Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

As a GM of Pulp Hero and Champions I can attest it is a great system for newbies. It does the job very well.

I GM games at Origins, GenCon, and RockCon DESIGNED and PROMOTED for newbies. It does the job very well.

I explain at conventions that Hero has a bad rap for being complex, too much math and too many rules. I then show them the 5ER and the small proporation (under 60 pages) that a PLAYER should now. Then I show them how much of the book is powers and explaination of genres (well over 300 pages) that the GM should know. It is obivious to the new player that it is easy to play. I tell them within the end of the game session they will know enough to be able to play the system.

Newbie players seem to like my games, and often say good things about the system. Also I know that some of them BUY the books after my convention games.

I believe that the system, presented by someone who will take the small amount of time to teach the player mechanics (which does not take a lot of time) is good for a newbie player.

 

Now some issues: character creation and GM time/skills.

Character creation; with a laptop and Hero Designer with character packs a character can be created QUICKLY and easily. I created a Pulp Hero character with the player in 20 minutes total start to finish. Creation of a character can be time consuming, but in all point based systems this can take some time.

GM time/skills. Hero takes effort and time from a GM standpiont. But ALL RPG systems require much more effort and time from the GM.

So IMHO it is a great system for newbies, and the character creation and GM issues are just the way it is and not overwhelming for thoses who are willing to take the time (that is a topic for another post).

Hey, do you have a reference or something of those 60 pages?

 

Still bummed I didn't get to catch up with you at the last GC.

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

Hero System was' date=' if I'm counting right and not mixing things up too badly, the 7th system I was introduced to. That's counting all of the various Palladium Books stuff as a single system, and not counting strategy games like Car Wars, or home brewed player invented non-published systems. It was also introduced to me only two years after being introduced to role-playing games as a whole. It was the best of the bunch, and after learning another 8+ rpgs (this time counting everything by WW as a single system, and not counting D&D 3e as a separate system), it still is the best of the bunch, and one of the easist to learn (yet the most difficult to master).[/quote']

Easy to learn, difficult to master - that, to me, is a good system, enough nuance to keep it interesting, but easy enough to just sit down and play. The really great games are that way. Of course, that's not for everybody. But I suspect most HEROites like that kind of game.

[Questar]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I'm curious as to why I keep seeing this, or similar, statements about Hero and Supers.

 

I don't see it. It isn't unless purposely viewed that way. This honestly and seriously bugs me. A lot.

 

 

I don't think that I purposely try to view Hero that way. But there are some things that seem geared specifically to supers which seem to have tilted the system somewhat.

 

For example, the Speed Chart. Great for Supers, but IMO, unneeded complexity for most other genres. So, no problem, you just don't use it for those. I ran a pulp adventure recently and did away with the speed chart, and it worked out very well.

 

But Hero is also set up so that it is usually going to be far more common to defeat a foe by knocking him out than by killing him. That, I think, is a more telling hark-back to the supers origins of Hero. I fudged it in my Pulp adventure by ruling that non-important enemies would be taken out by getting shot a single time. I didn't bother to roll damage and apply defenses. A Nazi soldier got shot, the Nazi was out. It fits the genre. Having to shoot a character two or three times to take them out does not. (Maybe the Pulp Hero book covers this, I don't know.)

 

PC's and major villains got their defenses, of course, but my point is that the non-lethal aspect of damage in Hero is for me a big reason why the system doesn't work as well outside of supers.

 

For me, another big deal is fantasy magic systems. This is probably just personal, coming from having played Hero mainly for supers. But when I run a fantasy wizard in the Hero system, it just feels like I am running a wizard with super-powers rather than a real fantasy type wizard.

 

For magic spells to be constructed out of a very precise mathematical structure like Hero, they feel to me far more "technological" than, well, magic. Doesn't matter what you call them or how you define the special effect. I know the underlying construction is based on mechanics, not effect. As I said, that's probably personal, but I would bet a lot of others feel the same.

 

I'm curious, Ghost-Angel, what type of genres do you usually play? And do you use the Speed Chart?

