Random musing of the week

[zornwil]

I feel like 4th edition was something like 85% (non-scientifically derived, gut feel) at the right level of detail for mechanics and game rules, and for a universal core system hit it pretty much right at overall level of detail being appropriate. I think a greater attention to the metagame layer and rules application (as opposed to more nuanced rules and specifics) would have been the greater contributionfor a 5th edition overall, and other than laying to rest a few details (such as the Great Linked Debate) and adding a couple powers here and there, more mechanical and rules changes could have been set aside.

 

That said, this is how I feel now as opposed to then, and hindsight is 20/20.

 

I didn't have much in the way of expectations of 5th edition, in terms of specific content, and that brings to mind that in general, on a tangent, I don't see much need for many rules upgrades/updates. I find them interesting, and I enjoy seeing such developments, and I recognize that fixes often are needed. But I've never seen much trouble with fixing things in one's own games and often felt that any given rules edition, if I like it enough to play it, is adequate and I'm not left wanting more, at least not from that game. I've never felt like I "needed" a rules update. I have a hard time understanding, fully, the mindset that does.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I often find myself slightly disappointed with innovations introduced by 5th edition...only to go back and look and find that they were there in the same or substantially the same form in 4th.

 

4th edition somehow felt more exciting though, and perhaps more immediate. I also remember it being an improvement over 3rd (and 2nd and 1st), as I perceived it at the time.

 

I do not feel that the additional page count of 5th edition has added as much as it could, and I would have liked to see more on the underlying mechanical assumptions and philosophy.

 

Nonetheless it is an excellent piece of work and presents a coherent and playable gaming experience. Please assume that this comment underlies eevrything I say in this and every other thread. My constant carping is not because I think this is not a good product. If I thought that I wouldn't use it and I would not be here.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

Oh and why are you sad, zorn?

 

(in answer to the obvious re-post: because I've drunk so much alcohol )

[Manic Typist]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

See, I've started with 5th edition, so I really cannot even begin to understand what you guys mean.

 

I'm confused as to how 4th edition could be "better."

[ghost-angel]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I was reading some reviews over on RPG.Net on Fifth Edition (both 5E and 5ER).

 

One review hit something pretty hard on the head: If you want the rules Sidekick gives them to you in 124 pages. If you took the tiny few things Sidekick didn't have and put them back in it'd probably stretch to 140 pages.

 

What 5ER gives you in all it's 592 page glory is, well, a metric ton of examples. And not just basic examples. Some of those builds are pretty complex, and you get them from pretty much every genre. And a chapter that gives you multiple characters from several major genres. And did we mention examples? I mean the book is just loaded with 'em.

 

Fifth doesn't really have MORE rules than 4th. It does have more ways to implement those rules, more discussions on the ramifications of those rules and more examples of how they might interact.

 

Personally, I'm quite pleased with Fifth. Espeically since it stripped even more of that "Superhero Game" feel out than Fourth did.

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

5th definitely has more rules, if we just talk about total numbers, than 4th, but those rules aren't mechanic-changing (at least from what I can recall), primarily just adding exemptions, managing niche situations, and so on.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I don't know how fair this really is. There are parts of the book that deal with rules; there are parts of the book that discuss genre conventions, and there are parts of the book devoted purely to examples and discussion. And yes, it's 592 pages long and covers the entirety of the game, barring genre specific discussion (Star, Fantasy, Dark, Champions, Pulp, etc.)

 

The d20 PHB is over 200 pages long. Okay. The DMG is just as dense and twice as hard to read, and of course there's the Monster Manual, which is a whole separate text, although it contains additional rules. Speaking of which, new spells, new items, and new Prestige Classes are introduced twice a month like clockwork - so just owning those core texts doesn't even begin to cover the entirety of the game.

 

For half the price of those three books, I have a 592 page book that walks me through all of the reasonable examples I could ask for, and unlike d20, exposes the code by which to design new character classes, items, feats, spells, whatever I want. I've found that as a generalist it's easy to get overwhelmed by all the options, but once you narrow it down, clearly define what you want, it's very easy to build that concept into a mechanic that is 100% usable in game.

