I wonder how many have stopped using Champions/HERO for similar reasons to this?

[Beast]

I bought Wild Talents I did not care for the system but it was well worth it for the world setting. I still think it scales poorly to 4 color comic gaming but was great for lesser powered supers gaming. The thing is that we all appreciate different things or we'd be fighting over the same thing.

 

No offense, Shiva13, but I like to get my eyes on a book and I certainly don't rely on a reviewer to make my decisions in movies, games or music. I am pretty independent minded. I think your way off in your assessment of HERO. Hero 5th edition was one of the best ever produced with outstanding support. This is depsite Fuzion and some of the lame 4th edition supplements. There is a lot to be said for simplicity though and retro games of simpler days are popular now. But I would like to present a different issue.

 

It is not just hero, it's RPGs in general that have declined. There are so many choices for enterainment than there was in 78 to 85 probably the hey day years of RPG gaming. Now you have the card games, online MMOs, Xbox, playstation and the digital world to contend with. This decline would have happened no matter what as tecnhnology and entertainment grew alot with more choices. It has little to do with a split in HERO system community because it affected RPGs as a whole. Was there a split in D&D? Vampire? Traveller?

 

I don't think there was a migration as much as an exodus from gaming in general.

 

Let's not get into a "fan defensiveness" situation here. They tend to devolve rather rapidly. And I just don't want to deal with that.

 

I've been with the Hero System since 3rd edition. And I have a copy of 2nd edition. I also have a complete run of the Adventurer's Club. And one of my letters was printed in issue #9 of the Champions comic book series. So yeah, I've got more than a little experience with the system and the community around it.

 

My view of the Hero System is my own. I'm not trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking.

I beg to differ

By putting your opinion out for all to read, is just that

If you had just listed the games you knew ,and where looking for input on those that you did not know is a different story

[Beast]

Out of my entire group of players, they love playing Hero when I GM it. Most of them play other systems when I don't. However, that being said, they keep coming back because pound for pound, Hero is still the best superhero system out there. Other genres require the rules built in to get them to work, but when I want to play superhero games, I've tried to play other systems. They don't work in my head.

 

Now, granted, there's a certain amount of pleasure in playing for a guy who writes for the system that might have something to do with that. But nonetheless, when they have a question, just like any other group of players, they ask me. I answer the question. We move on.

 

This begs several other questions about gaming, especially superhero gaming, that I'd like to bring up at this time. And this is pretty simple moralistic stuff.

 

1) Have we become so narcissistic that the concept of teamwork has passed us by? Superhero games are first and foremost about teamwork. All I've heard in this discussion is "I, I, I," no offense to anyone intended.

 

2) Is the very internet we post on a part of that narcissism, or is it a true generational shift where people are simply more selfish?

 

3) Why are we unwilling to do the hard work of basic arithmetic? The math I do for Champions may be harder than the math I do for my day job, but so what? That gives me an advantage in my day job that I am simply unwilling to give up.

 

4) You get out of a system what you put into it. And that's why I like a lot of Hero's complexity and options. The more you put into something, the more you get out.

#4 is what feel also 100%

[Old Man]

Out of my entire group of players, they love playing Hero when I GM it. Most of them play other systems when I don't. However, that being said, they keep coming back because pound for pound, Hero is still the best superhero system out there. Other genres require the rules built in to get them to work, but when I want to play superhero games, I've tried to play other systems. They don't work in my head.

 

Now, granted, there's a certain amount of pleasure in playing for a guy who writes for the system that might have something to do with that. But nonetheless, when they have a question, just like any other group of players, they ask me. I answer the question. We move on.

 

This begs several other questions about gaming, especially superhero gaming, that I'd like to bring up at this time. And this is pretty simple moralistic stuff.

 

1) Have we become so narcissistic that the concept of teamwork has passed us by? Superhero games are first and foremost about teamwork. All I've heard in this discussion is "I, I, I," no offense to anyone intended.

 

2) Is the very internet we post on a part of that narcissism, or is it a true generational shift where people are simply more selfish?

 

3) Why are we unwilling to do the hard work of basic arithmetic? The math I do for Champions may be harder than the math I do for my day job, but so what? That gives me an advantage in my day job that I am simply unwilling to give up.

 

4) You get out of a system what you put into it. And that's why I like a lot of Hero's complexity and options. The more you put into something, the more you get out.

1) Hell yes.

 

2) Why not both?

