Setting Up the Rules

[sinanju]

I'll say it again:  I want to run a game, not spend all my time adjudicating on rule calls.  I have a rule lawyer player.  Every incarnation of his character is bad.  It's just an infinite variety of junk.  Do I just keep vetoing his character over and over, five emails a day for weeks on end?  And what if asks, "what would I need to do here to make the character fromage-free?"

And I'll say why?  Given that the game has at least four obvious attempts to control this problem (real cost, active cost, DCs, stop and caution signs) and given that the rules are more than 500 pages, why can't I expect some support from the rules about what's fair and what's cheese?  If not in the original rules, then at the very least, in the genre books.  Why does that have to be me while I'm trying to run a game?  Damn, if I'm just going to run the game based on my intuition, why even have rules?  And by the way, some players want to know where the limit is, other players want to know that the limit is the same for everyone and not decided on a case by case basis.  The Fantasy Hero book is an additional some-odd hundred pages, it clears NONE OF THIS UP.  

 

But, as I said, I think I have the answer.  GMs have veto power.

 

Seriously, none of you have had a player ask where the line is so that they can make a fair character?  How do they react when you tell them that it's more of a feeling than a set of guidelines?

 

Try having the "rules lawyer" tell you what sort of character he wants to play and YOU build the character. Or let him describe three, and you build them all and he can pick one to play. That way, you know whatever character he plays is acceptable to you. (If he isn't satisfied with any of your designs, maybe the two of you just aren't compatible and he should find another game.)

 

But frankly, making rule calls is part of being a GM. It is and always has been, in every system. No game system can provide perfect balance and anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell you a new one. It's not as much fun as designing NPCs or plots or building a world, but it's part of the job.

 

And of course I've had players ask where the line is and then build right up to it. Or build something utterly overpowered and hand it to me. (I had a player once produce a doctor in GURPS with a medical skills in the mid-30s. I took one look and told him that he had to build a new character because THIS ONE had just been drafted as the President's personal physician and would not available to go adventuring. So he built another doctor with more reasonable skill levels.) You have to be willing to say no. If the player never learns (the rules lawyers of my acquaintance did, though), maybe you _can't_ game with him. Not everyone fits with everyone else.

[TheRealDeal]

Not sure if this helps, but my take on being a GM and running a game (I have run D&D 2E, 3E, 3.5E, 4E, and HERO) is that the Campaign cannot exist apart from the PCs. What do I mean by this somewhat arcane statement? Basically, the PCs are as important to the game as the entire rest of the Campaign (NPCs, Genre, Power Level, etc.) combined. So if a GM spends (and is willing to spend) hours and hours on his NPCs, genre storylines, plots, background, etc. he MUST be willing to spend the same hours on each PC. This is an upfront time sink, yes, and until you are done with this, you cannot run the campaign at full bore. Inform the players of this and let them know you will run the game for the first few sessions in "play test mode" while you iron out with each PC their powers and how they fit into the game.

 

Once you do this, giving each PC your full attention and working out with the players (yes back and forth many times perhaps) their PCs, you can finally have a stable set of PCs to really get into the game with. You can during these communication times explain any power limitations you are concern with in the powers they build, ask them what they are trying to achieve (this is critical, and you cannot let them dodge around this, if they are trying to get away with something, they will be unwilling to answer with clarity and will be very general, just keep pressing them for more specifics and this will eventually lead to a resolution). After the base PC is well established, any new powers they get with XP will be much faster under this process, as at that point their main concept is set and they are just adding on a few XP at a time. I usually wait until the PCs gain 25 XP before I allow them to spend any of it, just to keep things smooth and have this oversight time in manageable chunks, but it probably would not be a big deal if you let them spend XP in chunks of 2-3 or however many you give at a time.