 

If anything irks me, it's the exact same thing across all systems - people see a way to do something, or get some weird, semi-broken idea in their head, and insist on trying to make it reality. Certainly HERO can do it - but I will always ask "Why are you doing that?"

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I'm simply making the comment that there are more rules stated in 5th than 4th. On the whole, thats probably reasonable since 4th left a number of things unstated. That's all a tangent in any case to my original comment.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I like rules, and I like consistency, and I accept that there will nearly always be exceptions to rules and the need for consistency. 5th feels a little unweildly, less intuitive than 4th, and that is probably because there is more of it and it has a lot of specific examples I rarely use.

 

The examples are often very straightforward as opposed to 'hard'. I like 'hard' it gives you more to work with and infer. The sort of 'Sean's Ideal World' example I like to see is the sort discussed on page 97, the 'Reasoning from Special Effects' section, where there is actual discussion about power design and options. I don't use most of the examples in the book as they are too specific and lack context, but this stuff is gold.

 

In fact the one thing I would have liked to see is more discussion about the approach to building powers - what makes a consistent set of sfx, how concepts can be realised using the tools in the system, how there are almost always at least a half dozen ways to build something. I think that for the new - and experienced - player, this would be useful. Not 'this is how you SHALL do it', but 'hey - look - this is how I do it - what do you think?'

 

 

 

 

 

PS Glad you are now feeling fine, Zornwil

[Manic Typist]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

5th feels a little unweildly, less intuitive than 4th, and that is probably because there is more of it and it has a lot of specific examples I rarely use.

 

The examples are often very straightforward as opposed to 'hard'. I like 'hard' it gives you more to work with and infer.

 

In fact the one thing I would have liked to see is more discussion about the approach to building powers - what makes a consistent set of sfx, how concepts can be realised using the tools in the system, how there are almost always at least a half dozen ways to build something. I think that for the new - and experienced - player, this would be useful. Not 'this is how you SHALL do it', but 'hey - look - this is how I do it - what do you think?'

 

I think Hero doesn't seem very intuitive, initially, to new players, and thus I greatly appreciate what 5th edition incorporates. I can see, however, why you might view this as a distraction or unnecessary to you. You've got the swing of things, and are ready to move on to more...esoteric, concerns?

 

Again, same response. As a teaching tool, you need to basic, straightforward examples to help instill the proper knowledge. At more advance levels, however, you do need the tricky ones to challenge the player and allow for personal growth.

 

I can see how this would be useful, but there might be some danger of accidentally creating a false image that "This is the best way of doing this."

 

Thoughts?

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I think Hero doesn't seem very intuitive, initially, to new players, and thus I greatly appreciate what 5th edition incorporates. I can see, however, why you might view this as a distraction or unnecessary to you. You've got the swing of things, and are ready to move on to more...esoteric, concerns?

 

Again, same response. As a teaching tool, you need to basic, straightforward examples to help instill the proper knowledge. At more advance levels, however, you do need the tricky ones to challenge the player and allow for personal growth.

 

I can see how this would be useful, but there might be some danger of accidentally creating a false image that "This is the best way of doing this."

 

Thoughts?

I think the book already does exactly what you warn against - its many nuanced examples and rules tend to create a "right way" mentality, I think, as there's more specific rules on situations as opposed to general guidance.

 

I think Champions was inuititive early on but not having been introduced in 4th or 5th, hard to say how others would call that - but the system is really essentially the same as it was 25 years ago, and that ought to be easy to call out.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I think HERO seems counterintuitive to a lot of gamers for the simple reason that HERO, unlike almost all games, does not provide a list of things to choose from and you go "Ok, ready." Instead if provides a list of things to build things to choose from. Which makes a lot of little gamer brains go "uh, whazza?" and go into vaporlock.

 

It's hard to see it from an experienced point of view; but I've seen enough new gamers look at the book and go "I get it, but, no I really don't, you know, GET it."

 

It's not you're average system to be sure.

