Is Champions/Hero System cinematic?

[phoenix240]

I've been lurking in the thread on another forum(The thread is here) discussing possible rules sets for gaming in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the setting for all the recent movies. Several systems were brought up with the most support going to Marvel Heroic Role play and the most opposition, at least vocally, to Champions mainly because it "couldn't do cinematic" play. Personally, I disagree but some posters brought up some interesting points.What do you think?

[LouGoncey]

It says it is cinematic right in the beginning of CHAMPIONS COMPLETE -- if by cinematic, you mean "larger than life."  Superheroic seems cinematic (though I rarely play Superheroic).  But what are the guys over at TBP saying is cinematic?  All roleplaying is cinematic -- if it wasn't we would have to make EGO rolls everytime we acted, or we would freeze and/or run.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Um... yes.

 

Next question.

[Hyper-Man]

There was another recent thread on another forum (not sure if rpgnet or enworld) that talked about the uselessness of the word "cinematic" as a descriptor as it means different things to different people.

 

I'll try to find the thread later. It's an interesting read.

[Scott Baker]

I don't even have to look at the other forum to realize that the posters there obviously don't know what they are talking about. Any system can be "cinematic" (and I agree with what Hyper-Man posted). A good GM could run a game in the Marvel (movie) universe using Amber Diceless and everyone would have a great time. Anything else is just a personal opinion (or bias) regarding particular rule systems. As in years gone by, and similar discussions about running a "Marvel" game where the old Marvel Super Heroes was seen to be superior, it often was simply that the characters were pre-built for them. In Champions/Hero System, there wasn't a pre-built version of your favorite Marvel character waiting to be run right in the book.

[Scott Baker]

And check out this comment by Steve:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/88504-cant-decide-on-hero-6e-or-gurps-4e/?do=findComment&comment=2341460

[JasonPacker]

Hero is my go-to system for cinematic, especially super heroic games. I can't imagine a system that would do that better without abandoning the RPG space entirely for a more narrative style of play.

[IndianaJoe3]

Hero does action very well, no matter what the genre. It's not so good at slapstick comedy or introspection.

[phoenix240]

An interesting comment from the rpg.net thread. Thoughts?

 

 

 

I've played Champions/Hero a number of times, and also am well versed in MHR.  My "main" game is V&V, which is more in the "simulationist" camp, so that's usually what I prefer.

I have to admit, though, that there are things that MHR can do that - if one is even able to do them in the more complex games (Champions, GURPS, V&V, M&M) - they'd take a massive amount of work, or page-flipping, or calculations.  Let me give an example.

As I sat watching the final conflict in Iron Man 3, I was struck by how the battle scene I was watching on the screen wouldn't likely happen at our table.  At least not as depicted.  The more tactical games often have a game board, and whether we use miniatures, counters, or just mark an "X" on a piece of graph paper or vinyl battle map, we all know that Character A is 45 feet away from Character B, and likewise we also know whether Character A's ranged energy attack can reach Character B if he fires (and other details like that).

But what happens in the film is this elaborate chase scene taking place over, through, and within this massive industrial setting (an oil rig).  The characters fly, jump, fall, and duck and dodge over a distance of miles.  Trying to model this with a traditional 2D or 3D table game would be nearly impossible.  A scene like that could really only be "simulated" in the mind(s) of the participants.  And sure there's no real way to make sure that everybody's seeing the same exact thing in their mind.  But the more abstract and 'not detailed' approach of MHR allows things like this to happen at the game table.  You could call its lack of granularity on things like how much exactly a character can lift (or how fast or far they can fly) more "hand-wavey", but that same lack of detail allows the GM and players to more quickly come up with a really far-reaching and epic (and truly cinematic, as vague as that term can be) action scene that is far more difficult to be do in a "traditional", "simulationist" game.

And again I say that as one who prefers the more "traditional" game.

I think Majestic has a point that he may be overstating the "impossibility".

 

OTOH, I have no idea where the idea that you have to learn a plethora of subsystems to play different sorts of characters in Hero System came from. Hero System is one of the more unified game systems I know. I'd rank it higher than GURPs in the regard. Psionics, Superpowers, Magic, etc all work on the same core rules. You certainly don't need to learn new rules to play a "Brick" as opposed to a "Blaster".

[Scott Baker]

An interesting comment from the rpg.net thread. Thoughts?