[Narratio]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

1st ed. Champions was my... somewhere between 7th and 10th RPG and it immediately blew away the rest. I ran a 4 year campaign using 1st & 2nd Ed. Used it to bring newbies into RPG's as Paragon (my old wargames club) wandered the English conventions in the 80's and generally did good with it. I saw the trend to early pulp (Justice how I loved you) and Golden Age Champs, but running anything with 3rd ed. was impossible as I was working overseas.

 

I only found 4th ed. Champions by accident, in Virgin, while on a visa run back to the UK in the late 80's. It was here that I saw the way the system had changed and grown. And that the system was good enough to handle it. Try that with V&V, Heroes Unlimited, Superworld, etal...

 

A competent GM can bring in a newbie and have him playing 5th ed. inside 20mins. Cut out the dross die rolls, add a bunch of narrative and bingo, you've a convert.

 

Nope, this is an easy game system to learn the basics and then spend years fine tuning.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I'm curious as to why I keep seeing this, or similar, statements about Hero and Supers.

 

I don't see it. It isn't unless purposely viewed that way. This honestly and seriously bugs me. A lot.

 

If you look at the sentence as written it says that the system is written to accommodate super style games.

 

What that means to me is that the powers section of the game (and probably the part, along with frameworks, that scares most people) needs to be larger and more comprehensive to allow all of the nuances that super style games require.

 

Obviously fantasy magic could utilise the same powers but I think that if you were reading the core rulebook as Fantasy Hero and the powers section was labelled Magic Powers and Spells then people wouldn't be as intimidated as they would only crack it open if they wanted magic. They would be secure that they could ignore it if they were playing a muscle brained fighter.

 

As such, I do think that supers skews things because, if the game is to be multi-genre, then it requires so much of this stuff to be upfront rather than tidied away somewhere that the faint-hearted know they can safely ignore it.

 

I wasn't saying that the game was a supers game - I believe I have stated elsewhere that I will probably never run supers again using Hero - but instead that accommodating such a wide range of genres makes the book and system scary to newcomers. Especially if they are the trailblazer in their group.

 

Any system is much easier if there is someone to mentor you through the intricate bits. When Zornwil asked about being for those new to RPGs I assumed a situation where there would be no Hero experience in the playing group.

 

 

Doc

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I don't think the HERO System is designed specifically to be a good entry-level game for those new to RPGs. Meaning, it does not intentionally tread lightly when it comes to slinging the RPG lingo, or make character creation exceptionally fast and simple, and so forth.

 

However, I do still think that Hero is a pretty good entry-level game, mainly for two reasons:

1. It's more logical and less arbitrary than many game systems, with a fair amount of internal consistency. This may make it easier to grok than many other games, at least for people who tend to seek patterns as part of their learning process.
2. The most important factor in a new player coming into the hobby is getting them excited about it. And nothing generates excited new players more than being drawn into an existing gaming group that is enthusiastic about the game they play. Hero players tend to be enthusiastic about Hero.

[Funksaw]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

You know, the more I think about it...

 

Here's the thing - any game can be an entry-level game if you have an experienced GM willing to explain things to you.

 

But some gamers come into the gaming industry without prompting from friends - they hear about it elsewhere. And they usually start with either D&D or with WoD/Vampire.

 

That's just market externalities for you.

 

But HERO might actually be in a good position here, relatively, because of Sidekick, a complete ruleset for under $15.

 

When I started RPing, Vampire at $30 was exhorbitant; nowadays, Vampire costs $60... if you include the WoD core. D&D costs $90 -- yes, you can just play with the player's handbook, but we're talking about people who don't have friends in a gaming group to set the game up with them.

 

Sidekick, at $15, is a very, very cheap game these days. GURPS Lite is free but it's not really a full system (especially after 4th ed.)

 

I do think that a HERO Lite product would help to sell both Sidekick and HERO System 5th, partially because a free download showing how easy the system can be when pared down works helps dispel many of the myths. (For example, before I got into it, I somehow got it into my head that GURPS was a post-apocalyptic game, not a generic system... I may have confused it with RIFTS.)

