"Outsider" perspective on Hero System

[nexus]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

That's because they aren't looking for realism. Realism isn't very much fun. They're looking for verisimilitude. Two different things.

 

That's pretty much what I said in the rest of the post. They're looking for something that fits their expectation of how things should work, not how something actually work or maybe how they've seen it work in movies and TV shows.

 

Also IME, the loudest complainers are often looking for an "I win" button but that's a topic for another thread.

 

Edit: Looking back at my post I didn't make my intent very clear.

[schir1964]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

I was simply pointing out that a more accurate description might be better.

 

Instead of "Build Anything", perhaps "Most Flexible System" or "Most Customizable System".

 

I'm fine with Ultimate Toolkit, but what does the average customer think of when they read that?

It would be interesting to find that out and then decide if it is even worth the effort to make a change.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[bigbywolfe]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

When I first picked up 5er the only other superhero game I had played was Marvel Universe RPG. I bought it after reading the back of the book and the intro, and comparing it to GURPS and D20 Modern. Was HERO 5th ed rev what I expected? Not at all. But after I read the book cover to cover, I was blown away. This game has exceded my expectaions every step of the way. By the time I finished the "Powers" section of the book I was amazed every gamer I know who plays anything other than D&D wasn't playing this, especially the comic geeks.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

must activate life support: breath hubris...

 

you okay there?

 

 

HERO is good at providing you with numbers, thats for sure, but its not necessarily good at providing you with good number, so when it comes to creating your own numbers, it really becomes a case of are you doing the things hero does well or the things it does bad?

 

the best thing about HERO is that its numbers are consistant and mathematicaly sound. Thus, it is quite easy for those who understand the math behind the core concepts to implant new ideas and mechanics directly into the system and have them work extremely well with the core mechanics. In fact, I would go so far as to say that at least 90% of all "new" mechanics inserted into the system via individual group House Rules are in fact, not new mechanics, but simply extrapolation and extension of existing mechanics.

A perfect example would be the "Turn Undead" ability I defined for Fantasy Hero on the old (old, old....old?) message boards WAY back in the day. Essentially using a PRE attack against Undead. The mechanics were already present within the system, they only had to be tailored to work against undead beasties. This mechanic works so well with the core mechanics already present in the system, that this method made it into the official 5th edition version of Fantasy Hero (I'm not implying that Steve used my method, simply that such a House Rule....as it was at the time I suggested it...was so in-line with the system that it was implemented as an optional rule) However well it worked within the constraints of the core game system, I encountered opposition who insisted that 'Presence attacks don't work against Automatons like Zombies and Skeletons'. These individuals were such slaves to the rules, they couldn't see beyond them to the obvious answer that lay right before their very eyes. To be a true "master" of any RPG rules system, one must learn to go beyond the rules.

 

For example: i can easily build a character as capable as the xman colossus, say early days, on 250 cp. I cannot really come close to building the xman rogue (pre-ms marvel days) on the same points because the costs are so high for either the gazillion form multiform (req handwaving) or the super-huge vpp that she cannot effectively be built on the same budget.

 

Pre-Ms. Marvel Rogue is easy: Other than her ability to absorb the powers of others, she is in no way shape or form remarkable. Thus, I would build the girl Rogue herself on about 50points (skills, talents, Perks etc) and spend the other 200 points on her mimic VPP. It would consist of a large Variable Power Pool (which would obviously hit close to the campaign Active Point limits) and a healthy Transfer, that shifted points to the VPP. Assuming a +2 advantage on the Transfer (affects all powers of a given SFX etc) you could do a 1D6 Transfer +10 to maximum (can transfer a maximum of 16 cp) at 60 active or 1D6 +30 (maximum of 36cp transfer) at 90 active. Assuming a 90 active point Variable Power Pool, that would allow 24pts added to the VPP for a total of 114pts available in the VPP after maximum absorbtion. She could easily absorb Collosus abilities on those points, or Cyclops' eye beams, or Wolverine's healing factor and senses, or Jean Grey's telepathy....sure she couldn't absorb Surfer's Power Cosmic, but thats as things should be. Rogue can "overload".

