Acronyms

[ghost-angel]

Re: Acronyms

 

I don't think that's true at all...

 

The Basic Rules is the primary evidence towards that.

 

From a rules stand point - there has been a lot of unification of ideas in the system, reduction of terms to more basic thoughts - and from a actual-play standpoint the Damage Adding Rules have be so simplified as to be nearly intuitive - no more half dozen exceptions of "this adds like this unless this, or that, possibly the other..." kind of thing.

 

No - I don't think you can make that assertion at all.

[Rapier]

Re: Acronyms

 

I also think that Hero has become a great deal more entry-level friendly. If nothing else the more homogeneity of the rules these days helps that a lot. The move away from SFX laden power names also helps (ie Blast vs Energy Blast).

 

I don't think any RPG is necessarily easy to learn. If you've never played an RPG before the learning curve would be pretty steep regardless of what system you use. If you've played RPGs before, I think that Hero has enough common concepts and terms that I don't believe it would be a difficult transition.

[sheva]

Re: Acronyms

 

I don't fully agree.

I think the Hero system is a relatively hard RPG to learn.

In many systems, Dungeons and Dragons is a notorious example, its a lot quicker and easier to get a character up and running. With Hero it takes longer and is much more complicated..

And the Hero system is demanding on the GM. You always need a good GM. But in Hero you need a GM who understands the system well, does some work on what sort of magnitudes they want in the campaign and is prepared to say "NO" a lot to powergamers.

Don't get me wrong, the hero system is great. But it needs a knowledgeable GM with a firm hand. The complexity allows you to do almost anything, but makes it harder to learn and subject to abuse.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

Yup. It is the choice availability that often makes things hard - analysis paralysis.

 

When there are so many choices people want to know if they are getting things right. With more structured games (ones that do not have the same choice of detail) it is more checkbox filling in once you have got past the initial choice (Fighter, Mage or Thief...hmmm!)

 

The acronyms are something layered on top of that.

 

Doc

[Escafarc]

Re: Acronyms

 

I think new people find HERO more intimidating rather then "harder" because it requires the "M" word. You know math. Basic math skills are not universal in this country. You wouldn't believe the number of high school graduates I've seen fail a basic cash handling test.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

It might be a math thing Hugh but I have seen the same reaction from people given pre-populated character sheets.

 

Not just asking them to do maths but lots of numbers all over, sometimes even fractions right where anyone could see them....

 

 

Doc

[Lucius]

Re: Acronyms

 

I don't think that's true at all...

 

The Basic Rules is the primary evidence towards that.

 

I actually have a PDF of that but I have to admit I have not looked at it. Once I do, I may have to retract what I'm about to say.

 

BUT, based on the "non-basic" two volume rulebook, I'll say this:

 

No - I don't think you can make that assertion at all.

 

I'll not only make it, I'll back it up.

 

On vol.1, p.7 there is a section titled "If You're New To The Hero System."

 

There is no section I can find titled "If You're New To Role Playing" nor anything answering such questions as "What is a role playing game?" or defining basic terms like "character" in terms someone unfamiliar with the hobby would understand.

 

If we assume, for the sake of argument, that it is expected that some people would buy Hero as their first exposure to role playing games, then something like that (even if only a single page "what is a role playing game?" ) would have to be there wouldn't it? But everything I've seen was pretty obviously written with the assumption that the reader would be someone who has in fact already played role playing games.

 

Now, it's entirely possible that one assumption was made for the - what do we call them, "intermediate" rules? - and another for the Basic Rules and when I read them I will find that it has such an introductory section. But just based on SHREd 1&2, the assumption must have been either "No neophyte to gaming is going to pick this up" or "We don't even WANT a neophyte to pick this up."

 

edit: I just opened the PDF of the BR and looked over the first 15 pages. It gets right into character creation, but without, as far as I can see, explaining what a "character" is or why you want to create one or what you're expected to do with it once you do. So unless someone can point out something I missed....

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I don't expect a neophyte to understand a palindromedary - in fact, after 20 years sometimes I'm not sure I understand a palindromedary either

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Acronyms

 

Sorry to wax pendantic here... but the Hero System does not use acronyms. There are lots and lots of abbreviations, including those being discussed here, but I'm not aware of a single acronym in the system.