[Vondy]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

Hero doesn't have more rules than many other games (D20 for instance), it just has them all in one place. And its not that complex. The math is very basic. If people think the math is hard then they need to sue the public education system. Its not rocket-science or quantum computing folks. Its not even compound interest. Its multiplication with fractions (and we live in the age of the calcluator).

 

I got through that unit in grade school (though I still regard fractions as being furtive and untrustworthy). Also, aside from the abstractness inherent in reasoning from effect, the system isn't conceptually any more difficult than most other system. OCV and Thaco both use a formula, its just that D20 provides a GUI (charts), whereas you have to make your own for Hero. We're running from a DOS prompt.

 

I think 8 pages of "GUI" (charts) or so is all that stands between newbie players and All That Is Hero. All they need is their character, dice, and a little chart that says: "Roll X on 3D6 to hit DCV Y" and they are off and running. And even in a power heavy genre, character creation isn't that front-loaded. I recall Twilight 2000 and Aftermath were pretty tedious in terms of character creation. And yet, when I and my friends were 10, we forged through it and got rolling.

[Lucius]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

GA' date=' you must have seen many of the "supers ruined this game" threads here? [/quote']

 

I would certainly never say “Supers ruined this game.” I would say “Supers made this game POSSIBLE.”

 

I don’t think Champions set out to be “universal” but I think early on, people realized “You know, anything can happen in a comic book and a comic book super game has to be ready for anything, so it follows such a game is – well, ready for anything!”

 

Before Champions, if you changed genres, you changed systems – from AD&D to Traveler to Boot Hill to Gamma World – when the basic game engine of Champions got called “Hero System” and they started putting out different genre games with the same basic system to them, the idea of a Generic Universal Roleplaying System was born.

 

If there had been no superheroic comic books, or if for some reason no one ever wanted to set roleplaying games in that kind of world, it may have been a much longer time before anyone came up with the “Generic, Universal” concept.

 

I wouldn't wonder why - 2:1 STR' date=' [/quote']

 

Um, don’t you mean 1:1 STR?

 

 

I don't think that I purposely try to view Hero that way. But there are some things that seem geared specifically to supers which seem to have tilted the system somewhat.

 

For example, the Speed Chart. Great for Supers, but IMO, unneeded complexity for most other genres. So, no problem, you just don't use it for those. I ran a pulp adventure recently and did away with the speed chart, and it worked out very well.

 

Hm. Well, that would work, but personally, even for a pulp game, I like to be able to distinguish between normal Human (innocent bystander) (SPD 2, 2 actions/turn) Hero or otherwise exceptional person (SPD 3, half again as many actions/turn) martial artist/masterful fighter (SPD 4, twice the actions/turn of an ordinary man) and supernatural menace/killer robot/obviously superhuman monster (SPD 5 or 6, great for taking on a group of SPD 3 heroes.)

 

For me, another big deal is fantasy magic systems. This is probably just personal, coming from having played Hero mainly for supers. But when I run a fantasy wizard in the Hero system, it just feels like I am running a wizard with super-powers rather than a real fantasy type wizard.

 

For magic spells to be constructed out of a very precise mathematical structure like Hero, they feel to me far more "technological" than, well, magic. Doesn't matter what you call them or how you define the special effect. I know the underlying construction is based on mechanics, not effect. As I said, that's probably personal, but I would bet a lot of others feel the same.

 

You’re not the only one to say things like this, but I am, well….I guess I just don’t quite see it. You see, part of why I fell for the Hero system so hard is that I saw Champions II and said “Finally a game that can do magick RIGHT!”

 

So tell me – what DOES make something feel like “magic” to you?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Ubiquitous palindromedary

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

Hero doesn't have more rules than many other games (D20 for instance)' date=' it just has them all in one place. And its not that complex. The math is very basic. If people think the math is hard then they need to sue the public education system. Its not rocket-science or quantum computing folks. Its not even compound interest. Its multiplication with fractions (and we live in the age of the calcluator). [/quote']

 

It's not the system that's difficult, it's the calculators. They make them so complex these days!!

 

Preaching to the converted on this one - I think Hero is a really simple system presented in a very complex way.

 

OCV and Thaco both use a formula, its just that D20 provides a GUI (charts), whereas you have to make your own for Hero. We're running from a DOS prompt.