Really, the only thing preventing someone from designing an accurate representation of Rogue are active point caps, and if thats whats in your way, simply get rid of them! A good GM will let a good player make a broken character if that GM is confident in the players ability to roleplay as opposed to rollplay.

 

So while the hero numbers may seem consistent, they are not necessarily accurate.

 

Nope, they just need to be consistant. Accuracy is the responsibility of the designer and that will come with experience.

 

then again, i dont think we have to look far before we have hero experts trying to explain to me that total cp aren't a measure of "effectiveness" and how i just dont get it. :-)

 

 

They are both. On a basic level, they measure effectiveness, however, the efficiency of the build is a major consideration as well.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

I keep feeling like I should participate more in this discussion, but I can't seem to get a handle on how to contribute meaningfully. It seems like lots of people are talking about different things when they think they're talking about the same things, which makes it hard to find a useful beginning to the conversation...

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

I keep feeling like I should participate more in this discussion' date=' but I can't seem to get a handle on how to contribute meaningfully. It seems like lots of people are talking about different things when they think they're talking about the same things, which makes it hard to find a useful beginning to the conversation...[/quote']

 

Welcome to the Internet!

[ghost-angel]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

I keep feeling like I should participate more in this discussion' date=' but I can't seem to get a handle on how to contribute meaningfully. It seems like lots of people are talking about different things when they think they're talking about the same things, which makes it hard to find a useful beginning to the conversation...[/quote']

 

It's all about the pie.

 

 

This is one of those conversations where you can

a) state your opinion on the idea (the universality of HERO), and be satisfied.

2) state your opinion on the idea and then argue in circles, restating your opinion in different words, for days.

 

Me... I have a piece of pumpkin pie waiting.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

I'm not sure this statement is true as far as the topic of this thread is concerned.

 

If lacking a mechanic or construction rules that allows one to obtain a desired effect is not relevant to living up to the claim of "Build Anything You Want Or Can Imagine", then it would follow the corollary would be true: "All Game Systems Allow You To Build Anything You Want Or Can Imagine" since any lacking mechanics or rules construction is not relevant.

 

All game systems do allow you to build anything you want or can imagine. All of them. All one needs is a basic understanding of the core mechanics upon which the game depends and one can then design anything they want for the system.

I've done this from day 1 of being a GM. I played D&D (not even AD&D, I'm talking about the old red boxed set!) a few times and decided "we need a hit location chart". A few games later I decided we needed critical hit and fumble rules. A few sessions beyond that I added a crapload of new spells, then created a few new character classes (one of which was a beastmaster) and so on and so forth. Then I graduated to AD&D, but I kept adding stuff. My problem came when I left home and tried to join in other peoples D&D games...they didn't use any of the stuff that made my games what they were and I decided I didn't like D&D "as is". Thats what made me go on my quest for the "One True Game" and eventually choose HERO. Of course, I don't even play HERO "as is", but its modular design appeals to me. I have yet to run into a character, vehicle, item or creature that I can't design.

 

 

 

So the point that really matters is how should the Hero System be categorized if it fails the test of Ultimate Toolkit (To Build Anything).

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Thats just it, in my opinion(of course) its not the toolkit that fails, its the handyman. The tools are simply there, waiting to be used. HERO is a fully stocked tool kit which will allow you to build just about anything. Any GM worth his salt should be able to use it to hammer together a workable and functioning Fantasy game or Space Opera game, or Superhero game. The one's who can't....well they simply don't know how to use the tools that were made available to them.

 

It is essentially a matter of perspective. I've come go the conclusion that a lot of gamers want the book to tell them what to do. HERO's strength and ironically, its greatest weakness is that the book suggests what to do and gives examples, but these are not set in stone. The end result is completely and totally up to the builder.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

It's all about the pie.

 

 

This is one of those conversations where you can

a) state your opinion on the idea (the universality of HERO), and be satisfied.

2) state your opinion on the idea and then argue in circles, restating your opinion in different words, for days.

 

.

 

Hey! Thats me!

[薔薇語]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Me... I have a piece of pumpkin pie waiting.

 

Pumpkin

 

Apple is the only way to go.

