Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

It is up to the GM to address that, because the rules system as set up, can't. You shouldn't expect it to, in fact, because by adopting the rule that only some archetypes can use certain powers you are deliberately making a major change to the rules.

 

Exactly. My point, however, is that you're making life difficult for yourself by using an abusable power framework for magic.

 

 

 

I put together a thing called "the ultimate grimoire", long, long ago. It was a fair amount of work (it contains a lot more spells than the published Grimoires, though I have those too) but it was worth it. You can get it here, with handy Herodesigner templates courtesy of the nice folx here at the boards. The spells are indexed by type, which means I can avoid back and forth with the players by saying "These are the schools of magic available. Here's a list of what they can teach."

 

cheers, Mark

 

I've always planned on writing up my own grimoire. Haven't gotten around to it for, oh, 22 years so far...

[Markdoc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

Exactly. My point' date=' however, is that you're making life difficult for yourself by using an abusable power framework for magic. .[/quote']

 

Heh. Haven't found it a problem: it's an easy solution to the players who want lots of spells or cool abilities. By restricting what mages can put in MP and allowing non-mages to use MPs as well, I have restored balance to the Force ... er, game ... by essentially saying that all characters can use frameworks and all characters can have access to part (but only part) of the powers list. What part they choose will have a major effect on how the character ends up looking/playing, but it seems relatively balanced, even though we have characters who have been "under development" for years now.

 

cheers, Mark

[Terminal]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

Low fantasy campaign: I used 'schools' of magic (basically mirroring the Rolemaster magic schools) and had required limitations on them (must be zero End and have verbal components for priestly, must cost End and require expendable foci for personal magic, must be ego-based for mind magic). Then slather on the extra limitations (mostly extra time and rituals) and you end up with reasonable spell power for under 5 points, but it takes half an hour and a crateload of eye of newt to make it work. Then the casters increase their power by slowly buying off the limitations.

Meanwhile, the fighters are buying CSLs by the bucketload, keeping things nice and balanced. It's working well, largely thanks to the players staying very much in the spirit of things.

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

Heh. Haven't found it a problem: it's an easy solution to the players who want lots of spells or cool abilities. By restricting what mages can put in MP and allowing non-mages to use MPs as well' date=' I have restored balance to the Force ... er, game ... by essentially saying that [b']all[/b] characters can use frameworks and all characters can have access to part (but only part) of the powers list. What part they choose will have a major effect on how the character ends up looking/playing, but it seems relatively balanced, even though we have characters who have been "under development" for years now.

 

Yes, but my point, again, is that MPs only work for you because you are imposing many house rule restrictions on the use of the MP. Which is fine, but it doesn't show that MPs are good in FH. Most players aren't playing in your campaign (though we wish we were); giving mundanes access to powers and MPs is pretty odd for any FH that isn't high fantasy.

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

Low fantasy campaign: I used 'schools' of magic (basically mirroring the Rolemaster magic schools) and had required limitations on them (must be zero End and have verbal components for priestly, must cost End and require expendable foci for personal magic, must be ego-based for mind magic). Then slather on the extra limitations (mostly extra time and rituals) and you end up with reasonable spell power for under 5 points, but it takes half an hour and a crateload of eye of newt to make it work. Then the casters increase their power by slowly buying off the limitations.

Meanwhile, the fighters are buying CSLs by the bucketload, keeping things nice and balanced. It's working well, largely thanks to the players staying very much in the spirit of things.

 

Excellent, good to hear it. This is exactly how old school FH used to work. It's all right, but as you say, magic winds up being heavily limited and ritualistic, and it's harder for spellcasters like this to contribute when blades are drawn. I've gotten pretty good at building 15-20 AP spells that are still effective...

[Markdoc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

Excellent' date=' good to hear it. This is exactly how old school FH used to work. It's all right, but as you say, magic winds up being heavily limited and ritualistic, and it's harder for spellcasters like this to contribute when blades are drawn. I've gotten pretty good at building 15-20 AP spells that are still effective...[/quote']

 

QFT. Long ago, before we allowed frameworks in games, I made a Paladin type (actually a bad-tempered, cynical, holy warrior: so only a "sort-of" Paladin ) who had three cheapo spells. Early in his career, we were attacked by pirates while on a small ship. As they drew along side I stated "I board them!" The GM goggled at me and asked "You board them?" as though I was a nut. A few turns later, as the last surviving pirates fled by jumping into the sea, a clearly angry GM stated "Two more much larger pirate ships suddenly appear and bear down on you!"

