Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

[DarkClaw]

Looking to start a Superhero game with a new group. Only 2 of us have ever played with the Hero system. In your opinions what system would be easier on new players? What one is better for character development? Thanks for any replys.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

You don't honestly think you'd get an objective opinion about that here, do you? It'd be like going over to the M&M forum and asking the same question. The people who're on each forum are biased to that particular game system.

[DarkClaw]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

I know that like myself, others play more than just the one system they love. Alot use other system for ideas as well as diffrent looks at how things are dealt with in other systems. I guess what I'm looking for are those few rare individuals that are very well versed in many different systems and could give some of their insight and wisdom. My bad for not being more specific with my request.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Both games are point based and effects based. M&M is a dedicated genre game and it's rules reflect that. Hero is a universal game and it's rules reflect that. Character creation and combat speed will be faster in M&M. Granularity and exactness will be much more prevalent in Hero. Hero uses more "hard" rules to govern play while M&M uses more player and gm interaction.

 

Which game will be easier to learn will be entirely based on the players. Some people can immediately grasp Hero, some can't [that's the same for M&M where I've seen many D&D players struggle with the idea of effects based]. Hero has Sidekick which can help ease some of the fears 5Er causes. M&M will be coming out with it's Beginner's Guide at the end of the month.

 

That's about as unbiased as I can make it.

[susandwyer]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Hero (duh).

[Spence]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Arrrgggghhhhh!

 

I hate you all!!!

 

 

 

 

Just kidding

 

 

 

 

Now I have to go buy at least the core book so I can at least follow comments intelligently.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Now I have to go buy at least the core book so I can at least follow comments intelligently.

Make sure you buy a copy of M&M 2e. 1e sucks.

 

If you're just wanting to see the rules without the gm's section get the Pocket Player's Guide. It's black and white but only half the price.

[Spence]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Make sure you buy a copy of M&M 2e. 1e sucks.

 

If you're just wanting to see the rules without the gm's section get the Pocket Player's Guide. It's black and white but only half the price.

 

I'll probably get the full book. I find a GM section to be a lot of help in getting a "feel" for a game.

 

A quick question. Is M&M a D20 clone?

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

I'll probably get the full book. I find a GM section to be a lot of help in getting a "feel" for a game.

 

A quick question. Is M&M a D20 clone?

It's an ogl game based on d20. It uses a different system engine though, so no hit points, levels, classes, etc.

[Spence]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

It's an ogl game based on d20. It uses a different system engine though' date=' so no hit points, levels, classes, etc.[/quote']

 

Thats good, I have an irrational knee jerk reaction to class/level systems

[transmetahuman]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

It's an ogl game based on d20. It uses a different system engine though' date=' so no hit points, levels, classes, etc.[/quote']

Actually, it does use levels. They do approximately the same job as "starting points + active points cap" do in Hero.

[Barton]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Looking to start a Superhero game with a new group. Only 2 of us have ever played with the Hero system. In your opinions what system would be easier on new players? What one is better for character development? Thanks for any replys.

 

I say Hero. I gm a Champions game and two pulp games using the system. It is a lot of fun to play or to gm.

 

At GenCon 2006 the writter of M&M did a demo which I played in. I was NOT impressed with M&M. IMHO the lack of detail in M&M is a major problem. Too much is left to the gm to decide. M&M characters do not require disadvantages, and as a gm disadvantages are great plot hooks and make a character three dimensional.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Actually' date=' it does use levels. They do approximately the same job as "starting points + active points cap" do in Hero.[/quote']

PL is actually a rule of x in M&M, not a traditional level in the D&D sense. It governs the maximum combat efficiency a character can have. Starting points are disassociated with PL though 15 per rank is suggested.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

M&M characters do not require disadvantages' date=' and as a gm disadvantages are great plot hooks and make a character three dimensional.[/quote']

Actually not true. It uses a complication system where the characters are rewarded with hero points when their complications [aunt May, hunted, etc] come into play. You don't get points for them at character creation. You get hero point for them during play.

[Barton]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Actually not true. It uses a complication system where the characters are rewarded with hero points when their complications [aunt May' date= hunted, etc] come into play. You don't get points for them at character creation. You get hero point for them during play.