 

La Rose

[bigbywolfe]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

...actually here I am using hyperbole myself. Never mind 'indestructible and all powerful', here's an example of something a player wanted - a taser gun. Hit someone with the taser dart and they are pretty much instantly unconscious (or incapacitated) for some time. Not unrealistic. You see it a lot in lots of genres - but, because of the nature of Hero it is expensive to build at the level of effect it is usually demonstrated as operating at. An instant KO is hard to pull off in a point balance game, and this was Dark Champions - basically non-super humans with lots of fun equipment, training and attitude.

 

Sure you can build it in Hero, you just pile on damage and DEX drains until you can KO anything, but you can't just hand that to a PC when other PCs have point constraints.

 

Not a criticism of the system as such - you have to decide what is more important - game balance or realism, but the system does big itself up to the point where those unfamilar with it may well be disappointed with what they actually get - so not a criticism of the players either. It is a criticism of the hype.

 

 

 

I’m not at home so I don’t have access to the HD3, but I was thinking about the Taser question. First and foremost, as pointed out above, in real life tasers are under no stretch of the imagination one hit KO weapons. That having been said, I’m wondering if you’ve included all the necessary Limitations to make a taser “realistic”…

 

Besides being an OAF -1, with charges +/- depending on how you set up the charges (possibly requiring 2 sets of charges, one for the battery or power source and one for the compressed air that actually fires the weapon), it also needs the Real Weapon limitation -¼, Beam -¼, No Knockback -¼, Range Limitation (since range on both EB and RKA are based on point value this is especially important since most tasers fire about 15ft to 21ft [police ones have the longer range than civilian models], that’s about 2.25 hexes to 3.4 hexes, which may or may not justify a bigger limitation than the regular -¼ for limited range).

 

You would probably need some way of indicating that after the first shot the weapon is not usable on anyone else until a) contact is broken with the first target, and the darts are retracted (probably another Limitation, reload time after every shot?). You do have the benefit that once a target is hit he is sort of under the same conditions as being Covered, yet all he has to do to change that is move out of the weapon’s range or physically pull the darts out (not sure how to show that).

 

 

Although tasers and hand guns don’t work all that similarly in real life, I think they are alike enough in game terms to use one of the book’s example hand guns and work from there. Personally, I would use RKA, not EB, since, once you apply NND it won’t do body damage anyway. I would also suggest using the standard effect rule for the taser, even if it’s not commonly used in your campaign, for several reasons. As long as a tazer connects it always delivers the same amount of electricity, it’s not nearly as variable as, say, a bullet tearing through various parts of a body. Also, tasers are almost exclusively fired at the chest or back (which might not matter if you aren’t using hit locations, but I think is a good reason for making the damage somewhat standard). Theoretically you could fire a taser at someone’s head, but chances are the darts will simply cut the skin and bounce of the skull, unless they manage to stick in the neck or a particularly fleshy cheek (an idea I don’t really relish). If you are using the hit location chart I would probably require a called shot to the chest, since the likeliness of getting both prongs in someone’s hand, or even arm, isn’t that likely.

 

I should note that traditional tasers are effective because they interfere with the communication within the nervous system, but people with a high tolerance to electrical stimulation, or simply a high pain tolerance, or exceptional muscle control, can shrug off the effect of a single shot. There are new Electro-Muscular Disruption devices that not only interfere with the nervous system, but effectively override it, forcing muscles to contract, which usually causes the subject to curl into the fetal position due to the muscle contraction. Even these newer, more potent, taser weapons, do not regularly cause unconsciousness with a single or even several shots.

 

A much weaker, hand held stun gun to the back of the head or neck near the brain stem, or a well placed bunch to the jaw or temple, have a higher likely hood of one hit KOing an average person than a taser...tasers just hurt a hell of a lot more and make your muscles do funny things.

[BNakagawa]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

As I pointed out in the original thread (granted it is on rpg.net where a lot of us don't tend to go), some of the OP's examples are unfair because they represent design choices as opposed to design flaws.

 

He said you couldn't make a character who was immune to fire.

 

The counterpoint is that you can have a character who is immune to fire or you could have a character with the ability to burn anything.

 

No game system can accommodate both character designs. By his own example, no game system can ever be universal. The game designer must choose one or the other. (or neither)

 

Likewise, automatically hitting and the ability to be unhittable are by definition impossible to model with the same game system, so again, no game system can ever be universal, since at least one of the two above concepts must be illegal.