 

I like 5th more specifically because it leaves less hanging out there in unstated no man's land. Too many players and GMs think "not in the book, can't be done." these days. which is kind of irksome.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I think the book already does exactly what you warn against - its many nuanced examples and rules tend to create a "right way" mentality, I think, as there's more specific rules on situations as opposed to general guidance.

 

I think Champions was inuititive early on but not having been introduced in 4th or 5th, hard to say how others would call that - but the system is really essentially the same as it was 25 years ago, and that ought to be easy to call out.

 

 

I can see that. We just view the same situation slightly differently, but I do acknowledge the possible danger of too many nuanced examples.

 

I think the Hero system IS intuitive (so far at least!), it just does not APPEAR that way, initially.

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I can see that. We just view the same situation slightly differently, but I do acknowledge the possible danger of too many nuanced examples.

 

I think the Hero system IS intuitive (so far at least!), it just does not APPEAR that way, initially.

I totally agree.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I totally agree.

 

I largely agree too: how worrying

 

I think there are some counter-intuitive bits introduced for game balance purposes, but overall the thing I like about Hero over almost every other system is that you can pretty much work it out from some very basic principles.

 

What tends to be danunting abuot Hero is the fact that the characetr creation bit requires so much initial effort: most systems allow you to create characters quickly and with little reading and research: now I can create Hero heroes quickly, but only because I now the system, and even then teh complex ones take a lot longer, but when you start out there is a lot to get through.

 

I've seen 'random Hero generators' - both in program and paper form - and I think that a lot of new players would feel more comfortable with a 10 page 'Basic Hero Creation' section than the massive bit we have at present. You'll get pretty hackneyed characters - bit like all the other random generation systems really - and it would then allow them to dip into character creation at theri own rate when they got bored with Captain 2-D.

 

Sorry, off topic, but it semed the right place to go.

[Black Rose]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

What tends to be daunting about Hero is the fact that the character creation bit requires so much initial effort: most systems allow you to create characters quickly and with little reading and research: now I can create Hero heroes quickly, but only because I now the system, and even then the complex ones take a lot longer, but when you start out there is a lot to get through.

 

I've seen 'random Hero generators' - both in program and paper form - and I think that a lot of new players would feel more comfortable with a 10 page 'Basic Hero Creation' section than the massive bit we have at present. You'll get pretty hackneyed characters - bit like all the other random generation systems really - and it would then allow them to dip into character creation at their own rate when they got bored with Captain 2-D.

 

I liked the one in the Champions source book. It offered enough variation to keep things interesting, at least for a few games - more if you're into various character types. You could have fun with it if you're not too into the tinkering end of things. And it's fun for ideas, you know?

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

The Champions character generator is OK, but after taking a hard look at it over the last few days, I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty broken. It still makes for a good jumping off point for character generation if you're stuck for ideas, and I'm not going to fault the author for tackling a nearly impossible task.

 

My biggest gripes in 5th over 4th (and I don't have revised 5th, just the first one):

 

• Organization could be better for a reference-style book of its size. (Not to knock the Index, which is great.)
  
• Combat "clarifications" that smack more of the author's house rules.
  
• Deconstruction of 4th to the meta system taken too far:
  
  • Talents rewritten as powers.
    
  • Regeneration turned into a big rules hash.
    
  • Shapeshifting likewise turned into a bigger rules extravaganza.

 

Fourth handled all of the above better, IMO. On the other hand, there's not so much change that you can't simply use the 4th Ed. versions of any of the above, so it's not a major gripe.

 

All in all, though, I wouldn't mind seeing something like a beefed up Sidekick, basically 5th with all the rules but most of the fat trimmed. It'd be easier to carry, for one thing.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

Shapeshifting likewise turned into a bigger rules extravaganza.

 

Shapeshift works as it did in 4E, it just uses Senses to unify things a bit.

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

I largely agree too: how worrying

 

I think there are some counter-intuitive bits introduced for game balance purposes, but overall the thing I like about Hero over almost every other system is that you can pretty much work it out from some very basic principles.

 

What tends to be danunting abuot Hero is the fact that the characetr creation bit requires so much initial effort: most systems allow you to create characters quickly and with little reading and research: now I can create Hero heroes quickly, but only because I now the system, and even then teh complex ones take a lot longer, but when you start out there is a lot to get through.