 

3) We aren't, but as I said elsewhere, I have recently encountered functional adults for whom Champions math would be difficult. Then again, I've also pointed out that all the 'hard' math is in character creation, so if a player can get some help with that, it's just adding dice.

 

4) Tl;dr.

[BNakagawa]

I keep coming back to HERO System because I know it better than anything else. I can Reason From Effect practically in my sleep. There've been times in my life I could create characters without reference to the book. I could practically run the game without having to reference the book. I play other RPGs' date=' and it's been a long time since I've thought of Hero as the One True RPG, but warts and all it's still my favorite. [/quote']

 

This, this, a thousand times, this.

 

The HERO system is essentially a language. A language I have spent decades studying and using to express impossible things in concrete terms and explicit detail. As cool as new game systems might be and as clever or innovative the might be, I don't want to have to learn an entirely new language to tell one story. Maybe it isn't in fashion, maybe it isn't current or cool or hip. But as long as I can find people who speak this language, I plan to keep using it.

 

[Tasha]

Out of my entire group of players, they love playing Hero when I GM it. Most of them play other systems when I don't. However, that being said, they keep coming back because pound for pound, Hero is still the best superhero system out there. Other genres require the rules built in to get them to work, but when I want to play superhero games, I've tried to play other systems. They don't work in my head.

 

Now, granted, there's a certain amount of pleasure in playing for a guy who writes for the system that might have something to do with that. But nonetheless, when they have a question, just like any other group of players, they ask me. I answer the question. We move on.

 

This begs several other questions about gaming, especially superhero gaming, that I'd like to bring up at this time. And this is pretty simple moralistic stuff.

 

1) Have we become so narcissistic that the concept of teamwork has passed us by? Superhero games are first and foremost about teamwork. All I've heard in this discussion is "I, I, I," no offense to anyone intended.

 

2) Is the very internet we post on a part of that narcissism, or is it a true generational shift where people are simply more selfish?

 

3) Why are we unwilling to do the hard work of basic arithmetic? The math I do for Champions may be harder than the math I do for my day job, but so what? That gives me an advantage in my day job that I am simply unwilling to give up.

 

4) You get out of a system what you put into it. And that's why I like a lot of Hero's complexity and options. The more you put into something, the more you get out.

1) I,I,I has always been a problem in RPG's it's very amplified in Champions due to how many players percieve comics. Most people focus in on the Solo books and then when they play Champions they want their team experience resemble the Solo books.

 

2) I just think that the ability to communicate to so many others have amplified the complaints that some people have. I think that people are probably as selfish as ever, it's just more noticeable esp with the RP hobby shrinking so much.

 

3) Most people don't care for Math. It's not something you can do in your head, so it requires some thought. Of course, Hero Designer has mitigated much of the "I hate math" argument against hero.

 

4) I love the Complexity. I hate the amount of time it takes to build a great character. It's always been an issue for the system. Loving the Champions Villains volumes. They save a ton of time. I really hope that we will see HD Character Packs for Star Hero.

[Shiva13]

I'm not a Mod, but I feel I have to speak up.

 

Too much "fan defensiveness" of the game system runs the very real risk of becoming condescending or insulting to the readers of the forum thread that may share differing views than yours.

 

I've gotten a bit of an implication from reading some of these newer posts of fan elitism. And the condemnation of those who display different tastes as either being stupid or lazy.

 

That is negativity none of us need.

[Balabanto]

I agree with you, Shiva, but at the same time, I'm not being fan defensive, I'm trying to ask questions, so here comes round two.

 

1) As gaming becomes available to a broader audience, is it possible that the people who were in that intellectual crowd are now coexisting with people who don't share the same level of intellectual thought and critical complexity? Originally, gamers came from a highly educated class of minds and were much more interested in the simulationist style of gaming. Right now, the pendulum has swung towards a more "gamist" interpretation, where the purpose of the game is different from what it used to be.

 

2) Does more or less complexity necessarily mean better or worse? My issue has always been that with options comes complexity. But new players to my game always say "Holy !#$!! He can do this math in his sleep!" This means one of two things: A) They aren't used to point based systems or Never really did math.

 

3) What skills does Champions teach? What skills do other game systems teach? How can we as gamers showcase this when we run Champions? When we run Fantasy Hero? When we run Pulp Hero?