 

I think 8 pages of "GUI" (charts) or so is all that stands between newbie players and All That Is Hero. All they need is their character, dice, and a little chart that says: "Roll X on 3D6 to hit DCV Y" and they are off and running.

 

This is exactly where I think Hero falls down - it looks more complicated than it is froma character sheet. It is something I am working on for my group. Will share when I eventually get it finished.

 

And even in a power heavy genre' date=' character creation isn't that front-loaded. I recall Twilight 2000 and Aftermath were pretty tedious in terms of character creation. And yet, when I and my friends were 10, we forged through it and got rolling.[/quote']

 

I think that some of the terror in Hero creation is that you start with a blank page and anything is possible - there isn't the templates that get you going in other games - even if the processes are complex and tedious they are step by step stuff guiding you through. hero does expect you to think, and to think creatively!

 

 

Doc

[Susano]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

For magic spells to be constructed out of a very precise mathematical structure like Hero' date=' they feel to me far more "technological" than, well, [i']magic[/i]. Doesn't matter what you call them or how you define the special effect. I know the underlying construction is based on mechanics, not effect. As I said, that's probably personal, but I would bet a lot of others feel the same.

 

How is this any different from D&D's "you get 6d8 of Fireball at level 5 with +1d8 for ever level after that"? (or however it's worded) I mean, D&D magic seems more like a video game than anything. And GURPS magic, that I can recall, isn't all that "magical" either.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

You’re not the only one to say things like this, but I am, well….I guess I just don’t quite see it. You see, part of why I fell for the Hero system so hard is that I saw Champions II and said “Finally a game that can do magick RIGHT!”

 

So tell me – what DOES make something feel like “magic” to you?

 

It is the colour and sfx of the system that makes something feel magical. Ars Magica makes magic feel like magic and Chivalry and Sorcery did so too. They presented a system that felt like you were following magic systems rather than fractional power systems.

 

In Hero this depends on the GM doing the legwork to provide that kind of feel to the player. It also requires the player to be content not to look behind the curtain and be happy to believe in the great and powerful Oz.

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I would certainly never say “Supers ruined this game.” I would say “Supers made this game POSSIBLE.”

 

I don’t think Champions set out to be “universal” but I think early on, people realized “You know, anything can happen in a comic book and a comic book super game has to be ready for anything, so it follows such a game is – well, ready for anything!”

 

IIRC, it was the Golden Heroes game that suggested as a comic book game, it could do pretty much everything. After all, we had fantasy comics, science fiction comics - even romance comics.

 

Before Champions' date=' if you changed genres, you changed systems – from AD&D to Traveler to Boot Hill to Gamma World – when the basic game engine of Champions got called “Hero System” and they started putting out different genre games with the same basic system to them, the idea of a Generic Universal Roleplaying System was born.[/quote']

 

At the time, Chaosium was using Basic Role Playing as the backbone to most/all of its games, so Hero wasn't the only company using the same base mechanics for a variety of genres.

[kjamma4]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

My answer to your question (as others have already stated) depends on how you are going to proceed. I think that almost all RPGs can be daunting to the person who is new if they are going to run the game for new players. Less daunting would be if you are new to RPGs and playing under a new GM. Even less daunting is if you are a new player playing under an experienced GM.

 

I have been roleplaying for over twenty-five years but I first played HERO at GenCon 2005 in a game run by this board's Koshka with Zornwil and Barton as co-players. Although I would not qualify as new to RPGs, it took very little time with their help to "get" the mechanics of the game. Under tutelage like that, it is not hard to conceive that a total neophyte would get it too.

 

Following that, I joined Bartons' Pulp HERO campaign with other members of my family. On the first night there, Barton created our characters (I believe about five or six in all) in less than an hour and a half using HERO Designer. All we had to do was tell him what we wanted and he designed it. Again, granted, he has a wealth of experience but I did not see any difference in him teaching us the HERO system as someone teaching a different system.

 

As to your original questions, HERO is more than adequate for those new to RPGs and in some ways, I would say it is ideal since it will allow you to play whatever you want. I would think that showing a new player that one ruleset can be used for any genre would be a great selling point.