[incrdbil]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

must activate life support: breath hubris...

 

 

For example: i can easily build a character as capable as the xman colossus, say early days, on 250 cp. I cannot really come close to building the xman rogue (pre-ms marvel days) on the same points because the costs are so high for either the gazillion form multiform (req handwaving) or the super-huge vpp that she cannot effectively be built on the same budget.

 

So its the HERO system fault that a comic had characters of wildly different power levels working together?

 

I'm supposing Batman and Superman, since they often worked together, should be able to be built onthe same point base.

 

Comics don't have to worry as much as a RPG plot about balance, equal treatment of characters, or even consistancy of power levels from issue to uissue

 

 

So while the hero numbers may seem consistent, they are not necessarily accurate.

 

I'm not sure how you can bring in 'accuracy' into the picture here. The situation you are creating has no degree of measurement, no common basis for comparison, and starts on a faulty and flawed premise that Collosus and Rogue had some form of equality in power levels.

 

then again, i dont think we have to look far before we have hero experts trying to explain to me that total cp aren't a measure of "effectiveness" and how i just dont get it.

 

Well, come up with something to discuss, and maybe we could see if you do.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

As I pointed out in the original thread (granted it is on rpg.net where a lot of us don't tend to go), some of the OP's examples are unfair because they represent design choices as opposed to design flaws.

 

He said you couldn't make a character who was immune to fire.

 

The counterpoint is that you can have a character who is immune to fire or you could have a character with the ability to burn anything.

 

No game system can accommodate both character designs. By his own example, no game system can ever be universal. The game designer must choose one or the other. (or neither)

 

Likewise, automatically hitting and the ability to be unhittable are by definition impossible to model with the same game system, so again, no game system can ever be universal, since at least one of the two above concepts must be illegal.

 

Great point. I forgot that I was going to say something like that earlier. It's the classic "what happens when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object?" question.

Can God make a boulder that he couldn’t lift? Can HERO make an absolute that doesn’t have an equal and opposite absolute?

[Lord Liaden]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

It's all about the pie.

 

 

This is one of those conversations where you can

a) state your opinion on the idea (the universality of HERO), and be satisfied.

2) state your opinion on the idea and then argue in circles, restating your opinion in different words, for days.

 

Me... I have a piece of pumpkin pie waiting.

 

Nowadays I tend to bail on topics like this early, because for me the subject isn't worth the effort of proving myself "right" against a dedicated arguer. Debate can be an interesting intellectual exercise, but at the end of the day this is just a game; one meant to be enjoyable, not stressful.

 

Like I said early on the thread: HERO isn't perfect, it isn't for everyone, and one has the right not to like it for whatever reason. IMHO it can be made better, and I like hearing other people's ideas on how to do that, as well as offering my own. I don't want to compel anyone to agree with my ideas, or feel compelled to agree with anyone else's.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

True, but there's a difference between differing opinions and outright falacies, particularly ones that border on slandering the system the person supposedly likes.

[schir1964]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

All game systems do allow you to build anything you want or can imagine. All of them. All one needs is a basic understanding of the core mechanics upon which the game depends and one can then design anything they want for the system...

Perfectly valid opinion given that one would agree with your definitions you've put forth.

...It is essentially a matter of perspective. I've come go the conclusion that a lot of gamers want the book to tell them what to do. HERO's strength and ironically' date=' its greatest weakness is that the book [i']suggests[/i] what to do and gives examples, but these are not set in stone. The end result is completely and totally up to the builder.

And there is nothing wrong with having that perspective.

 

However, my take on the intent of this thread was the expectations of someone who read the outside of the book, and how those expectations were not met when they started delving into the system. Now whether those expectations were reasonable can be debated and will remain in the realm of opinion, but the important factor is whether such expectations are common among the average gamer.

 

Of course all of this is completely separate from the other side of the coin, which has to do with the intended design of a game system.

 

If the intent is for the system to be a "Game System" not a "Toolkit For Building A Game System" then it does not matter if anyone can rebuild the Game System beyond its original design and expand it to something it was never designed for. That does not redefine a "Game System" to be a "Toolkit For Building A Game System".