 

I've seen 'random Hero generators' - both in program and paper form - and I think that a lot of new players would feel more comfortable with a 10 page 'Basic Hero Creation' section than the massive bit we have at present. You'll get pretty hackneyed characters - bit like all the other random generation systems really - and it would then allow them to dip into character creation at theri own rate when they got bored with Captain 2-D.

 

Sorry, off topic, but it semed the right place to go.

I would like to see a half-way elegant system to put something down such as "great scientist, botany background, into chemistry, also was a swordfighter" and then have a quick translator of some sort to put that into HERO character terms in play. But that's easy to say....the closest I've seen and considered doing myself have been more workable in a single campaign where there are known maxes and mins and a variety of limitations enough around the design process that such a generation from general character sketch to in-play mechanics is possible.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

HERO is all about providing options both during character creation and actuall game play. What it lacks most right now is a compact or standardized vocabulary to describe a GM's house rules (whatever they may be) from the character/player viewpoint. We often compare character builds of some sort on this forum but their full meaning is often blurred until we bring in the associated house rules that they will be operating within.

 

Maybe we need another Ultimate book dedicated to Game Mastering in general focused just on introducing and using HERO with new players (both new to RPG's in general as well as experienced gamers otherwise unfamiliar with HERO). This book would not be genre specific but like the Combat Handbook and Equipment Guide could certainly pull certain passages from the Genre books.

 

I would buy such a book.

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

HERO is all about providing options both during character creation and actuall game play. What it lacks most right now is a compact or standardized vocabulary to describe a GM's house rules (whatever they may be) from the character/player viewpoint. We often compare character builds of some sort on this forum but their full meaning is often blurred until we bring in the associated house rules that they will be operating within.

 

Maybe we need another Ultimate book dedicated to Game Mastering in general focused just on introducing and using HERO with new players (both new to RPG's in general as well as experienced gamers otherwise unfamiliar with HERO). This book would not be genre specific but like the Combat Handbook and Equipment Guide could certainly pull certain passages from the Genre books.

 

I would buy such a book.

Really great point re house rules, I think all HERO games are by definition a mixture of the book and strong interplay with house rules, both as metarules providing conventions which is necessary given HERO's agnosticism here, but also as specific configurations of the options along with various interpretations and exceptions for a particular play style/experience. While I hear lots of people say they "don't have house rules" in my experience all ultimately indicate very specific group interpretations which vary with others' interpretations and what DOJ occasionally pronounces as orthodox, plus we nearly all make exceptions for certain circumstances, whether in character building or in play.

[Checkmate]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

To Zorn's inital post a little aside: The Great Linked Debate was actually solved a VERY long time before people would let it go. WAY back when Bruce Harlick was in charge of the boards, someone asked about linking STR to a Flash Attack. Bruce's response was that if you did that any time you used your STR your flash would go off. The examples he used: Shake someone's hand, you flash them. Clap someone on the back, you flash them. Lift up a box your flash goes off. This said that in his eyes (and his eyes were law at the time) the two powers HAD to be used together, but no one wanted to see that and continued the debate.

 

Now to this:

I don't know how fair this really is. There are parts of the book that deal with rules; there are parts of the book that discuss genre conventions, and there are parts of the book devoted purely to examples and discussion. And yes, it's 592 pages long and covers the entirety of the game, barring genre specific discussion (Star, Fantasy, Dark, Champions, Pulp, etc.)

 

The d20 PHB is over 200 pages long. Okay. The DMG is just as dense and twice as hard to read, and of course there's the Monster Manual, which is a whole separate text, although it contains additional rules. Speaking of which, new spells, new items, and new Prestige Classes are introduced twice a month like clockwork - so just owning those core texts doesn't even begin to cover the entirety of the game.

 

For half the price of those three books, I have a 592 page book that walks me through all of the reasonable examples I could ask for, and unlike d20, exposes the code by which to design new character classes, items, feats, spells, whatever I want. I've found that as a generalist it's easy to get overwhelmed by all the options, but once you narrow it down, clearly define what you want, it's very easy to build that concept into a mechanic that is 100% usable in game.