 

[As an aside, I too thought that HERO was only used to play super-heroic games. However, my first introduction to HERO was for pulp gaming and following that, my pre-HERO group quickly switched from D&D 3.5 to HERO for our fantasy campaign. It works really well for both. Having played in only two Supers games (and those both at conventions**), I don't have quite as much experience but from what I can see, HERO has no problems with scaling.]

 

**Side note to Barton: Maybe it's time to do a one shot of Supers?

[Barton]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

Hey, do you have a reference or something of those 60 pages?

 

Still bummed I didn't get to catch up with you at the last GC.

 

I need to as a project before next year's Origins and Gen Con to make a page guide for newbies (a sort of index of the stuff you should know as a player).

 

I hope to see you in a game at next year's GENCON. I am planning on at least seven slots for next year.

[Vondy]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

 

/snippage

 

This is exactly where I think Hero falls down - it looks more complicated than it is froma character sheet. It is something I am working on for my group. Will share when I eventually get it finished.

 

/snippage

 

 

I have been playing hero almost exclusively for sixteen years, and used it off and on for several years before that, and I still don't like the way the character sheets are printed up. I want a much cleaner expression. My group (and all of them were veteran heroites) ended up with full "design time" character sheets and streamlined "run time" character sheets. It made the play experience more enjoyable.

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I would certainly never say “Supers ruined this game.” I would say “Supers made this game POSSIBLE.”

 

I don’t think Champions set out to be “universal” but I think early on, people realized “You know, anything can happen in a comic book and a comic book super game has to be ready for anything, so it follows such a game is – well, ready for anything!”

 

Before Champions, if you changed genres, you changed systems – from AD&D to Traveler to Boot Hill to Gamma World – when the basic game engine of Champions got called “Hero System” and they started putting out different genre games with the same basic system to them, the idea of a Generic Universal Roleplaying System was born.

 

If there had been no superheroic comic books, or if for some reason no one ever wanted to set roleplaying games in that kind of world, it may have been a much longer time before anyone came up with the “Generic, Universal” concept.

 

 

 

Um, don’t you mean 1:1 STR?

 

 

 

 

Hm. Well, that would work, but personally, even for a pulp game, I like to be able to distinguish between normal Human (innocent bystander) (SPD 2, 2 actions/turn) Hero or otherwise exceptional person (SPD 3, half again as many actions/turn) martial artist/masterful fighter (SPD 4, twice the actions/turn of an ordinary man) and supernatural menace/killer robot/obviously superhuman monster (SPD 5 or 6, great for taking on a group of SPD 3 heroes.)

 

 

 

You’re not the only one to say things like this, but I am, well….I guess I just don’t quite see it. You see, part of why I fell for the Hero system so hard is that I saw Champions II and said “Finally a game that can do magick RIGHT!”

 

So tell me – what DOES make something feel like “magic” to you?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Ubiquitous palindromedary

I'll say why magic doesn't feel right in HERO or some other systems - it feels entirely rational and explicable - not to say magic shouldn't be rational, but it should feel that way except to those who know it. Some layer or subterfuge or such can make it feel mysterious and weird. That being said, I realize others have different expectations of magic.

 

Yeah, re, 2:1, but you know what I meant.

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I need to as a project before next year's Origins and Gen Con to make a page guide for newbies (a sort of index of the stuff you should know as a player).

 

I hope to see you in a game at next year's GENCON. I am planning on at least seven slots for next year.

It was hard for me to play in games due to GMing.

[Questar]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

personally, even for a pulp game, I like to be able to distinguish between normal Human (innocent bystander) (SPD 2, 2 actions/turn) Hero or otherwise exceptional person (SPD 3, half again as many actions/turn) martial artist/masterful fighter (SPD 4, twice the actions/turn of an ordinary man) and supernatural menace/killer robot/obviously superhuman monster (SPD 5 or 6, great for taking on a group of SPD 3 heroes.)

Lucius Alexander

Ubiquitous palindromedary

 

I understand your preference, and I'm not advocating doing away with the speed chart for a pulp campaign. This was a one-shot adventure, a departure in many ways for my gaming group. It was geared to be heavy on investigation and roleplaying, with combat as an incidental.