 

So far it has worked well for me, and the players usually have a solid and stable PC after the 2nd or 3rd gaming session. The players get into their PCs and really see how they are unique and special in the game and this really clinches it for them. I make sure each PC is special in some way during this oversight time with each player. I let them know they are co-GMing with me in effect when they create their PCs, and we have a gentlemen's agreement that I will not find ways to sabotage their powers and such, but if I find that a power is too much, they agree to alter it in cooperation with me. This way, they know their powers will do what they expect most of the time (there are always rare exceptions which are part of the plot and enjoyable in that they are just that, rare) and if I find something is disrupting play, I take the blame on myself as GM for missing it, learn from my error, and ask the player to work with me to tone down the power. This way I can avoid trying to find underhanded ways to gimp the power which is a violation of our gentlemen’s agreement. I also allow them to buff up powers that they find are not doing what they expected, so I allow some flexibility and we weave these changes into the plot somehow if needed, and it seems to work out well.

 

I have found that any game system really requires this up front effort from a GM. Yes many game systems claim to be balanced out of the box, but honestly, while they have good intentions, they have holes, sometimes, glaring ones. HERO gives it to your straight, and does not try to sell you an illusion. The HERO system tells you point blank the system is not balanced by itself, but requires significant GM to Player cooperation and communication to work, but once you put in that extra effort, you are well rewarded for it.

 

Along this same line, I do not punish players who find out they have not built something as well as they later learn they could have to achieve what they were after, by forcing them to keep it, I allow them to change it. At the same time I ask the same from them, asking them to change something I find too disruptive. The key here is to tone down such powers a little at a time. Make minimal changes as much as you can, and see if that is enough, and if not, make more as needed. I just am upfront with the players, telling them I will make minor change requests and see how they work, but this may mean I need to ask for this several times until I find the sweet spot. Or I can just make a more significant change request which will likely be too much, and then boost the power back up a little as needed. I let them decide.

 

If you do this with the players, it takes more time at first, yes, but it is worth it for sure. Just be willing to be flexible in game and allow retraining as needed, finding a plot reason for it if you need to, which is actually pretty easy once you do it enough times. This works for me in addition to the general rule limits you may also use (like AP limits and DC limits and such). I have never found I can enjoy GMing a game with PCs made only by the players with little input from me as GM. I do not subscribe to the hands off GMing approach, I avoid micromanaging, but I most definitely must approve each PC and only after I have spent the time going through each one with the player. If this takes several hours over the course of a few sessions even, so be it.

 

Once your players get used to this, they know they will not be getting away with tricks, and will eventually give up trying or find another group. This is good, if somewhat frustrating at first, as going through the disruption the loss of a player imposes is worth the long term effect of ending up with only players who are willing to work as a team with the GM and other players, and not demand self-gratification or else. So I suppose my advice may end up with you losing a player, if that is not something you can accept at the moment, then do not take my advice

[Grailknight]

You don't have to build his character for him but you'll have to do it with him, preferably face to face and away from the other players. 

 

Have him state his vision of the character with a general outline of what his character can do and what he'd like it to grow towards. That will place limits on the breadth of his abilities and they'll be limits he envisioned not ones you imposed. 

 

Now hash out those abilities. If he wants to be the greatest X in the world, you have to establish where he is along that path relative to the campaign guidelines at this point in his career. If he's well rounded(conceptually) then he'll be okay, if not go back to his character outline and ask him where your ideas diverge. Basically put the onus on him to justify his character in campaign context rather than campaign power.  He has to want to fit in, but it has to be fun for everyone.

 

Suggestions

 

Run some test combats against mobs of normals (fantasy/modern) or agents(supers) so he can see just how powerful he is relative to the world at large. Newbies to Hero are often amazed a what their character can do relative to normal people. He may just lack confidence and some easy victories are nice as you learn the system.

 

Make a set of guideline examples with 2 types in particular in mind. First, true novices that your starting pc's should be more powerful than in most but not necessarily all ways. Second, the rival/mentor/retired hero that the pc's  should not be equal to one on one now, but that they will someday surpass before reaching their ultimate goals. 