 

Even small magic can be devastating in combat to the unprepared!

 

cheers, Mark

[Ice9]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

giving mundanes access to powers and MPs is pretty odd for any FH that isn't high fantasy.

I disagree significantly, on three points:

1) The "magic is powers, mundane is skills" thing is just a convention. It's not in any way mandated by the rules. Consider:

Wounding Flourish - Drain 3d6 (DEX and STR), OIF (bladed weapon of opportunity), RAR (Sleight of Hand), Trigger (attack which hits the hand or arm), Limited: Triggering attack must do BODY, Limited: Only on creatures with recognizable anatomy.

Summon Ancient Spirits - KS: History 20-

 

2) Again, while it's common to have mundane skills purchased separately and spells in Multipowers, it is by no means required. Something like combat or acrobatic tricks could easily be a Multipower, and a mage with Summon really doesn't need any other powers to have a variety of effects at their disposal.

 

3) If one of the PCs is a mage with a wide variety of spells, then by definition, the setting is "high-fantasy" enough that PCs can have access to magic abilities. No, the "mundanes" don't get them, but PCs - of any type - are hardly mundane.

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

1) The "magic is powers, mundane is skills" thing is just a convention. It's not in any way mandated by the rules. Consider:

Wounding Flourish - Drain 3d6 (DEX and STR), OIF (bladed weapon of opportunity), RAR (Sleight of Hand), Trigger (attack which hits the hand or arm), Limited: Triggering attack must do BODY, Limited: Only on creatures with recognizable anatomy.

Summon Ancient Spirits - KS: History 20-

 

More like common sense than convention. You are really reaching to find ways to get even ineffective drains and summons into the swordsman's arsenal, and there are lots of other powers that they really just can't have. Giving mundanes and spellcasters access to the same (broken) power framework not only doesn't even things out, it tilts things further in the spellcaster's favor, because he can use powers the mundanes can't, and because he can do the things the mundanes can do just as cheaply (if not cheaper).

 

2) Again, while it's common to have mundane skills purchased separately and spells in Multipowers, it is by no means required. Something like combat or acrobatic tricks could easily be a Multipower, and a mage with Summon really doesn't need any other powers to have a variety of effects at their disposal.

 

You mean a mage with Multiform, who can literally be every other character in the party, less 20 points or so. But seriously, as I said above, the range of powers available for "combat tricks" is just not as good as the range available for "it's magic".

 

3) If one of the PCs is a mage with a wide variety of spells, then by definition, the setting is "high-fantasy" enough that PCs can have access to magic abilities. No, the "mundanes" don't get them, but PCs - of any type - are hardly mundane.

 

No, this is totally wrong. It's common, if not typical, for most characters in a fantasy setting to have no magic abilities whatsoever, with a small minority of people able to use magic effectively. You seem to think that all PCs have to be magicians of one sort or another for there to be balance in the game. That's just not true; Hero is better than that. If I were playing in a campaign where I had to play a magical character to compete with the other PCs, I'd be really irritated.

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

QFT. Long ago' date=' before we allowed frameworks in games, I made a Paladin type (actually a bad-tempered, cynical, holy warrior: so only a "sort-of" Paladin ) who had three cheapo spells. Early in his career, we were attacked by pirates while on a small ship. As they drew along side I stated "[i']I board them![/i]" The GM goggled at me and asked "You board them?" as though I was a nut. A few turns later, as the last surviving pirates fled by jumping into the sea, a clearly angry GM stated "Two more much larger pirate ships suddenly appear and bear down on you!"

 

Even small magic can be devastating in combat to the unprepared!

 

I know, right? This kind of touches on my pet peeve that Hero is costed for supers and not for fantasy. But at the same time, it's fun to be practically invincible with 5" of flight, a 1 hex area flash, and an ego blast.

[Markdoc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I know' date=' right? This kind of touches on my pet peeve that Hero is costed for supers and not for fantasy. But at the same time, it's fun to be practically invincible with 5" of flight, a 1 hex area flash, and an ego blast.[/quote']

 

He had "Divine light" (Flash, 1" radius) - delay and then combine that with headshot the next phase for lots of one-shot kills , "Divine healing" (a slowish regeneration) and "Divine shield" (Forcefield). He later added "Divine intent" (that's a joke, son!) which was dangersense.