 

I will tell you though, it worked beautifully in ways I hadn't really thought about. Slower characters weren't sitting around while the fast ones went again. And the threat of multiple low-powered opponents took on a nice edge. I think it really helped give a better genre feel to the game. And it certainly sped things up for the players. And as GM I didn't have to put up with the knowledgeable players basing their tactics on the speed chart phases.

 

I wouldn't think of running a supers game or even a pulp-supers game without the speed chart. But for a low level game, the speed chart offers diminishing returns. Its disadvantages start to outweigh the advantages, IMO. That's why I think the existance of the Speed Chart is one thing that skews the system more positively for supers than other genres.

 

But I hardly subscribe to the notion that these things "ruin" the game for other genres. That's demonstrably wrong.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I'll say why magic doesn't feel right in HERO or some other systems - it feels entirely rational and explicable - not to say magic shouldn't be rational' date=' but it should feel that way except to those who know it. Some layer or subterfuge or such can make it feel mysterious and weird. That being said, I realize others have different expectations of magic.[/quote']

 

I think there are cross-expectations. Magic implies mystery and uncertainty of "the rules". As players in a game, we want to know "the rules". Take away the players' knowledge of the rules and they're unhappy. Given them knowledge of the rules, and the mystery of Magic goes away.

[OddHat]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

It is the colour and sfx of the system that makes something feel magical. Ars Magica makes magic feel like magic and Chivalry and Sorcery did so too. They presented a system that felt like you were following magic systems rather than fractional power systems.

 

In Hero this depends on the GM doing the legwork to provide that kind of feel to the player. It also requires the player to be content not to look behind the curtain and be happy to believe in the great and powerful Oz.

 

 

Doc

 

I'll say why magic doesn't feel right in HERO or some other systems - it feels entirely rational and explicable - not to say magic shouldn't be rational, but it should feel that way except to those who know it. Some layer or subterfuge or such can make it feel mysterious and weird. That being said, I realize others have different expectations of magic.

 

This kind of relates to the Production Values and charactersheet discussions, and the flaws in the USPD and Grimore formats.

 

A list of spells that gives the exact costs and modifiers on each spell is great from a HERO GM's point of view. You can see exactly how to fine tune it as you like, and using it as the model for other spells is a breeze.

 

From a players POV, even if you know exactly how the system works, it feels mechanical. If you don't know the system, it becomes an intimidating list of weird numbers and abreviations.

 

This lacks flavor:

 

20 Rage of the Lost Ones: Energy Blast 6d6, Penetrating (+½), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +½) (60 Active Points); Side Effects (Summon a 300 point Outsider; -1), Requires A Skill Roll (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

 

This is better, though not perfect:

 

Rage of the Lost Ones: By performing a simple ritual gesture and intoning a word of power, the Mage opens a connection to an enraged Outsider, allowing the lost spirit to strike a single blow against the Mage's target for 6d6 damage. So fierce is this blow that ordinary armor does not protect entirely against it; for each point of Body damage rolled on the dice, one point of Stun will bypass the target's defenses. As the Outsider wishes to strike against the living, this spell does not draw on the Endurance of the mage. However, there is a price to be paid. Should the Mage fail his Magic Skill roll, a 300 Point Outsider will be drawn to the world of the living, where it may do as it likes. To cast Flames of Perdition takes only one half phase and requires a Spiritualism Skill roll at -6.

 

On the sheet, it would be noted as:

20 Rage of the Lost Ones: 6d6 Penetrating, 0 END, Side Effects, Spiritualism Roll, Gestures, Incantations, AP:60

 

In HERO's defense, such an approach would make writing up even a simple magic system harder than is currently the case in the Grimores and setting books, and it would require the GM to track more information as exact details would no longer be on the character sheet.

 

My own favorite RPG Magic Sysytem was GURPS Voodoo; nested skill rolls and great flavor text. Very worthwhile.

[OddHat]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I think there are cross-expectations. Magic implies mystery and uncertainty of "the rules". As players in a game' date=' we want to know "the rules". Take away the players' knowledge of the rules and they're unhappy. Given them knowledge of the rules, and the mystery of Magic goes away.[/quote']

 

That too.