[bigbywolfe]

1) As gaming becomes available to a broader audience, is it possible that the people who were in that intellectual crowd are now coexisting with people who don't share the same level of intellectual thought and critical complexity? Originally, gamers came from a highly educated class of minds and were much more interested in the simulationist style of gaming. Right now, the pendulum has swung towards a more "gamist" interpretation, where the purpose of the game is different from what it used to be.

 

I'm not sure this is accurate at all. I hear more stories about bad GMing, power gaming, people doing just plain dumb stuff, et cetera from "back in the day" before we "figured out what role playing was about". D&D was sold is toy stores at one point and played largely by Junior High and High School students. Not sure how or why those original gamers would constitute "a highly educated class of mind".

Some of the most socially maladjusted people I have ever met have been at our local game shop and the regulars are not the cream of the crop intellectually either. Somehow I doubt this is a brand new phenomenon.

[Killer Shrike]

 

I'm not sure this is accurate at all. I hear more stories about bad GMing, power gaming, people doing just plain dumb stuff, et cetera from "back in the day" before we "figured out what role playing was about". D&D was sold is toy stores at one point and played largely by Junior High and High School students. Not sure how or why those original gamers would constitute "a highly educated class of mind".

Some of the most socially maladjusted people I have ever met have been at our local game shop and the regulars are not the cream of the crop intellectually either. Somehow I doubt this is a brand new phenomenon.

 

+1 for Truth.

[Shiva13]

When I got into gaming, it gave structure to something I had already been doing since I was a young child. Making up stories and playing them out with friends or family.

 

I had the writing bug since I was in first grade. It manifested then. Even when my spelling was pitiful, I was still charting out my own stories. And engaging in fan fiction then. It's always been as natural as breathing to me.

 

When roleplaying games hit me square in the face, I didn't truly see them for what they were. I saw them for what they could be. A gateway to further expressing the characters and stories I always carried inside my head.

 

Roleplaying has never been about the mechanics to me. It's always been about gathering the tools together to tell a really good story with a group of people.

[Shiva13]

The more time consuming that things like character creation and management of a game system is to me, the less time I am spending thinking about new characters and fun new situations And that's a negative to me.

 

I would be at my most happiest if I had a game system that utterly and seamlessly faded into the background. And was only referenced when the need arose. But was otherwise out of my way most of the time of the time, so I could spend that time creatively.

[Greywind]

That must be a difference between us, Shiva. I find that the more time I'm involved in character creation, I'm also spending that time, and more, thinking about who they are and how they would react in new situations. Which is a fairly critical point to telling stories. Adversity and character growth, or at least change is necessary. There's more to creatively spent time than sitting at the table in the game.

[Old Man]

I'm not a Mod, but I feel I have to speak up.

 

Too much "fan defensiveness" of the game system runs the very real risk of becoming condescending or insulting to the readers of the forum thread that may share differing views than yours.

 

I've gotten a bit of an implication from reading some of these newer posts of fan elitism. And the condemnation of those who display different tastes as either being stupid or lazy.

 

That is negativity none of us need.

Well said.

[GhostDancer]

1) As gaming becomes available to a broader audience, is it possible that the people who were in that intellectual crowd are now coexisting with people who don't share the same level of intellectual thought and critical complexity? Originally, gamers came from a highly educated class of minds and were much more interested in the simulationist style of gaming. Right now, the pendulum has swung towards a more "gamist" interpretation, where the purpose of the game is different from what it used to be.

 

I'm not sure this is accurate at all. I hear more stories about bad GMing, power gaming, people doing just plain dumb stuff, et cetera from "back in the day" before we "figured out what role playing was about". D&D was sold is toy stores at one point and played largely by Junior High and High School students. Not sure how or why those original gamers would constitute "a highly educated class of mind".

Some of the most socially maladjusted people I have ever met have been at our local game shop and the regulars are not the cream of the crop intellectually either. Somehow I doubt this is a brand new phenomenon.

Quote...Originally, gamers came from a highly educated class of minds and were much more interested in the simulationist style of gaming.

 

Quote...D&D was sold is toy stores at one point and played largely by Junior High and High School students. Not sure how or why those original gamers would constitute "a highly educated class of mind".

Some of the most socially maladjusted people I have ever met have been at our local game shop and the regulars are not the cream of the crop intellectually either. Somehow I doubt this is a brand new phenomenon.