[Escafarc]

Re: Acronyms

 

Sorry to wax pendantic here... but the Hero System does not use acronyms. There are lots and lots of abbreviations' date=' including those being discussed here, but I'm not aware of a single [i']acronym[/i] in the system.

 

Yes it does OCV is an acronym for Offencive Combat Value not an abbreviation.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Acronyms

 

Yes it does OCV is an acronym for Offencive Combat Value not an abbreviation.

Actually Bob is right. Acronyms are supposed to make pronouncable words like "laser" or "scuba". OCV is just initials. In other words the initials became the commonly accepted abreviation for the term, but it's not an acronym. (Unless you are actually saying "Ahk-vee" or something, not OCV).

 

EDIT: actually just double checked the definition. Does not have to make a word. Things like IRA and CIA are considered acronyms, but acronyms are also considered to be a type of abreviation. That and most people think of acronyms as the type that form words, or at least that seems to be the most frequent use of the term in the US.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

Sorry to wax pendantic here... but the Hero System does not use acronyms. There are lots and lots of abbreviations' date=' including those being discussed here, but I'm not aware of a single [i']acronym[/i] in the system.

 

i didn't think anyone would immediately understand what I was talking about if I titled the thread Initialisms.

 

 

Doc

[teh bunneh]

Re: Acronyms

 

I've eliminated pretty much all the acronyms from my Convention charsheets. Most of the build numbers, too. It works well, especially for folks who've never played Hero before. But you gotta put a little work into it -- like Doc Democracy says, you have to force yourself to see things as a newbie.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Acronyms

 

I get the impression' date=' actually, that Hero has given up on the idea of being an "entry level game" and I think that's unfortunate.[/quote']I don't think it's that so much (g-a notes the Basic Rulebook, etc.) I think it's more that they may think (rightly, IMO) that there's no need for a specifically "entry level" game, and possibly that no other games are really "entry level" either. Because most people who get into RPGs don't choose the game they start with based on how easy or hard it is... they just start with whatever game is played by the players who introduce them to RPGs. I don't really see D&D as being all that much easier for newbies than Hero is, but I think it gets a reputation for being a great game for newcomers because most newcomers play it. But most newcomers aren't playing it specifically because it's easy... they're playing it because most gamers overall play D&D, and therefore, it's the first game that the most new players are introduced to.

 

It's great when the system is presented as clearly and logically as possible, because it helps existing players to teach it to new players, and helps new players follow along and pick it up. But that's how almost all new players start: with existing players teaching them. Almost no one (IMO) would just walk into a store and suddenly decide to get into RPGs by finding one that looked tailored to new players...

[Rapier]

Re: Acronyms

 

I don't fully agree.

I think the Hero system is a relatively hard RPG to learn.

In many systems, Dungeons and Dragons is a notorious example, its a lot quicker and easier to get a character up and running. With Hero it takes longer and is much more complicated..

And the Hero system is demanding on the GM. You always need a good GM. But in Hero you need a GM who understands the system well, does some work on what sort of magnitudes they want in the campaign and is prepared to say "NO" a lot to powergamers.

Don't get me wrong, the hero system is great. But it needs a knowledgeable GM with a firm hand. The complexity allows you to do almost anything, but makes it harder to learn and subject to abuse.

 

Faster CharGen != Easier.

 

In fact, I've created Hero characters much faster than I've seen some people create a DnD character. What Feat does he want? What Prestige this or that? Is it easier to throw together a roll 3d6 in order and create a fighter with a longsword? Maybe. But I can also throw together a FH fighter nearly as easily.

 

Hero character generation may be more complex but I don't honestly believe it's much of any bit harder than most other gaming systems.

 

So you believe that you can have a good DnD campaign with a GM that has a poor understanding of the rules? A GM in a DnD campaign also has a lot of work to do. The GMs primary focus in ANY game is going to be plot development and pacing. That's what GMs do. That is also why you see so many campaign supplements that are system generic. Because if you want to run an Elementally Evil Temple adventure, it's the temple itself that is all the work. Popping in a couple of orcs or goblins or guards is the easy part.