 

I asked the designer and he said they are NOT required. That is my point, it is not required.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

I asked the designer and he said they are NOT required. That is my point' date=' it is not required.[/quote']

Disadvantages are not required in Hero either.

 

In M&M you take disads to make the character more interesting and to earn hero points. In Hero you take disads to earn starting points. M&M doesn't force you to take disads if you don't want them, but complications are one of the major ways to earn hero points in the game.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Disadvantages are not required in Hero either.

 

I'd say there's a huge difference in running a 200 point character with no disadvantages in a game with 150 points of disadvantages allowed (where everyone else is going to take the full 350 and most villains are going to be built assuming you took your 350) versus a lot of other systems where you get only a handfull of points to round out your character. I don't know the numbers for M&M, but let's say BESM at 50 pts + 5 or so pts for example.

 

Of course, I know you weren't overly serious in that statement. =)

 

Still, Hero assumes you're going to take a LOT more points in Disadvantages than a lot of competing systems.

[novi]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

To be completely fair, you can run a Champions game where you just give all the players 350 points and they get no points for disadvantages. But very few people do, as it rings too munchkin. But yes, M&M characters don't require any disadvantages.

 

From what I've seen in the few sessions of it I've played, it's an okay system. It gets rid of hit points for a fairly cinematic damage system (Bruised, Staggered, Unconscious, or Dead). And it replaces the clunky class/level bs for figuring out your character's abilities with a point-buy system. (What? Me, biased?) But on the other hand, it has a much different balance between powers than HERO does. I wish I had a good, concrete example now, but one escapes me.

 

One important difference is that in M&M, everyone has the same SPD. While potentially much simpler to run a combat with, it does make it a little one dimensional.

 

But as to your original questions, which would be easier on new players? If they've played mostly D&D, then definitely M&M; otherwise, just probably M&M. The book has prettier pictures, and it doesn't trigger the same irrational fear of math that keeps people from doing their own taxes.

 

And as to which is better for character development? Parsing error. I'm not sure what you mean by that phrase. If by development you mean character complexity and depth, I'd have to say HERO, if just because you have to sit down and think out 150 points worth of background and disadvantages. And more granularity in what you can do. If by development you refer to character advancement/leveling up speed, than the answer is M&M, since it will take fewer XP to buy anything new than in HERO.

 

All things considered, I prefer HERO overall. I find its a better, more rational system with broader applicability. But its had more development time, and I have no irrational fears of math.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

I haven't played M&M. I played a ton of d20 and many other systems, but since I never went for super hero genre simulation, I never needed to pick it up. At the end of the day its a matter of taste; I like my mechanics to make a lot of heavy crunching sounds, so what I've read about M&M doesn't really appeal to me; with HERO I have a single core toolkit that I can use to do Damn Near Anything .

 

However, MitchellS has a great point: even were the boards generally unbiased (and they aren't) it's very difficult to get an unbiased opinion since many of these cats were playing HERO when it was in 1st Ed. And that's a really, really long time ago.

[MitchellS]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

I'd say there's a huge difference in running a 200 point character with no disadvantages in a game with 150 points of disadvantages allowed (where everyone else is going to take the full 350 and most villains are going to be built assuming you took your 350) versus a lot of other systems where you get only a handfull of points to round out your character. I don't know the numbers for M&M' date=' but let's say BESM at 50 pts + 5 or so pts for example.[/quote']

I once played in a game where the GM decided that everyone's "true" point totals needed to be the same, so if you bought 300 points of powers in armor and it costs you 200 points with the OIF, then you only got to spend 50 more points on the rest of the character. That made you a 350 true point character even though you were only built on 250 points because you got 100 free points from the focus [but I only had to buy 50 points of disads ]. That was a math nightmare, but it was more balanced.

 

Still, Hero assumes you're going to take a LOT more points in Disadvantages than a lot of competing systems.

The difference is that in Hero you really must take those disads to get the points, and because the rules limit you to 50 points per category you're really required to take at least 3 different categories [50 points of hunted, 50 psychics, etc]. Hero forces you into character development.