 

If the intent is for the system to be a "Toolkit For Building A Game System", then that system by design will not be a "Game System" in and of itself by definition regardless of the number of "Game Systems" that can be built from it.

 

Ackk! I've delved too deeply into the philosophies of game design again. (8^D)

 

Summary: While I understand your viewpoint and have no problems with it, I doubt that the majority of average gamers would have your viewpoint. And I was simply approaching it from that perspective.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Vondy]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

It's all about the pie.

 

 

This is one of those conversations where you can

a) state your opinion on the idea (the universality of HERO), and be satisfied.

2) state your opinion on the idea and then argue in circles, restating your opinion in different words, for days.

 

Me... I have a piece of pumpkin pie waiting.

 

I'm making a pecan pie.

 

And, I agree with you. More and more I adopt the Killer Shrike mode of internet debate: state my opinion and give it two or three exchanges. After that, we're past any chance of agreement. Its just arguing for its own sake.

[Vondy]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Perfectly valid opinion given that one would agree with your definitions you've put forth.

 

And there is nothing wrong with having that perspective.

 

However, my take on the intent of this thread was the expectations of someone who read the outside of the book, and how those expectations were not met when they started delving into the system. Now whether those expectations were reasonable can be debated and will remain in the realm of opinion, but the important factor is whether such expectations are common among the average gamer.

 

Of course all of this is completely separate from the other side of the coin, which has to do with the intended design of a game system.

 

If the intent is for the system to be a "Game System" not a "Toolkit For Building A Game System" then it does not matter if anyone can rebuild the Game System beyond its original design and expand it to something it was never designed for. That does not redefine a "Game System" to be a "Toolkit For Building A Game System".

 

If the intent is for the system to be a "Toolkit For Building A Game System", then that system by design will not be a "Game System" in and of itself by definition regardless of the number of "Game Systems" that can be built from it.

 

Ackk! I've delved too deeply into the philosophies of game design again. (8^D)

 

Summary: While I understand your viewpoint and have no problems with it, I doubt that the majority of average gamers would have your viewpoint. And I was simply approaching it from that perspective.

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Personally, this is where Hero has routinely failed (IMO).

 

Since 4th edition Hero has focused on the toolkit, genre books [genre toolkits], and ultimate series [character design toolkits] and done very little to provide ready to play settings with all the work done [games]. For those of us who like developing our own settings, or who want to recreate an established fictional universe, that's perfect. For those who want something they can just crack open and play that's a problem.

 

In terms of super-heroes hero is pretty well supported if you buy into the setting. Other genres are lacking. True, the settings exist, but those settings are fairly generic and don't stand on their own compared to a lot of other game settings that run on inferior (IMO) mechanics. As a result, Hero isn't competing amongst gamers who want a slick GUI for their gaming experience. Hero is a DOS prompt.

 

Part of the problem is how much work goes into the toolkits versus the settings. A good setting has to have an inspired concept or a unique verve or really good mood setting art (or preferably all three). Hero provides solid but pretty much RPG retread settings. They seem to pull from all the common elements without being particularly unique. They're like a flat soda. This goes for the Champion's Universe, too. Its definately comic booky, but it tries to include and allow for everything instead of taking a chance on coming alive and being unique.

 

People will, of course, disagree about the settings, but while I am a DOS prompt kind of guy, I accept most of the gaming market isn't. And, on top of it, when I see a GUI I want it to reach out and grab me. I wan't it to have its own unique appeal. Hero's settings don't do that for me. Thus, I understand why we heroites comprise a strong, but narrow market segment.

[Sean Waters]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Completely unrealistic actually. A taser will almost never knock someone unconscious. Especially not from a single very short burst.

 

If a taser did immediately put someone down you would see a lot less incidents of "Tased 8 times" in the headlines.

 

You would have to have a sustained electrical pulse to knock someone unconscious. As The Rose points out - in HERO terms this is a long time combat wise, going on for multiple segments.

 

Most of the time when I find games complaining a "system can't do this! how unrealistic!" is more due to their lack of understanding what "this" really is and less to do with the game.