 

I think you're both right. The originators of our hobby were well read- D&D's influences and sources include J. R. R. Tolkien, Robert E. Howard, Edgar Rice Burroughs, A. Merritt, H. P. Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Roger Zelazny, and Michael Moorcock. Monsters, spells, and magic items used in the game have been inspired by hundreds of individual works ranging from A. E. van Vogt's "Black Destroyer" (the Displacer Beast), Lewis Carroll's "Jabberwocky" (Vorpal sword) to the Book of Genesis (the clerical spell "Blade Barrier" was inspired by the "flaming sword which turned every way" at the gates of Eden). D&D predecessor, Chainmail, was put together by Napoleonics wargamers Dave Wesely and Dave Arneson. Dave Arneson singled out M. A. R. Barker and Empire of the Petal Throne as being his favorite GM and roleplaying game, respectively.

 

Barker received a Fulbright Scholarship in 1951 to study Indian languages. He attended the University of California, Berkeley for graduate studies, writing a dissertation on Klamath language, collecting traditional myths, legends, tales, and oral histories and later publishing a grammar and dictionary on the language.

He taught at the Institute of Islamic Studies at McGill University from around 1958/9 until 1972 and became active in the development of Urdu and Baluchi instruction materials for English-speaking students following a period of two years from 1960 when he was attached to Panjab University. Some of these are still recommended university course study materials as of 2010. From 1972 he moved to teach at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, where he chaired the Department of South Asian studies until his retirement in the early 1990s.

 

I first learned about D&D at Akron (Ohio) University, 1980, where the game books were sold in the college book store. These books were not sold in toy stores yet.

[GhostDancer]

Out of my entire group of players, they love playing Hero when I GM it. Most of them play other systems when I don't. However, that being said, they keep coming back because pound for pound, Hero is still the best superhero system out there. Other genres require the rules built in to get them to work, but when I want to play superhero games, I've tried to play other systems. They don't work in my head.

 

Now, granted, there's a certain amount of pleasure in playing for a guy who writes for the system that might have something to do with that. But nonetheless, when they have a question, just like any other group of players, they ask me. I answer the question. We move on.

 

This begs several other questions about gaming, especially superhero gaming, that I'd like to bring up at this time. And this is pretty simple moralistic stuff.

 

1) Have we become so narcissistic that the concept of teamwork has passed us by? Superhero games are first and foremost about teamwork. All I've heard in this discussion is "I, I, I," no offense to anyone intended.

 

2) Is the very internet we post on a part of that narcissism, or is it a true generational shift where people are simply more selfish?

 

3) Why are we unwilling to do the hard work of basic arithmetic? The math I do for Champions may be harder than the math I do for my day job, but so what? That gives me an advantage in my day job that I am simply unwilling to give up.

 

4) You get out of a system what you put into it. And that's why I like a lot of Hero's complexity and options. The more you put into something, the more you get out.

I can only think of one specific instance of Champions math helping me IRL, but, generally, such mental gymnastics help ward off dementia. And the incident was bringing my Mongol bride through Honolulu Customs. The officer asked how much she weighed. Oyuntsestseg ("Jewel in the Heart of the Lotus Blossom") only knew her weight in kilograms, which the officer did not follow. I'm a Yank, we barely touched metrics in school, but Champions taught me to multiply the kilos by 2.2 for pounds, and we were on our way.

 

So regarding this one item, I was better educated than the officer, who by all rights should have know better than me.

[GhostDancer]

I'm not a Mod, but I feel I have to speak up.

 

Too much "fan defensiveness" of the game system runs the very real risk of becoming condescending or insulting to the readers of the forum thread that may share differing views than yours.

 

I've gotten a bit of an implication from reading some of these newer posts of fan elitism. And the condemnation of those who display different tastes as either being stupid or lazy.

 

That is negativity none of us need.

I agree with Simon - none of us on this thread have fallen to Goradin's level, even after Simon posted such.

[Killer Shrike]

The more time consuming that things like character creation and management of a game system is to me, the less time I am spending thinking about new characters and fun new situations And that's a negative to me.

 

I would be at my most happiest if I had a game system that utterly and seamlessly faded into the background. And was only referenced when the need arose. But was otherwise out of my way most of the time of the time, so I could spend that time creatively.

Well...have you looked at FATE ? It's extremely lightweight and narratively focused.

[kahuna's bro]

Is this the thread where I complain about Ben Affleck being Batman? Because that movie is so dead to me! I tremble with nerd rage at the very thought. Now, let's see what else I can get offended at.

 

Anyone? Any ideas at all?

 

try the non gaming discussion section

[rravenwood]

 

D&D predecessor, Chainmail, was put together by Napoleonics wargamers Dave Wesely and Dave Arneson.