 

Let everyone be special at something. In a fantasy campaign, VPP mages should be 1-2 DC less than Multipowers to balance out versatility.

[NuSoardGraphite]

The previous two posters are dead on.  Make the character WITH your player(s).  Try these steps:

 

1: type out and print a complete outline/synopsis of the game you intend to run.  Include the background that the player characters should know leading up to the opening scene of the game, any relevant political information that they should know and outline the mood and themes you would like to explore during the game.  Also include in this outline, the power level you wish to portray, including Base Points + Disads/Complications, Active Point limits, Skill roll limits, Characteristic maxima and any special house rules you will be implementing (and what optional rules you will activate, if any)  This will give the players a baseline for creating the type of character that will fit into the game.  

 

2: Have the players write up an outline of the character they wish to play.  Include a physical description, psychological profile and brief background of the character.  Also, have them detail in narrative terms, what the character is capable of (powers, skill and ability etc).   Review this and accept or veto based on the character concept.

 

3: Once a players basic concept has been accepted, hash out a time that YOU and the player can sit down together and create the character.  During this process you can easily work out powers and abilities that you feel don't belong in the game you wish to run or are too powerful.  This needs to be a collaborative process.  The player should make the decisions regarding exactly what goes into the character (based on their initial concept) and the Gm is there to simply guide the process so that the character is acceptable within the context of the game world.

 

4: Once the character is created, solo play that player with the character to make sure that the character performs as desired by both yourself and the player.  Make adjustments as needed if it turns out the character is overpowered or underpowered or is lacking in some area they shouldn't be.  Once the character adjustments are completed, the character should be ready for group play.

 

Repeat these steps with all the player characters.  This process can be time consuming if you don't have a lot of free time.  It could take a couple of weeks.  This process can be done with 2 players at once if you desire, just make sure that the process is collaborative and that you don't end up making the character for the player (unless of course, they want you to...I've done that for a few players in some of my games)

[NuSoardGraphite]

HOW TO DEAL WITH A MUNCHKIN

 

At heart, the Munchkin wants to be a badass.  Usually, they desire to be the most physically badass character in the party.

 

Let him (or her).

 

There's nothing wrong with this desire.  Every group should have a badass that does the most damage per hit.  Let the Munchkin player play this character.

 

The key is, to make sure that the Munchkin isn't the best at everything, which the Munchkin will try to get away with if you let him.  Don't let him do that (with point limitations, it's very tough to make this kind of character anyway) but it IS okay to let him bet the best at melee combat.  Or the best with a sword.  or the best archer.  or the best Martial Artist.  Let the Munchkin be the best [ENTER TEMPLATE HERE] and he'll be happy, as long as his character performs well during gameplay.

 

The secret to keeping the Munchkin happy during gameplay, is to send a lot of unskilled ruffians at him during combat, so that he can flaunt his superior combat skills by mowing down scrubbs by the dozens.  

 

Another tactic is to provide the Munchkin with a rival who is as good as he is, or *gasp* even better.  Have a battle between the Munchkin's character and the rival NPC come to a draw.  It will drive him nuts.  But make sure at some point near the climax of the game (or story or whatever) that the Munchkin gets to defeat his rival.  That will make the Munchkin so happy, that'll be the Best Game Ever.

 

Munchkins can be notoriously difficult when the GM wants a game that has realistic chances for everyone to win or lose an encounter.  However, if you don't mind your PC's owning unimportant ruffians by a fairly wide margin, you can easily feed the Munchkins desire and he will (generally) cease to plague you in other areas of the game (during Roleplaying portions or tactical planning etc)

[NuSoardGraphite]

HOW TO DEAL WITH A RULES LAWYER

 

Most of this is front-loaded.  Rules Lawyers have a need to adhere to the rules as closely as possible to make it "fair" for everyone involved.  If you detail exactly what can go into a character in your initial handout to the players, this will go a long way toward mollifying the Rules Lawyer.  You have to detail each and every little adjustment you are adding to your game.  Specifically, which optional rules you are (or are not) going to use.  Hit Locations, Impairing/Disabling wounds, bleeding etc.  You also need to detail which (if any) powers or Talents are unavailable for use by the PCs.  If you miss something, the Rules Lawyer is likely to catch you on it eventually.