 

If anything irks me, it's the exact same thing across all systems - people see a way to do something, or get some weird, semi-broken idea in their head, and insist on trying to make it reality. Certainly HERO can do it - but I will always ask "Why are you doing that?"

 

Don't take this as a plug for D20, I much prefer HERO, however your statement is INCREDIBLY misleading.

 

First, the PHB and the DMG combined cost about as much as Fred, and you get about the same thing. More if you consider that the PHB and DMG give you the basis for a setting that Fred doesn't provide.

 

While Fred does provide examples of powers, I don't find them all that helpful. I mean Claws: HKA and Tough Skin: Damage Resistance 20/20 aren't my idea of a big help. Most of the examples are very basic. Sure they may add a focus or charges here and there, but not rocket science. If you want REAL examples you have to buy Until Superpowers Database.

 

Then you mention the Monster Manual, that is akin to an enemies book in HERO. In D20 you're just as able to create your own enemies as you are in HERO.

 

Then in HERO if you wanted say a Champions setting, you'd have to buy Champions and then Champions Universe.

 

You mention adding prestige classes and other rules in other books with D20, which is EXACTLY like the Ultimate line of books in HERO.

 

So while I agree that HERO is a MUCH better system, I, in no way, feel it's more cost effective.

[zornwil]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

To Zorn's inital post a little aside: The Great Linked Debate was actually solved a VERY long time before people would let it go. WAY back when Bruce Harlick was in charge of the boards, someone asked about linking STR to a Flash Attack. Bruce's response was that if you did that any time you used your STR your flash would go off. The examples he used: Shake someone's hand, you flash them. Clap someone on the back, you flash them. Lift up a box your flash goes off. This said that in his eyes (and his eyes were law at the time) the two powers HAD to be used together, but no one wanted to see that and continued the debate.

 

Now to this:

 

 

Don't take this as a plug for D20, I much prefer HERO, however your statement is INCREDIBLY misleading.

 

First, the PHB and the DMG combined cost about as much as Fred, and you get about the same thing. More if you consider that the PHB and DMG give you the basis for a setting that Fred doesn't provide.

 

While Fred does provide examples of powers, I don't find them all that helpful. I mean Claws: HKA and Tough Skin: Damage Resistance 20/20 aren't my idea of a big help. Most of the examples are very basic. Sure they may add a focus or charges here and there, but not rocket science. If you want REAL examples you have to buy Until Superpowers Database.

 

Then you mention the Monster Manual, that is akin to an enemies book in HERO. In D20 you're just as able to create your own enemies as you are in HERO.

 

Then in HERO if you wanted say a Champions setting, you'd have to buy Champions and then Champions Universe.

 

You mention adding prestige classes and other rules in other books with D20, which is EXACTLY like the Ultimate line of books in HERO.

 

So while I agree that HERO is a MUCH better system, I, in no way, feel it's more cost effective.

Interesting, thanks for the info re Bruce's pronouncement.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

First' date=' the PHB and the DMG combined cost about as much as Fred, and you get about the same thing. More if you consider that the PHB and DMG give you the basis for a setting that Fred doesn't provide.[/quote']

 

No - they cost more by MSRP.

 

Rest of the point stands.

[Checkmate]

Re: Random musing of the week

 

No - they cost more by MSRP.

 

Rest of the point stands.

 

I can get both PHB and DMG 3.5ed for $40 new at Amazon.com www.amazon.com/Dungeon-Masters-Guide-Rulebook-Dragons/dp/0786928891/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b/102-7245922-1559352

Same site has the newest edition at $50 and a used copy of of 5th non-revised at $35.

 

Cheaper and includes a setting, talk semantics all you want those are the facts. And to clarify, I said ABOUT the same (I would consider a $10 difference about the same.

 

As far as the rest of the points, they don't stand. You CAN create new classes, feats, spells and skills and if you read the DMG it tells you how. Are the mechanics as elegant? Heck no, maybe that's why I prefer HERO to D20, but bad doesn't mean non-exsistent.