 

I know it's really off-topic, but to ensure the historical record is correctly represented: Chainmail was created by Gary Gygax and Jeff Perren. Dave Arneson made use of the Chainmail rules in his Blackmoor game, which in turn inspired Gygax and thence lead to his collaboration with Arneson that resulted in the original D&D rules.

 

Back on topic, I agree with the rest of your point that while there certainly are and have been plenty of non-intellectual gamers, the originators and early adopters of role-playing tended to be well-educated and rather intellectual, and also tended to have strong wargaming backgrounds. As with all sweeping generalizations, there were undoubtedly exceptions, but the days of maladjusted high-schoolers being (or at least being perceived as) most representative of the typical role-player seems to have come a little later.

[Cassandra]

Is this the thread where I complain about Ben Affleck being Batman? Because that movie is so dead to me! I tremble with nerd rage at the very thought. Now, let's see what else I can get offended at.

 

Anyone? Any ideas at all?

Apparently they didn't see Daredevil when then picked Affleck. Of course, neither did Daredevil.

 

Makes me miss Adam West.

[Cassandra]

The first Superhero games was ironically Task Force Games Supervillains. The makers of Star Fleet Battles created a role playing game that allowed the players to set up a criminal empire in New York City. There was a list of powers that many comic book fan would recognize, but martial artist and characters with super strength could only inflict one point a damage a turn rather then the other powers 1-4, 1-6, 1-8, 1-12, or even 1-20 die rolls.

 

Champions was my next RPG, and was a quantum leap above anything else I found in character creation. The supplements were of less use because the characters in them were so far above the then 200 Points Character Standard. The key to the Hero System is it's flexibility, which allows the GM and the PCs to create the campaign they want. I haven't found another game system that comes close, and I've tried Villains & Vigilantes (Even got the comic), Superworld, Marvel, and DC.

[bigbywolfe]

Pointing out that the people who made the original RPGs were well read and thus gamers in general used to be of higher intellectual quality is like pointing out that video game programmers are educated so most early video game players were great with computers. A =/= B.

Now I'm not saying that most gamers are, or were, maladjusted. I just think the claim that hobby is getting bogged down by all the riffraff interfering with us true intellectuals is silly (and bordering on elitist).

 

How many times on this very forum have there been complaints about how video games and MMOs and such are depleting the RPG hobby because of the ADD generation? Would that not imply that we are actually losing those with lower " level of intellectual thought and critical complexity"?

 

The hobby has always been a mix of bright, creative people and socially awkward outsiders (sometimes both in one individual). I've met brilliant people, dumb people, passionate people, and downright terrible people in this hobby.

[bluesguy]

When I bring in new players who have never played Hero I tell them a couple weeks in advance about how the game system works. I tell them about the campaign world. I then tell them to think about a character that will work in that world. Think of the concept/abilities/powers. Think about the character's family, their history, how they became who they are. And then we spend an afternoon building a character (thank you Hero Designer). After that we sit down and go over the character sheet.

 

Last but not least we practice how to roll for skills and some combat. Then when they first start playing I put them between two players who know the system well - especially the combat part - to help them along. So far I have taught five people who are either totally new to RPG or new to Hero how to play. We have been having fun.

[bluesguy]

The first Superhero games was ironically Task Force Games Supervillains. The makers of Star Fleet Battles created a role playing game that allowed the players to set up a criminal empire in New York City. There was a list of powers that many comic book fan would recognize, but martial artist and characters with super strength could only inflict one point a damage a turn rather then the other powers 1-4, 1-6, 1-8, 1-12, or even 1-20 die rolls.

 

Champions was my next RPG, and was a quantum leap above anything else I found in character creation. The supplements were of less use because the characters in them were so far above the then 200 Points Character Standard. The key to the Hero System is it's flexibility, which allows the GM and the PCs to create the campaign they want. I haven't found another game system that comes close, and I've tried Villains & Vigilantes (Even got the comic), Superworld, Marvel, and DC.

The key to the Hero System is it's flexibility' date=' which allows the GM and the PCs to create the campaign they want. I haven't found another game system that comes close[/quote']

 

100% agree. And the fact that as a GM and player I can learn one system and play in any genre my mind can imagine is very exciting.

[massey]

I know some absolute drooling morons who can still grasp Champions. I don't think it's that hard. Some of them don't know how to use a shower but by god they understand a multipower.