 

A DnD GM also has to say "NO" to a lot of powergamers. We've all seen the guy with the Lvl 10 fighter with +3 Full Plate and a Vorpal Blade. Most of us have at least heard of the guy with doubled up Feats and Prestige and all sorts of other things. Powergamers are powergamers and they will powergame in all games.

[Rapier]

Re: Acronyms

 

I've eliminated pretty much all the acronyms from my Convention charsheets. Most of the build numbers' date=' too. It works well, especially for folks who've never played Hero before. But you gotta put a little work into it -- like Doc Democracy says, you have to force yourself to see things as a newbie.[/quote']

 

I was actually with someone last week about just this. We've been using HD exclusively for CharGen since the second it hit the shelf. Before that we were using MetaCreator and before that I think it was HeroCreator (? it came with a copy of the BBB). What we were discussing is how much the character sheets could stand to be redesigned. The character sheets we use now have all the cost information on them (which was very important when we were doing things by hand), but that information isn't really necessary to play the character. It's important if you are building a character, but HD is very good at keeping track of the costs. The character sheet is, currently, cluttered with a lot of stuff that is completely unnecessary during play. It doesn't matter how many Real Points your Blast costs. You never use it. The Active Cost on the other hand you use for Adjustments.

 

So you drop the Characteristics Costs and the Real Points. Similarly Complication Costs are removed. The theory is that by removing all of the extra information that isn't necessary, we would have space to include a bit more of the stuff we would use on a regular basis. The bonus here is that by removing all of the extra information that you don't use you are simplifying the character sheet and making it more accessible to newer players.

 

I'm not even quite sure how it happened but I somehow volunteered to see about finding/creating a new character sheet that is a little more play friendly (and doesn't waste so much space on the build aspects). Your Con-Sheet is very nice and fancy, but a little labour intensive for my tastes!

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

Faster CharGen != Easier.

 

But then, thats not what he said, he said quicker and easier. I think that the quicker and easier has degraded for D&D as time has gone on and 4th Edition definitely seemed to me to be harder than HERO to make a character. Before that, the choices (for first level) were so limited that everything else kind of chose itself.

 

In fact' date=' I've created Hero characters much faster than I've seen some people create a DnD character. What Feat does he want? What Prestige this or that? Is it easier to throw together a roll 3d6 in order and create a fighter with a longsword? Maybe. But I can also throw together a FH fighter nearly as easily.[/quote']

 

As could I. But we were talking about newbies here. I think they'd follow the generation path of D&D more easily than they would with HERO. The amount of choice in HERO is staggering to many people. That causes confusion and hesitation and leads to thoughts that the system is just too difficult.

 

 

Doc

[teh bunneh]

Re: Acronyms

 

I'm not even quite sure how it happened but I somehow volunteered to see about finding/creating a new character sheet that is a little more play friendly (and doesn't waste so much space on the build aspects). Your Con-Sheet is very nice and fancy' date=' but a little labour intensive for my tastes! [/quote']

 

Well, obviously I spent a lot of time making it pretty... But the basic idea is pretty simple:

 

Across the top: Character name

 

Upper left: Primary characteristics (Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Ego, Presence). Other characteristics go under either combat stats or defenses.

 

Beneath that, Complications

 

Upper Right: Skills/Perks/Talents

 

Beneath that: Powers

 

Center left: Combat stats (most common attacks, including OCV and DCV bonuses, damage, and notes)

 

Center right: Defenses

 

Bottom: Background/personality

 

Take out all the costs and you're good. You could set aside a corner somewhere for a character pic. I know exactly jack-all about how to create a HeroDesigner template, but it shouldn't be that hard to do, I suspect.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Acronyms

 

Take out all the costs and you're good. You could set aside a corner somewhere for a character pic. I know exactly jack-all about how to create a HeroDesigner template' date=' but it shouldn't be that hard to do, I suspect. [/quote']It isn't, really. A Hero Designer export template is just a text file. Creating one from absolutely nothing would be something of an undertaking, but it's not too hard to start getting the gist of it by monkey-see monkey-do if you start by tweaking an existing one. And there are some already out there that are designed to remove costs and numbers in various ways...