 

In M&M having a sickly Aunt and a girlfriend, or a rogue's gallery, or a fear of snakes, are worth hero points. Hero points are worth 10x more value then starting points in M&M. You're not required to have them but if you don't you're going to be a boring character to role play with and you're hero points totals are going to be low.

[BigJackBrass]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

A friend of mine bought a copy of Mutants and Masterminds 2nd Edition for me and he is now interested in running a supers game. Naturally, I'm the test subject so that he can decide which system to use.

 

Although he owns Hero and has read through it he tells me that he has been finding the system quite difficult to grasp. Considering that this is a chap who used to enjoy Aftermath and Chivalry & Sorcery I think that it's less a matter of complexity than one of underlying concepts.

 

In some respects M&M has taken a lot from Hero, and I have to say that it's a very good system, quite nicely presented. Character creation, which I've been working through this afternoon, is relatively straightforward but I can't say that it seems vastly quicker than with Hero. Combat may well be, but I've not given it a run through as yet.

 

Both games look good and both could well serve your needs, but I will say that M&M is - understandably - much more limited than Hero. Although it is an effects-based system the range of options is smaller and I suspect that supplements will have to address this. If you want the most flexibility off the bat then Hero is my strong recommendation. Nonetheless, from what I've seen of it so far M&M is not a system to dismiss depending on what you need to do with it. A bit vague (sorry!) but it's clear that some people can "get" one system without being able to grasp the other. For my part, I feel that Hero gives much wider scope as well as greater control of detail. Not everyone needs that, of course.

[Spence]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Well, as I said I will have to pick up M&M core so I can form an opinion. I have several supers systems already, SuperHero 2044, DC Hero, Blood of Heroes, Heroes Unlimited, Villain and Vigilantes. And a couple of others I can’t remember the names for that are buried in “the stacks”. So far none of them have measured up to Hero, IMO anyway. Plus Hero has the advantage of low to zero conversion for pretty much all of the genres I enjoy playing. And the major advantage of not requiring any additional books to play other genres. They have them available, but none of the supplements are required. I like that. Plus the supplements do not routinely introduce “new stuff” that mandates its purchase because everything made “using just the original books” is defacto outmatched by anything in the “new” books. One of the reasons I can’t stand some of the current RPG lines. Each supplement is touted as “you don’t HAVE to use it because the GM can say no”, but everybody knows that if your group all run out and sink $ into a shiny new book, they want to USE it. And get disgruntled if they can’t.

 

So I prefer games where I don't have to spend a few hours in damage control, plot adjustment or other time consuming paperwork just because the publisher whats to throw out another half baked supplement without bothering to balance check it.

 

[/rant] :D

[Spence]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

...... I think that it's less a matter of complexity than one of underlying concepts.

 

My guess is it will be related to how Hero handles SFX and the whole "Reason from Effect" thing. Have him log into the boards, there's a whole crowd who can crack that nut if asked. I was lucky to learn about it way back in '82 when the rulebook was really really small and didn't tax my brain cell too much.

[zornwil]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

Dark Claw, normally I don't resort to "go search" but in this case a search on "Mutants Masterminds" will yield all sorts of ongoing conversation on these boards.

 

It's difficult to answer your question without knowing more about what kind of game you and your group want to play, what style, what you aesthetically like in games, etc. - by the same token, it's a lot to ask! I think if you search through the various M&M/HERO arguments you'll see it's easy to tap into how HEROites here feel.

[zornwil]

Re: Champions Or Mutants & Masterminds?

 

I asked the designer and he said they are NOT required. That is my point' date=' it is not required.[/quote']

Basically, I think the way the game flows one very quickly realizes it's not as much fun without using complications just as one has the same revelation with HERO. And as far as how the book reads and so on, it pretty much guides people to use those just about as heavily as HERO guides people to doing disads, maybe less directly, MAYBE, but not by much at all. Put it this way, I can't imagine a group in which all PCs wouldn't end up with issues that players voluntarily apply to their characters, I don't see how you'd read the book (even at the most cursory glance) and end up doing otherwise.