 

The Rules Lawyer is going to be a pain in the ass during gameplay.  This is inevitable and unavoidable as long as you have a Rules Lawyer at your table.  Don't sweat it.  The main thing is to not get into arguments with the Rules Lawyer, as they rarely wish to give ground.  Whenever they challenge your interpretation of a rule, ask them to look it up for you, as the Rules Lawyer LOVES to do this and is most likely already doing so anyway.  When s/he finds the rule and quotes it to you, pretend to listen intently, nod and agree with the Rules Lawyer and move on.  This is the fastest way to deal with them.  Don't let ego get in the way.  You have an obligation to your other players to get past the issue and keep the game moving along at a nice pace.

 

A good way to get the Rules Lawyer on your side from the getgo is to ask his/her input on which Optional Rules should go into the game in the first place.  They'll wet themselves with glee at being included in this process, and ever afterward you will be the awesomest GM in The Land.

[NuSoardGraphite]

WHY HERO DOESN'T DETAIL THE RULES FOR THE GM:

 

Back in the pre-historic days before the release of the 5th edition, Hero used to do this.  The Fantasy Hero book was replete with phrases like "This is inappropriate for Fantasy games" or "Use of this in a Fantasy game would prove unbalancing".  The problem with this was that there were many a GM who wanted to use the very things that the FH book forbade us to.  We wanted to use Power Frameworks like a Multipower as our framework for Magic.  FORBIDDEN!  We wanted to use Powers to create Feat-like Talents for non-mage characters.  FORBIDDEN!    We wanted to make adjustments to the rules to tailor our games to a specific feel or subgenre.  FORBIDDEN!

 

These restrictions made it notoriously difficult for GM's to simulate a wide variety of settings outside of the D&D/LotR paradigm.  Most of us ignored these restrictions of course, but when it came to discussion of our games on the message boards, the authors restrictions made it practically impossible to have a reasonable conversation. 

 

"You can't use Power Frameworks in a Fantasy Hero game!"

 

"You can't use Powers for a non-mage in Fantasy Hero!  What were you thinking?!?"

 

"That spell is too high of an Active Point cost!  You have to keep it under 60 Active Points!"

 

It was maddening.  People would come in and ask things like "I want mages to have more spells in the game...more like D&D.  But when I work out the point costs, a starting mage at 150 points can only afford 5 or 6 spells, unless I heavily limit them, and even then they can only afford a few more without seriously reducing their characteristics and skills...HELP!"  And when someone came in and would suggest a Multi-power spell system, someone would inevitably come in and say "You can't do that!!!"  "No frameworks in Fantasy Hero!"  "Leper!  Outcast, Unclean!"

 

One of the best things to happen to Hero in this regard, is Steve Long, the 5th edition and the removal of the aforementioned restrictions on character creation.  The 5th edition introduced the concept of the GM deciding exactly what elements of the system went into his or her game, from the standard rules to the optional rules.  From which powers and talents to how high the skills can go and the limit of characteristics.  And the GM can tailor these things for each and every genre he or she wishes to run.  It was beautiful.  This created a renaissance of character and campaign creation.

 

However the problem of new players and GM's increased with this new level of freedom given to the fans.  It is now more difficult for those with less experience with the system to know how to get started.  It requires gaining experience with the system to understand the underlying math, how the mechanics all interact and how to scale it to match the desired effect.  Not something that can be done simply by looking at numbers on paper. (it CAN be done this way, but it isn't particularly intuitive)

 

Just know that you can get to where you want to be.  My suggestion is to playtest, playtest, playtest.  That's what I did when I first started out with HERO.  It's how I got to understand where the power scale lay and what was appropriate for the games I wanted to play.