[Rapier]

Re: Acronyms

 

As could I. But we were talking about newbies here. I think they'd follow the generation path of D&D more easily than they would with HERO. The amount of choice in HERO is staggering to many people. That causes confusion and hesitation and leads to thoughts that the system is just too difficult.

 

I can see your point, but I think we are envisioning two rather different examples. I (and correct me if I err) believe your example is walking into a room with six Hero-NooBs and throwing a copy of the 6E1 on the table and shouting 'CREATE YOURSELF A CHARACTER!!!' Yes, I can very easily see that being rather daunting. I would think you would get a similar reaction if I did likewise with Vampire, Gurps, DnD, Paranoia or any other game.

 

I was thinking more along the lines of having a detailed campaign document that outlined the types of abilities that one might expect and walking through character design with someone that knows the system. That's how I learned DnD. That's also how I learned Champions (and ShadowRun and Rifts and GURPS and BattleTech, etc).

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

I can see your point' date=' but I think we are envisioning two rather different examples. I (and correct me if I err) believe your example is walking into a room with six Hero-NooBs and throwing a copy of the 6E1 on the table and shouting 'CREATE YOURSELF A CHARACTER!!!' [/quote']

 

No.. My situation is different. I walk into a room with a group of people I have been gaming with for years with plain pre-prepared HERO characters and say - "Here are your characters, what do you think?"

 

These are people who are in their 30s and 40s and have been gaming most of their lives. Their reaction - "What a mess", "This is a bit complicated Stephen". It is worse when we begin to think of creating characters. It is that kind of thing that is opening my eyes. One of the players contributes here and gets frustrated that the system is still a bit of a mix between reason from effect and provide stuff that has SFX meanings (characteristics are the big hole in HERO's effects based philosophy) but going his way would make the appearance of difficulty even worse.

 

hence my drive to make the interaction with the system lose its impact on the eyes, allow an appreciation of what the system can facilitate before they might want to delve into the mechanics behind everything. The proliferation of initialisms was a comment at the last game session (which was the first time I had hauled out 6th edition in front of them).

 

Doc

[Rapier]

Re: Acronyms

 

No.. My situation is different. I walk into a room with a group of people I have been gaming with for years with plain pre-prepared HERO characters and say - "Here are your characters, what do you think?"

 

These are people who are in their 30s and 40s and have been gaming most of their lives. Their reaction - "What a mess", "This is a bit complicated Stephen". It is worse when we begin to think of creating characters. It is that kind of thing that is opening my eyes. One of the players contributes here and gets frustrated that the system is still a bit of a mix between reason from effect and provide stuff that has SFX meanings (characteristics are the big hole in HERO's effects based philosophy) but going his way would make the appearance of difficulty even worse.

 

hence my drive to make the interaction with the system lose its impact on the eyes, allow an appreciation of what the system can facilitate before they might want to delve into the mechanics behind everything. The proliferation of initialisms was a comment at the last game session (which was the first time I had hauled out 6th edition in front of them).

 

Doc

 

Ahhhh! Got it. I think we are actually arguing the same point!

 

I don't think the problem is necessarily the acronyms as it is the character sheets are overloaded with useless and/or extraneous information. On that, I think it's safe to assume we agree?

 

I also think that some genres are a lot easier on new players than others. FH or DC, I think, would be an easier transition into Hero simply because the games tend to be skill and/or equipment driven. Pick your weapon, pick your armour and tinker with characteristics and a couple of skills. Champions with it's 'here is a 600 page book, pick yourself some powers' is a bit more intensive.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

I think we can wholeheartedly agree about the character sheets. And if we remove the extraneous information there is less need for initialisms and we deal with that problem too.

 

(I'm hoping Bob approves that I have moved to the proper terminology!! )

[etherio]

Re: Acronyms

 

...Every game has its own jargon and TLAs...

 

WTF is a TLA?

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Acronyms

 

Three Letter Acronym.

[etherio]

Re: Acronyms

 

three letter acronym.

 

tvm