 

 

Well, it isn't unrealistic. Perhaps the target is not unconscious (less than -10 stun) but they are not gettign up and going anywhere for a good while (so probably 0 to -10 stun). A Hero taser should be built with some sort of continuing effect - it can shock for several phases, perhaps, but that first hit will put anyone it hits down for the count. You get 'Tasered 8 times' headlines because either it was not a clean hit -say the electrode did not get through the leather jacket the target was wearing - or the officers in question were taking no chances.

 

I'm not saying tasers should be easy to use - they are not that accurate, generally just get one shot and have very limited range don't work against most armour and probably have an activation roll - but if they do hit they are very effective at stunning a target and taking all of the fight out of them.

 

...mind you I'm not trying to turn this into a taser thread - the point is that Hero makes some very strong claims, and in my opinion would benefit from more realism there. Hero is the most flexible and adaptable system I know of, allowing a massive range of game styles and character types to be accommodated. That is its strength. I'm not dissing the system, I'm saying the cover could use a little work.

[ghost-angel]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Personally, this is where Hero has routinely failed (IMO).

 

Since 4th edition Hero has focused on the toolkit, genre books [genre toolkits], and ultimate series [character design toolkits] and done very little to provide ready to play settings with all the work done [games]. For those of us who like developing our own settings, or who want to recreate an established fictional universe, that's perfect. For those who want something they can just crack open and play that's a problem.

 

In terms of super-heroes hero is pretty well supported if you buy into the setting. Other genres are lacking. True, the settings exist, but those settings are fairly generic and don't stand on their own compared to a lot of other game settings that run on inferior (IMO) mechanics. As a result, Hero isn't competing amongst gamers who want a slick GUI for their gaming experience. Hero is a DOS prompt.

 

Most of the released books are actually for specific settings, but do try at stab at some level of generality.

 

I just find it ironic that the heaviest supported line (Champions) has only one Setting and it's so wide open as to be generically boring.

 

Fantasy has four settings for it, only one of them supported (again the generi-fantasy of Turakian Age). Star Hero two settings, one of them supported with additional books.

 

I think it would be interesting to see Hero itself publish more Setting books and try and support each one with at least another book - even if it's a mixed bag book of equipment/enemies/locations.

[Vondy]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Most of the released books are actually for specific settings, but do try at stab at some level of generality.

 

I just find it ironic that the heaviest supported line (Champions) has only one Setting and it's so wide open as to be generically boring.

 

Fantasy has four settings for it, only one of them supported (again the generi-fantasy of Turakian Age). Star Hero two settings, one of them supported with additional books.

 

I think it would be interesting to see Hero itself publish more Setting books and try and support each one with at least another book - even if it's a mixed bag book of equipment/enemies/locations.

 

I'd suggest something akin to the 3rd edition approach for settings-genres, but with a twist. I'd produce memorable, supported settings with the rules tailored to them, and then have the toolkit available as its own set of books. This would give people an out-of-the-box entry level buy in (GUI), and then, once they are used to the system, makes wrapping their heads around the toolkit books (DOS) easier. Those of us who are used to the toolkit - and gamers looking for that - would still have access to it. At the same time, we'd have a set of gateway drugs to draw more people in. I might also collapse the genre materials into one book (sans the equipment) and then drop the equipment into another book. This would give hero the "big trimvirate" of core books: the toolkit itself, the genre-building book, and the loads of gear book. HARG!!!

[Vondy]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Well, it isn't unrealistic. Perhaps the target is not unconscious (less than -10 stun) but they are not gettign up and going anywhere for a good while (so probably 0 to -10 stun). A Hero taser should be built with some sort of continuing effect - it can shock for several phases, perhaps, but that first hit will put anyone it hits down for the count. You get 'Tasered 8 times' headlines because either it was not a clean hit -say the electrode did not get through the leather jacket the target was wearing - or the officers in question were taking no chances.

 

I'm not saying tasers should be easy to use - they are not that accurate, generally just get one shot and have very limited range don't work against most armour and probably have an activation roll - but if they do hit they are very effective at stunning a target and taking all of the fight out of them.

 

...mind you I'm not trying to turn this into a taser thread - the point is that Hero makes some very strong claims, and in my opinion would benefit from more realism there. Hero is the most flexible and adaptable system I know of, allowing a massive range of game styles and character types to be accommodated. That is its strength. I'm not dissing the system, I'm saying the cover could use a little work.