[Tasha]

But what if that player isn't sure what you mean by "unfair for this genre or something."  It would seem to me that that would be a good thing for the genre books to do, but they're as open-ended as the 2 volume rule book as far as the rules go.  Take, for example, trigger.  I have no idea why every character doesn't have 8 active-point-maxed, DC-maxed offensive powers, all with the 1/4 point trigger ("when I say boo"), all ready to go off in a multipower when they enter combat.  Boo.  You get attacked 8 times.

 

You reply, "that would ruin the game," to which some player is likely to wonder, "well, how close to that line can I get without ruining the game," or worse, they've got a powerpool, but because restrictions aren't laid bare, you have to constantly spend your time adjudicating on the genre/fairness of every creation.  Sure, some players will get the picture and join the cause, but what about the other guy, the min/maxer or power-gamer?  Do you just tell them that Hero isn't the game for them? Do you encourage everyone to min/max and then go for broke?  Because the min/maxer will want a line and if you have to draw it for every power and advantage in the game...

The real answer is to have the Players build Characters first with plain english powers and skills. They later translate the Plain English into Hero Skills/Perks/Talents/Powers. You build to concept first, don't have them build powers then characters.

 

All point buy systems tend to be open to min maxing and powergaming builds. You just need to point characters in the direction of not doing that.

 

It may take you asking for that plain english writeup for their character, and YOU the GM writing the PC up for the Player. To show the players what you are trying to do with your limits etc.

[Zephrosyne]

Aversil, I can understand where you are coming from but ultimately, it is a matter of experience.  All anyone on this forum can do is tell you what they do.  Every gm/player group dynamic is different.  Also, Hero by no means has a monopoly on rules abuse/munchkinism/whatever you wanna call it potential.  That being said, from my experience, effects based/toolkit type systems do seem a bit more prone to it than most.  The flexibility and seemingly unlimited possibilities is very seductive.

 

The first thing I think you need to do as a gm is know yourself.  Know your strengths, weaknesses and what you are and are not comfortable with.  Do not let anything into a campaign that you cannot handle.  It is true that the most important thing in the campaign is the players because they are the focus; however, if you are not comfortable with what you are doing, it isn't going to matter one damn bit.  You will fail!  You also really need to know the rules.  Know all the important ones and know where to find the not so important ones.  You also need to be properly prepared.

 

Me personally, I have a document of what I call campaign standards.  Those are a generic, universal set of guidelines that I apply to almost any Hero campaign that I run.  These are basic things that almost never need tweaking based on the campaign.  Before I run a campaign, I design a sound framework for it.  You don't need to know exhausting detail about the campaign, you want to leave room for growth but you do need to know what does and does not exist, what is and is not real.  Once I know the world, I then give characters a written campaign background, a list of house rules, and character creation rules.  For my group, I do have a tendency to use things like base damage dice, active point cost, OCV/DCV, defense, etc. restrictions.  I have players that sorta need those parameters.  After this, I give them all two weeks to mull over it and create their characters as well as a written background.  Unless I am dealing with someone inexperienced in roleplaying, I don't take a particularly active part in the character creation process outside of answering any questions they might have about what is and is not acceptable.  They usually call me with background and concept proposals and I discuss them on an individual basis.

 