 

So yeah, it is incumbent on the GM to regulate what he permits in the game. We learned a lot about GM'ing fantasy, during our first few years of system building. I was lucky: we had 4 other hero GM's in my college-era group and when we were playing in each others' games, me and two of the others would often sit around for several hours after the others had gone home, critiquing the game - what worked, what didn't what was balanced, what wasn't and tweaking to fix. Since we typically played several times a week, we got more playtesting in, over the course of 4 years than most people get in a lifetime, which has stood me in good stead ever since.

 

cheers, Mark

[Escafarc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I know' date=' right? This kind of touches on my pet peeve that Hero is costed for supers and not for fantasy. But at the same time, it's fun to be practically invincible with 5" of flight, a 1 hex area flash, and an ego blast.[/quote']

 

I tend to run my FH (all my other "heroic" level ones too) games more like a "Supers" game. And using the Resource Points Rules the characters have the same point totals as supers which makes it easier for cross-genre campaigns.

[juli888]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I use Multipower for Spells. Problem solved.

_________________

http://www.watch-movies-tv.info

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

He had "Divine light" (Flash' date=' 1" radius) - delay and then combine that with headshot the next phase for lots of one-shot kills , "Divine healing" (a slowish regeneration) and "Divine shield" (Forcefield). He later added "Divine intent" (that's a joke, son!) which was dangersense.[/quote']

 

All good choices. I've also gotten good mileage out of weak entangles that are just a bit too strong for casual STR, and suppress is just as cheat in FH as in Champions, if not more so.

 

Conversely, I don't think I ever managed to make a decent transform or drain spell that was really worth the points, certainly not compared to things like flight or invisibility.

 

So yeah, it is incumbent on the GM to regulate what he permits in the game. We learned a lot about GM'ing fantasy, during our first few years of system building. I was lucky: we had 4 other hero GM's in my college-era group and when we were playing in each others' games, me and two of the others would often sit around for several hours after the others had gone home, critiquing the game - what worked, what didn't what was balanced, what wasn't and tweaking to fix. Since we typically played several times a week, we got more playtesting in, over the course of 4 years than most people get in a lifetime, which has stood me in good stead ever since.

 

Yeah, I played FH about weekly for a decade with a bunch of munchkins, so I know what you mean about getting to know the system. It's certainly interesting that our respective groups came to handle certain things in different ways.

[Markdoc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

Yeah' date=' I played FH about weekly for a decade with a bunch of munchkins, so I know what you mean about getting to know the system. It's certainly interesting that our respective groups came to handle certain things in different ways.[/quote']

 

Another interesting thing we did was what we called "personalized warfare". We did this with different systems, but ran a few with Hero system. We set up a big table (we had a lot of wargamers in our group) covered in lovely terrain and got anywhere from 12 to 22 players (!). Everybody made a character and went in and out of the room, where the GM sat - the GM told them "You see a guy here wearing fancy armour" or "Someone dashed across the the road and into those trees" or even "You are hit in the face by an arrow for 12 BOD/60 STUN - it came from that window over there" and then got your action and adjudicated it.

 

For Hero system games, the rules were simple - theme (if any), no GM's permission powers, no active point limits, no other rules. Last man (or woman or thing) standing won. Long before teh interwebz, we had already had to deal with the pixie with a 16d6 RKA, the tunneling slug with mindcontrol powers, the "area affect NND, continuous uncontrollable RKA, 0 END, does BOD" and Inter-dimensional teleport or Tunneling or Flight, all UAA, at range or the regenerating killer robot with "Takes no Stun" and healthy rDEF

 

Those games taught us a lot about how to abuse the system - and were kind of fun

 

cheers, Mark

[Ice9]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

More like common sense than convention. You are really reaching to find ways to get even ineffective drains and summons into the swordsman's arsenal, and there are lots of other powers that they really just can't have.

I think you misunderstand. The first power (the Drain) was an example of a completely mundane ability written up as a power. The second (Summon Ancient Spirits) was a magical spell, suitable for a necromancer, that was mechanically represented as a skill. "Mundane" and "magical" are SFX, not game mechanics.

 

No, this is totally wrong. It's common, if not typical, for most characters in a fantasy setting to have no magic abilities whatsoever, with a small minority of people able to use magic effectively. You seem to think that all PCs have to be magicians of one sort or another for there to be balance in the game.

