems are smoother than Hero, like the orginal Boot Hill (I own versions 1 and 3) and some go further in directions then Hero (Aria is one, but the base combat system is sooooo broken) And for realism, I made a quick rule on weapon "classes". So a military vehical class weapon has a +6 body add. Makes the M2HB .50 a LOT more deadly. So I think that Hero has such a solid foundation, that you can just add flavor rules, and with a little tweaking for balance, be on your way. Most of the time. Boot Hill was soooo cool.

Krieghandt

[rjcurrie]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Personally, I think that Hero gamers, like all gamers, just like to complain.

[zornwil]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

Personally' date=' I think that Hero gamers, like all gamers, just like to complain. [/quote']

I plead the 5th!

[ghost-angel]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

After reading others answers ...

 

I don't think Hero Gamers are in for more "realism" as they are for "consistent rules design and implementation" ... many systems can feel realistic but rules seem randomized, or at best kludged to create such realism.

 

Hero Rules can be mind boggelingly flexible but still consistent in execution.

 

Unlike, say, DnD spells which look, feel and act pretty damn arbitrary to me.

[Lemurion]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I'm agreeing with ghost-angel. The big thing for me is the consistency and the control. It just all works well together.

[i3ullseye]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I think another key is one of balance. HERO offers a very balanced environment, which helps regulate things. Currently I have another game system I love, and thats the MURPG. Diceless, uses stones instead of dice... so it is resource based instead of probability based.

 

Like the old Marvel game, the new Marvel game is very rules light. And because of that it plays fast, and is great for staying with the story and never letting the rules become more important than the character. And it is a snap to teach to people.

 

All that being said, when issues arise, they are not as easily resolved. How much can be lifted? sure. How far can you throw it, ok, but not as clear. How much damage does that thrown piece of metal do once it drops 30', and has been super heated to 300 degrees celcius? Now we need a bit more detail to work with it.

 

I think I prefer my 4 color games a LOT looser, and over time I have moved away form Champions as my first choice in many situations. If the group are all HERO system veterans, nothing is better. But for new groups, or casual pick-up games... even the Sidekick isn't enough to make this an easy sell.

 

But for ANY genre that needs a bit mroe detail, if the players are willing to learn the system, HERO is still tops with me.

 

And it is detail and customization, not realism, that is my big selling point.

[Balabanto]

Re: Are HERO gamers more wedded to more "realistic" game physics?

 

I would like to point out that this is why Rod Currie rocks and we are all puny ants beneath his mighty light.