 

Most officers equipped with tasers have a few "had to tase him repeatedly stories." So much so that police departments have started implementing stronger guidelines for taser use and many larger departments have stopped describing it as "non-leathal" and placed it into the "less lethal" category.

 

In this case I think you are confusing the disruption of the nervous system (DEX disruption) with actual stun. This may be because the "stun gun" tasers are so often equated with is a misnomer. The actual stun being done is probably a few dice at most - and yet it needs to consistently produce a stunned result. This makes modeling an effect that reflects the actual results of taser use in the field is extremely difficult. It almost begs to be done as a mind control [as odd as that sounds].

 

Unless someone is constantly popping back up from -0 to -9 a stun only EB isn't a very good way to model the attack. Some people go right down and stay down, true, but a healthy and angry person [and boy being tased will piss you off] often doesn't. It seems more like taking a stuned result than being knocked out. There have been cases where healthy adult males were tased in excess of a dozen times before they agreeed to cooperate.

 

It hurts, but the main thing is that its messing with your nervous system, not that its knocking you out.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

 

However, my take on the intent of this thread was the expectations of someone who read the outside of the book, and how those expectations were not met when they started delving into the system. Now whether those expectations were reasonable can be debated and will remain in the realm of opinion, but the important factor is whether such expectations are common among the average gamer.

 

I realise that. I just like derailing threads.

 

as far as the expectations from reading the cover are concerned...any gamer who has been around the industry and purchased a few RPG's will know that the description on the cover of amost any RPG is pure hyperbole and can't be taken at face value. One has to read the game in its entirety (or nearly so, in most cases) to get the full story. The difference between HERO (and GURPS) and just about every other RPG out there is that the other RPG's are usually talking up the setting rather than the rules. HERO, having no setting attatched to the core book, can only glorify its mechanics as revolutionary.

 

Of course all of this is completely separate from the other side of the coin, which has to do with the intended design of a game system.

 

If the intent is for the system to be a "Game System" not a "Toolkit For Building A Game System" then it does not matter if anyone can rebuild the Game System beyond its original design and expand it to something it was never designed for. That does not redefine a "Game System" to be a "Toolkit For Building A Game System".

 

I agree. Some games are designed with a 'modular' approach. GURPS and HERO being the most obvious examples. Most other game systems are designed to be self contained and are designed with a particular flavor in mind.

 

If the intent is for the system to be a "Toolkit For Building A Game System", then that system by design will not be a "Game System" in and of itself by definition regardless of the number of "Game Systems" that can be built from it.

 

That is essentially what HERO has become. At its core, it is a fully functioning 'Game System'. However its design is completely modular in nature. Optional and new rules can be added as needed and other rules modified or removed completely. The game itself is designed with this functionality in mind. No other game on the market is designed in this fashion (except of course GURPS, which in many cases is even more modular than HERO) and thus HERO can sustain far more tinkering before the game begins to stress to the breaking point.

 

This is evidenced by these message boards. How many of the messages are peoples various modifications of the basic mechanics? Removing or adding figured characteristics (Mental Defense is a figured in most of my campaigns). Modifications or elimination of the Speed Chart. New advantages and custom limitations. (I myself came up with No Damage Reduction[+1/2] which allows an attack to bypass Damage Reduction). Heck, even HERO's Characteristic Benchmarks are left purposefuly vague, to allow individual groups to tweak the flavor to their own specifications.

Is HERO a Game System? Absolutely, but it is one designed to allow individuals to play their own unique variations. In all my years as an RPGer and GM, I've run into very few RPG's that not only suggests, but encourages players to tinker with the systems mechanics.

 

Ackk! I've delved too deeply into the philosophies of game design again. (8^D)

 

Uh oh. Better not let Steve catch you

 

 

Summary: While I understand your viewpoint and have no problems with it, I doubt that the majority of average gamers would have your viewpoint. And I was simply approaching it from that perspective.