 

Maybe more reason to go with a skill rolls based approach, wiht players not privy to exactly what modifiers the GM may be applying at a given time.

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

I think there are cross-expectations. Magic implies mystery and uncertainty of "the rules". As players in a game' date=' we want to know "the rules". Take away the players' knowledge of the rules and they're unhappy. Given them knowledge of the rules, and the mystery of Magic goes away.[/quote']

Bear in mind, doing things like open-ended die rolls and other probability games can replicate this. Deadlands magic was great.

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

This kind of relates to the Production Values and charactersheet discussions, and the flaws in the USPD and Grimore formats.

 

A list of spells that gives the exact costs and modifiers on each spell is great from a HERO GM's point of view. You can see exactly how to fine tune it as you like, and using it as the model for other spells is a breeze.

 

From a players POV, even if you know exactly how the system works, it feels mechanical. If you don't know the system, it becomes an intimidating list of weird numbers and abreviations.

 

This lacks flavor:

 

20 Rage of the Lost Ones: Energy Blast 6d6, Penetrating (+½), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +½) (60 Active Points); Side Effects (Summon a 300 point Outsider; -1), Requires A Skill Roll (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

 

This is better, though not perfect:

 

Rage of the Lost Ones: By performing a simple ritual gesture and intoning a word of power, the Mage opens a connection to an enraged Outsider, allowing the lost spirit to strike a single blow against the Mage's target for 6d6 damage. So fierce is this blow that ordinary armor does not protect entirely against it; for each point of Body damage rolled on the dice, one point of Stun will bypass the target's defenses. As the Outsider wishes to strike against the living, this spell does not draw on the Endurance of the mage. However, there is a price to be paid. Should the Mage fail his Magic Skill roll, a 300 Point Outsider will be drawn to the world of the living, where it may do as it likes. To cast Flames of Perdition takes only one half phase and requires a Spiritualism Skill roll at -6.

 

On the sheet, it would be noted as:

20 Rage of the Lost Ones: 6d6 Penetrating, 0 END, Side Effects, Spiritualism Roll, Gestures, Incantations, AP:60

 

In HERO's defense, such an approach would make writing up even a simple magic system harder than is currently the case in the Grimores and setting books, and it would require the GM to track more information as exact details would no longer be on the character sheet.

 

My own favorite RPG Magic Sysytem was GURPS Voodoo; nested skill rolls and great flavor text. Very worthwhile.

I think if you use the options presented in FH for magic there are some really good ways to make magic feel like magic. Especially by making magic entirely dependent on skill rolls and enforcing Side Effects, Independent, and other Lims that allow the GM to "play games" (no pun intended) with the results. I don't think it's that hard. It's just not even implied in the core book. Is this a system problem? Not really, except that the core book doesn't have a solid process of "here's how to generate ideas, here's ways to apply the core system principles in quite diferent ways." This is as much a matter of simple logistics and economics (book length, page count, need to promote ancilliary products) as it is anything else.

[zornwil]

Re: Is HERO an ideal or even an adequate game for those new to RPGs? Should it be?

 

And as GM I didn't have to put up with the knowledgeable players basing their tactics on the speed chart phases.

 

I am not suggesting you should do things differently. However, I wanted to take exception to the implication (not necessarily intended) that somehow this is bad or undue metagaming on the part of players. I feel it strongly reinforces the heroic adventure milieu by allowing the sensible taking-advantage of tactics as many heroic figures would. "Ah-ha, his reaction time is poorer than mine! I'll wait, and then I can do at least 3 actions I want, I bet, before he can react!" It also allows the players to compensate for an important shortcoming on their own, that they are not heroic brilliant figures (typically) who can intuitively take advantage of opponents in this manner or at least limit damage to themselves by understanding this.

 

So far I have use the speed chart in all low-level games as well as high-level. I can understand altering it - I try to ensure players are in a reasonable range for con games so nobody sits around too long and no one PC dominates combat time. But I think the 2/3 SPD difference with the rare but obviously stand-out 4 works fine.