For one thing, PCs are "a small minority of people". More importantly, there's more to fantastic abilities than being a mage. If you look at myths and fairy tales, a lot of people who are by no means "wizards" still have atypical abilities - pacts, blessings, uncanny skills that border on impossible, charms, relics, divine ancestors - it's not just about "mundane or mage". And I do think that characters should be playing in the same arena. If one character is limited to "things that are realistically possible for an average person" and another character can do "anything that has happened in fantasy", then you have a disconnect. And even if you happen to adjust other factors such that things balance out at a particular point in their development, you won't have any ability for further progression.

[phookz]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

For one thing' date=' PCs [i']are[/i] "a small minority of people". More importantly, there's more to fantastic abilities than being a mage. If you look at myths and fairy tales, a lot of people who are by no means "wizards" still have atypical abilities - pacts, blessings, uncanny skills that border on impossible, charms, relics, divine ancestors - it's not just about "mundane or mage". And I do think that characters should be playing in the same arena. If one character is limited to "things that are realistically possible for an average person" and another character can do "anything that has happened in fantasy", then you have a disconnect. And even if you happen to adjust other factors such that things balance out at a particular point in their development, you won't have any ability for further progression.

 

I think you've really nailed it here. The larger problem, IMO, is that many people design a campaign world that has a disconnect. As I've said before, a lot of popular fiction is difficult if not impossible to model in a game and have game balance, unless you restrict the character archetypes. Gandalf was a plot device. Middle-earth is a rich, interesting world, but if you let a player be a wizard everyone else will be left in the cold. That didn't always happen in the book because he was a plot device, but hell - if the guy can go toe to toe with a Balrog and come out on top what chance does the average troll have against him?

[Old Man]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I think you misunderstand. The first power (the Drain) was an example of a completely mundane ability written up as a power. The second (Summon Ancient Spirits) was a magical spell' date=' suitable for a necromancer, that was mechanically represented as a skill. "Mundane" and "magical" are SFX, not game mechanics.[/quote']

 

Yes, but the SFX are limiting the game mechanics. That drain sucks. And many if not most powers are simply not definable with mundane SFX.

 

If one character is limited to "things that are realistically possible for an average person" and another character can do "anything that has happened in fantasy", then you have a disconnect. And even if you happen to adjust other factors such that things balance out at a particular point in their development, you won't have any ability for further progression.

 

No, Hero is perfectly capable of balancing "realistically possible" with "magically possible". Along a broad range of development points. You just have to be careful about how you go about it. Certain characters should, conceptually, have access to a broader range of powers than others. Usually, the way to balance that is to make the "restricted access" powers expensive enough to make up for that versatility; either that or you have to give the specialists some kind of cost break or other compensation for giving up access to them. Giving everybody multipowers may seem fair, but if a warrior can only put HKAs and badly-built Drains in his multipower, he's still at a disadvantage to the character that, conceptually, can slot every power in the book. Especially as the game progresses. So now if I want my mundane character to be competive, I have to give him a pact or blessing or supernatural skill or charm or relic or divine ancestor, whereupon he is no longer mundane. Thus, mundane PCs are discouraged, at best.

[Blorn]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I really like Markdoc's Ultimate Grimiore, for concept mining if nothing else. I'd like to see a comparable "mundane" list of powers, techniques, combat maneuvers. I envision different school of fighting style; gladiator, ranger, archer, dual-wield, The Disotal Academy (a Kingdoms of Kalamar reference, all women), fencing, unarmed, etc. Each of these could have unique powers (possibly some of them being magical in nature), but there could be some powers that are more ubiquitous... Anyone want to start an "Ultimate Fighting Technique?" (or would that be redundant with what's already been published?)

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I really like Markdoc's Ultimate Grimiore' date=' for concept mining if nothing else. I'd like to see a comparable "mundane" list of powers, techniques, combat maneuvers. I envision different school of fighting style; gladiator, ranger, archer, dual-wield, The Disotal Academy (a Kingdoms of Kalamar reference, all women), fencing, unarmed, etc. Each of these could have unique powers (possibly some of them being magical in nature), but there could be some powers that are more ubiquitous... Anyone want to start an "Ultimate Fighting Technique?" (or would that be redundant with what's already been published?) [/quote']

 

Both Hero System Martial Arts and Fantasy Hero have lists of, "fighting tricks" like this. I'm sure they could be expanded upon.