 

 

I think the only thing that makes it "easier" in MHR is the fact that you are already making it all up in your heads as you play. No reason you can't do this in Hero, or any other simulationist, game system. And if the GM knows the rules, and/or just the scope and effect they are looking for, you certainly don't need to do any extra page flipping.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Game mechanics-wise, Hero is one of the most cinematic game systems I've ever played outside of Exalted and other games that emphasize that type of roleplaying.

 

Other than that, any game can be cinematic if the GM presents it in that manner.

[Tasha]

If you visualize a game as being on the Cinematic vs Gritty continuum then you can start talking what games are more cinematic over others.

I see a Cinematic game as one that is very forgiving, that takes a lot of kill of Player Characters. Gritty Games tend to be ones that make death of all characters very easy and quick.

it's the Difference between the A-Team TV show and a War Docudrama. In the A-Team everyone fires off millions of rounds of Ammo out of Automatic weapons and only vehicles and property get damaged. Grenades just vault the badguys in the air to stun them. In the Docudrama, Bullets kill randomly and graphically. Death is cheap and comes often. Grenades blow limbs off and kill people.

Hero's default is Cinematic, it can be as cinematic as the A-Team. It can also be used for more gritty games, but doesn't ever really get as gritty as the Docudrama.

Traveller is Realistic. You don't get into combat, because your character will probably die.

D&D (ex 4th ed), starts out somewhat gritty, and as the characters get more powerful the game becomes very Cinematic.

D&D 4e starts out Cinematic and pretty much stays that way throughout the character's career.

Gurps tends to be more Gritty, but not as gritty as Traveller.

[Scott Baker]

Traveller is Realistic. You don't get into combat, because your character will probably die.

 

At least in the little black books you didn't have to get into combat to die in Traveller. I lost more than one character during character creation. 

[Tasha]

At least in the little black books you didn't have to get into combat to die in Traveller. I lost more than one character during character creation. 

That was only in the first few printings. They added a rule in later printings that allowed you to muster out with a Maiming wound (ie Lost leg or arm).

[Spence]

An interesting comment from the rpg.net thread. Thoughts?

 

 

 

I think Majestic has a point that he may be overstating the "impossibility".

 

OTOH, I have no idea where the idea that you have to learn a plethora of subsystems to play different sorts of characters in Hero System came from. Hero System is one of the more unified game systems I know. I'd rank it higher than GURPs in the regard. Psionics, Superpowers, Magic, etc all work on the same core rules. You certainly don't need to learn new rules to play a "Brick" as opposed to a "Blaster".

 

I hear this a lot.  For some reason no one seems to understand that Hero only has one mechanic for everything, 3d6 roll low. 

 

Game mechanics-wise, Hero is one of the most cinematic game systems I've ever played outside of Exalted and other games that emphasize that type of roleplaying.

 

Other than that, any game can be cinematic if the GM presents it in that manner.

 

I have played a lot of games and Hero is easily as cinematic as Exalted and the others.  Just don't play on a board/map.  Bang.  Done.

 

Without a map and figures/markers the game is immediately narrative/cinematic.  I already only require a die roll if their is a dramatic need. 

 

Sam Super-spy wants to pick the lock:

• Alone in the corridor he picks the lock with no roll needed.  Why? He is a SUPER SPY! Taa Daa!
• In the corridor with bullets flying and 50 storm troopers charging him, he has to roll.  It's the pressure man!

 

I became unsatisfied with Champs a few years back because it was getting bogged down on the table with the maddening D&D style players that what to think out every possible ability from every possible angle before making a decision and if you tell them "it's been 15 minute, make a choice your times up" they throw a tantrum.   

 

So I followed a bit of advice from the Hero boards and stopped using a hex map on the table.  I still use small maps to look at and pass around, but everyone had to describe what is happening. 

 

Suddenly the rollicking free-wheeling cinematic adventure was back!   Woot!  Problem solved!

[Spence]

At least in the little black books you didn't have to get into combat to die in Traveller. I lost more than one character during character creation. 

 

 

That was only in the first few printings. They added a rule in later printings that allowed you to muster out with a Maiming wound (ie Lost leg or arm).

 

Now that is an improvement

[Beast]

wrong htread

[Sean Waters]

Hero certainly calls itself cinematic.  It certainly can be cinematic in practice.  I'm not sure the rule set is particularly cinematic though.

 

I'm not saying that is a bad thing: have you SEEN cinema?

 

Look at Spiderman: lots of stuff involves the sheer exhilaration of swinging between tall buildings.  You're not going to find a game system that does that, well, not a tabletop RPG anyway.