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

No, I think my viewpoint comes from far too many years gaming. And not simply gaming, but looking at the core concepts behind games and searching for one that fit my own personal style. I have a Talent for inherently understanding game systems. I think most HERO gamers have varying levels of this Talent, which is why they're attracted to HERO. The 'average' gamer does not have this Talent and they don't understand core concepts behind game design. In the many gaming groups I've been in, not only am I usually made the defualt GM, but I'm also the one usualy designated to "decipher" a new RPG system. Over the years, I've collected many an RPG system because a friend of mine purchased it, couldn't figure it out, gave to me to decipher and when I explained it to them, they would simply say "you understand it, you keep it". Saved me a lot of cash over the years it did.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: "Outsider" perspective on Hero System

 

Personally, this is where Hero has routinely failed (IMO).

 

Since 4th edition Hero has focused on the toolkit, genre books [genre toolkits], and ultimate series [character design toolkits] and done very little to provide ready to play settings with all the work done [games]. For those of us who like developing our own settings, or who want to recreate an established fictional universe, that's perfect. For those who want something they can just crack open and play that's a problem.

 

And thats exactly why I chose HERO as my game system of choice. When I decided to find my main system it eventually boiled down to two games...GURPS or HERO. Both games completely divorced from setting material and this was done on purpose. Over the years I discovered that games based around specific settings were inadequate for my purposes due to setting specific design philosophies. I needed a 'generic' game that I could tailor to my own specifications. I was also tired of purchasing a completely new game system every time I wanted to change genres and thus my new system had to not only run my homebrew settings well, but stand up in multiple and in some cases, incompatible genres. HERO was the only one that survived my tests.

 

In terms of super-heroes hero is pretty well supported if you buy into the setting. Other genres are lacking. True, the settings exist, but those settings are fairly generic and don't stand on their own compared to a lot of other game settings that run on inferior (IMO) mechanics. As a result, Hero isn't competing amongst gamers who want a slick GUI for their gaming experience. Hero is a DOS prompt.

 

I agree. While I have absolutely no desire to see the HERO system core attatched to a specific setting (as that will ultimately cause gamers to go back into "Hero is only good at XXX cause thats what it was designed for" mode.) I would like to see less generic settings where the HERO system is tweaked and tailored for the setting itself. In essence, instead of creating settings that conforms to HERO, create a highly detailed setting and conform HERO to the setting. This will go a long way toward letting the gaming industry know just how versatile HERO can be.

 

Part of the problem is how much work goes into the toolkits versus the settings. A good setting has to have an inspired concept or a unique verve or really good mood setting art (or preferably all three). Hero provides solid but pretty much RPG retread settings. They seem to pull from all the common elements without being particularly unique. They're like a flat soda. This goes for the Champion's Universe, too. Its definately comic booky, but it tries to include and allow for everything instead of taking a chance on coming alive and being unique.

 

Again, I agree. As a HERO gamer, I love the rules books. The HERO System book itself and all its companions (the Genre books and Ultimate series most especially) however the settings books are another matter entirely. I don't have a single one. I've looked at them, but found them lacking. The settings have very little unique flavor and they tend to be generic in the extreme. I know this is done on purpose to allow HERO gamers to tailor their games to their own playstyles, but when it comes to setting material, the more detail, the better. They should take lessons from the settings masters, White Wolf. Boy can those guys detail and flavor a setting! Sure, they overdo it a lot, but the following that their settings generate is surpassed only by the following that D&D settings have.

 

People will, of course, disagree about the settings, but while I am a DOS prompt kind of guy, I accept most of the gaming market isn't. And, on top of it, when I see a GUI I want it to reach out and grab me. I wan't it to have its own unique appeal. Hero's settings don't do that for me. Thus, I understand why we heroites comprise a strong, but narrow market segment.

 

I think HERO gamers are a unique and versatile group of gamers who in general prefer to run their own settings, or their own version of existing settings. As it stands currently, HERO is specifically for those gamers who like to run homebrew settings and it appeals the most to this limited demographic. No game system, regardless of setting, is going to appeal to every gamer or even to most gamers. Thats simply not possible. However if HERO is to ever appeal to more gamers that it currently does, they are going to have to begin generating more detailed and attractive settings. My thoughts are that they should develop a section of DOJ that concentrates on that alone (or maybe allow third party companies to develop such settings and relax restrictions on mechanics changes that accompany such settings)