[hepatitvsj]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I haven't had a chance to test this yet, but I was thinking of using resource points next time I run FH.

I will give all the pcs a set # of equipment, magic and whatever else points.

i.e. the fighter would have 60 equipment points but only 10 magic points. he may know several spells but only be able to cast one good size one or a couple smaller ones. (if he takes the 5pt spellcaster perk) but he could kit out more weapons/armor. I intend to make potions, scrolls, etc to be slotted into the magic resource...the fighter could carry a potion of healing and a potion of aid strength if he had no other way to fill his magic resource.

the mage (or cleric) would have 60 magic but only 10 equipment, he can slot 60 points of spells, giving him as many spells as he can fit, but he can't use as much equipment until he ups his resource (at 1 per +1 resource I'm thinking. same cost for everyone.) this allows him to know many spells. ( at the turakian age /3 cost since he can't use the spell unless he has "kited it out" therefore the /3 modifier makes MUCH more sense) so now a 2D6 RKA with incantations, gestures, and requires a skill role is only 15 points, a 1/4 of the mages resource points. he may take only requires a skill role (-1/2) and pay 20 resources points if he wishes.

this puts mages much more in line with everyone else. the versatility still makes up for the fact a mage much purchase every spell vs a fighter simply buying a weapon. ( and I LOVE playing mages...so I'm on their side. )

the final option is a 35/35 split, for fighter/mage, bard, fighter/cleric, paladin/anti-paladin, etc.

this gives more room for a player to pay more for a spell, but not have gestures, incantations, etc on it (basically a sorcerer, or he could leave those limitations on like any normal mage (these examples represent my campaign world)

there is no option to start as a E25/M45. only the three above...prevents minmaxing

 

also since consumable items (scrolls and potions, etc) are now slotted into resource, a player can't just carry as much as encumbrance allows...opening the option for mages to take inventor for these things and create them for the armory for an appropriate monetary, but not EP, cost. this avoids a mage dumping EP into one shot items at the benefit of all...and his detriment. (again...other Gm's worlds may have found a solution to this as well.)

 

I should also mention I do not allow normal, unenchanted, armor to give any ed. only heavy full armors give a couple of points. therefore spells of energy, even at only 1D6, are very deadly. enchanted items are very rare (magic in general is, mages/clerics are very rare and shouldn't expect to meet many normal who can resist their magic...demons however )

 

I think thats it.

[Blorn]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I'm not sure I want to add more complications to the character design process with resource points. It's just one more thing for players to have to calculate, not to mention the fact that I, as the GM, would have to have a bunch of pre-made items (though, I don't mind players starting with a magic item if they can justify it with background story... I once allowed a player to have a magical shield that was handed down from generation to generation in her family, but, she had to prove that she was worthy of the family heirloom by, you guessed it, going on a quest. On top of that, the shield, which was sentient, did not allow for it's entire capabilities to be realized until the player further proved her worth... the player knew about some of the powers, she had heard many stories of her ancestors that was passed down through the ages, but, for some reason she couldn't get them to work).

 

Resource points would also add another layer of possible min/maxing. I like to keep my magic items as more of a plot device than something the players can start their careers with (see above for an example). One of the things I can't stand about D&D 4E is how mundane magic items become when everyone can buy what they want. I don't mind that for simple common things like healing potions, but that Staff of the Archmage or that Vorpal Sun Sword are items that they have to find... and even when they do, they may not know all of its capabilities. Of course, the worlds I tend to run are fairly low magic, definitely not High Fantasy... As someone above mentioned, the players are exceptional, so I'm ok with them having spells and what-not. Essentially, magic is, in my campaigns, run mostly like a High Fantasy campaign, but there just isn't a lot of practitioners. A city of 2000-3000 may have 10 or so wizards of low to moderate ability. Minor divine magic is a little more common, so much so that the common person, when they see something magical, assumes that it's some kind of sign from the gods.

 

Anyway, getting back to commenting on the resource points. I think that there are definitely ways to balance fighter/wizards, magic items/innate ablities, etc all ready in the HERO System without adding another mathematical calculation element... But, if it works for you, go for it. Who knows, maybe it's the way to go with all of this...