 

What we mean by cinematic, on the cover of the book, is 'not terribly realistic', or 'action movie logic'.  We don't mean 'excellent for angsty teen simulation'.

 

Most games are not particularly cinematic in themselves.  To be cinematic you need to be able to change things around and adapt quickly, you need to be able to call for a roll at a moment's notice to determine something no one had foreseen happening, that kind of thing.  Equally you need to be able to write cinematic scenarios.  Everything has to happen pretty quickly.  Bear in mind most movies are not more than 2 hours long.  A game is always going to drag out a lot more than that, if it is going to have the same content, simply because script writers have spent a lot of time paring everything down so that it makes sense (often) and conveys all the relevant information to the audience so that they can understand what is happening.  Most games are simply not built that way, or geared to a scenario built that way.

 

Hero assumes that you can write scenarios.  There is very little in the books about how to create a cinematic experience and no examples.  It is assumed that if you have all these cool characters, magic will happen.

 

The other thing about cinematic experiences is that there are rarely half a dozen main protagonists, except in some war movies and The Avengers (which was a war movie), and it is also rare that all the main characters are centre screen for the whole time.  Practically unheard of.  

 

If you want to know if Hero, or any game, is 'cinematic', first define what you mean by 'cinematic' (what it actually means is 'having qualities characteristic of films')  Is Hero capable of being the engine in a cinematic game?  Sure.  Is it a game that is in some way inherently cinematic?  Hmm...well, it can certainly create a very wide range of characters and such, so casting is covered, but I think there is probably more to it than that.

[NuSoardGraphite]

 

I have played a lot of games and Hero is easily as cinematic as Exalted and the others.  Just don't play on a board/map.  Bang.  Done.

 

I never play RPG's on a board/map.  I feel it takes away from the cinematic presentation when you do that.  Some players really enjoy that, but not me.

 

 

 

Without a map and figures/markers the game is immediately narrative/cinematic.  I already only require a die roll if their is a dramatic need. 

 

Sam Super-spy wants to pick the lock:

• Alone in the corridor he picks the lock with no roll needed.  Why? He is a SUPER SPY! Taa Daa!
• In the corridor with bullets flying and 50 storm troopers charging him, he has to roll.  It's the pressure man!

This is similar to what I do.  A lot of actions my players want to do, I let them be automatic.  Only if there is extenuating circumstances (pressure, combat, high difficulty) do i worry about the roll or if there is an opposed test such as two characters fighting.

 

 

 

I became unsatisfied with Champs a few years back because it was getting bogged down on the table with the maddening D&D style players that what to think out every possible ability from every possible angle before making a decision and if you tell them "it's been 15 minute, make a choice your times up" they throw a tantrum.   

 

So I followed a bit of advice from the Hero boards and stopped using a hex map on the table.  I still use small maps to look at and pass around, but everyone had to describe what is happening. 

 

Suddenly the rollicking free-wheeling cinematic adventure was back!   Woot!  Problem solved!

 

I've always run my games this way, beginning with day #1 of being a DM using the basic Red Box Set of D&D.  I wanted my games to feel like the novels I've read and the movies I had seen, and using mapped combat didn't give me that feeling.  I've used free-style "cinematic" combat the whole time.

[Theros]

I think that Hero System is cinematic in any other genre than Superheroic (mostly because of combat). Why?

 

Cinematic system need to be fast. Damage calculation is rather slow with big number of dices and there are plenty of things to remember at first.

 

Still...this is very good system, but not that cinematic.

[Spence]

I never play RPG's on a board/map. 

 

-snip-

 

I've always run my games this way, beginning with day #1 of being a DM using the basic Red Box Set of D&D.  I wanted my games to feel like the novels I've read and the movies I had seen, and using mapped combat didn't give me that feeling.  I've used free-style "cinematic" combat the whole time.

 

You're lucky.  My formative gaming start was war-gaming historicals before Chainmail led the way to D&D 1st.   It was years before could play without a board/map.   I had issues for a long time with being able to visualize the action without the crutch of mini's on the table.  Just couldn't seem to let go. 

[phoenix240]

Well, the rpg.net thread seemed to go south pretty quickly.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Well, the rpg.net thread seemed to go south pretty quickly.

It's RPG.net. that's how they roll over there.

[phoenix240]

I'm not entirely sure why it got so hostile, honestly.

[Scott Baker]

It's RPG.net. that's how they roll over there.

 

 

I'm not entirely sure why it got so hostile, honestly.

 

"It's RPG.net. that's how they roll over there." - Lather. Rinse. Repeat. It's a shame things seem to go that way.