[Markdoc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

We've tried using resource points in the past (several times, actually) . It was pretty horrible.

 

In terms of balance, it doesn't add a great deal, because the problem Old Man has brought up (fighters get RKA and armour, wizards get everything) still rears its head. Secondly you rapidly run into situations where either a) you expand the pool, so that characters are not too limited - but then mages become really powerful or players stop carrying items they both need and which logically they could easily acquire because they are running up against pool limits. Several GMs in our group tried, but we never did get what I would consider a useful system.

 

There's a long thread on resource pools in FH that goes over this is some detail, if you want to search for it.

So far, my opinion, if you want balance remains that you need to build your magic system to gimp magic users. In my system, the requirement for extra time and a skill roll, reduces their power in emergency situations like combat, but allows them to shine everywhere else. There are plenty of other approaches - Killer Shrike's page has a learned discussion on this very topic - but in the end, I don't see an alternative if you want mundanes and mages to play at the same level. The good news is that it is not that hard to do, and (in my opinion) adds flavour to the game.

 

cheers, Mark

[Escafarc]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

I have to disagree with Markdoc. We've used the Resource System since we came across it in the old Super Agents book and it works fine. I've found in addition to well thought out magic system that if you make the characters pay for everything like a "Supers" campaign (increasing the point as needed) tends to help balance things well.

[Ice9]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

No, Hero is perfectly capable of balancing "realistically possible" with "magically possible". Along a broad range of development points. You just have to be careful about how you go about it. Certain characters should, conceptually, have access to a broader range of powers than others. Usually, the way to balance that is to make the "restricted access" powers expensive enough to make up for that versatility; either that or you have to give the specialists some kind of cost break or other compensation for giving up access to them.

As I said, you can balance things at a given point level, especially a low one. If spells are generally expensive and swords are free, then you start out with "novice mage and experienced swordsman" or "journeyman mage and veteran warrior", which is fine. But that falls apart if the players ever gain significant experience, because the mage has a scale that goes all the way up to "conjure armies of djinn", and the swordsman is still stuck with "things that are realistically possible". Heck, at some point, even straight stats and skill levels go past what's realistically possible.

 

Also, restricting Multipower does not, by itself, rein in mages at all. It just restricts what type of mages are effective. Guy who throws out a lot of attacks like fireballs, animated swords, and curses? You'll run out of points. Guy who can bind spirits to himself, gaining the agility, prowess, and insight of history's greatest heroes, plus drain life force with a touch? Still doing just fine.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Real Costs for spells and how you handle them?

 

As I said' date=' you can balance things [i']at a given point level[/i], especially a low one. If spells are generally expensive and swords are free, then you start out with "novice mage and experienced swordsman" or "journeyman mage and veteran warrior", which is fine. But that falls apart if the players ever gain significant experience, because the mage has a scale that goes all the way up to "conjure armies of djinn", and the swordsman is still stuck with "things that are realistically possible". Heck, at some point, even straight stats and skill levels go past what's realistically possible.

 

Also, restricting Multipower does not, by itself, rein in mages at all. It just restricts what type of mages are effective. Guy who throws out a lot of attacks like fireballs, animated swords, and curses? You'll run out of points. Guy who can bind spirits to himself, gaining the agility, prowess, and insight of history's greatest heroes, plus drain life force with a touch? Still doing just fine.

 

In all reality, everything characters do in a typical RPG defy reality. A Swordsman taking on 20 guys in a row and winning is pretty unrealistic.

 

Without any tinkering on our part, the system favors "the wizard" who can do anything over "the fighter" who just has some combat skills. Hence why you have to reign in such things in settings where you want a "fighter" archetype to work.

 

The same thing would happen in any genre if you don't customize your powers to fit and be balance. If one guy has a gun and sharpshooter skills, and the other guy can bend reality at will, obviously the latter is going to "win" or be "more powerful." If one guy is just really strong and tough, and the other guy is Silver Surfer, well, do the math.

 

This is not unique to FH. Nor is it a "problem" with the HERO system, or at least not one unique to it - see all the hubbub regarding Casters vs. Melee in D20, or Jedi vs. Everything Else in Star Wars games (both the D20 and WEG versions, not to mention the SW Galaxies MMO.)

 

And, again, by enforcing my genre conventions in my FH games, I've never had those players playing non-casters feel like they are "supporting characters" to the all-powerful Caster.