Once characters are created, I review them.  I check the math as well as the build itself.  This is where experience comes in.  I do have some players that like to push the boundaries of what I consider acceptable.  If it is something appropriate for the campaign and something I can live with, I'm generally ok with it.  They accept me for the gm that I am so I accept them for the players that they are.  This is where knowing yourself and knowing the rules comes in.  Yes, players can come up with abusive applications of the rules that are concept and campaign appropriate, it doesn't mean that you have to accept it!  Some players will also come up with total bs.  I had a player who tried to get me to allow him the Disadvantage: Hates Ham (5th Edition).  I wanted smack him upside the head.  He was actually trying to argue why I should allow it.  You have to be reasonable but you don't have to be a pushover.  If it is something that you can't deal with, just say no!  The Sixth Edition rules (the two big blue books) do a very good job of giving you a few warnings about potential problem areas but no rulebook can over all the bases.  That is where your experience and judgment will have to come into play.  Some things you are going to have to be fairly rigid about, other things you can be more flexible.  If something gets past you that you didn't see as a problem initially, pull the player aside and explain the situation.  Hopefully, he is reasonable enough to make appropriate adjustments.  I have never actually used the statement "because I said so" because it is a bit condescending and you are probably talking to adults; still, the buck stops with you.  Just be honest, fair, and consistent with your decisions, players don't have the right to ask for more than that.  If they do, then they don't deserve you.

[Archmage1]

Hi, I'm the player in question, and I am enjoying the game a lot, but if I'm really making the game less fun for everyone else, then you should ask me to leave.

I want to play, but if I'm ruining everyone else's fun... that's not something that I want to be doing.  I didn't think that I was messing up this badly.

 

I think I'm in a relatively bad position as far as character building goes.  I know the character creation rules fairly well, but what I don't know is how powerful things are in game, which makes it hard to know if something is over the top, or if it is useless.

 

I would be happy to talk with you about character design, and go through things with you, and we can try to work things out.  Alternatively, I would be quite willing to send you a list of what I want the character to be able to do(Which will probably be based on a 3.5 class), and you build him as you want, and I will then play that character.  

 

I want to play, and I'm hoping that once the character is finished, things will be fine.

[Ndreare]

Why not make yourself familiar with the bestiary and the mooks at the back off fantasy Hero?

Then you will be familiar with the expected power level of Hero System mobs.

There is even some example characters in the back of fantasy Hero 6th that helps or players a lot.

[Archmage1]

Well, the issue there is we are running a 1st edition d&d game that got converted, so the monsters are converted from d&d by Aversil, so I'm not sure how things line up.

 

I will take a look at them, as they would almost certainly be a starting point.

Thank you.

[Aversill]

Archmage 1, do you really want to do this on a public forum?  I'm asking questions about how to set up mechanical limits to reign in character construction abuses.  I'm assuming that you don't know everything about the game.  But please don't insinuate that you have no idea about power levels and things.  All the other characters are in scope.  You have a file with every 1e D&D spell in the Player's Handbook translated into Hero, about fifty different special abilities for magic weapons, hundreds of potions, and all the rules covering armor, including magic armor.  You know what the power levels are.  Moreover, you and I have gone back and forth talking about your character.  Part of the reason I started this thread was because I wanted something concrete to give to you so that you could figure out where the limits of the game are, since, generally, when I say something is too powerful that's your cue to go ahead and add it to your character sheet.  At one point, you wanted a character who could blind mega-scale teleport while desolid and invisible.  Are you saying you don't know what that would do to a game?  Really?

 

If you really want to know, I don't think you're playing the game.  I think you're playing me.  I'm not sure why you're doing that.  Maybe it's the 3.5 background.  Maybe it's something else.  But it's no fun for me, and it is, quite frankly, no fun for anyone else at the table either.

 

I recommend that you read the comments on this thread that aren't mine.  They're very good at explaining a surprising principle in this game: that despite the incredible volume of the rules, the game only works if people aren't trying to abuse the system.  

[Archmage1]

You are correct, a specific argument on the thread does not make sense, but I can perhaps shed some light on things.

 

I was thinking that my character was 1-5th level spells.  The teleports are 4th(dimension door), and 5th(teleport), whereas the rest are much lower(With the exception of desolidification, which should be removed)

What I wasn't considering was the duration of heroes effects being effectively infinite, which changes things.

Rather than having 1-5th level spells, I was making 7-12th level spells, and thinking they were balanced.

I also wasn't thinking of things in combination.  I thought along the lines of one thing at a time, which was not reflected in the character.  Teleport or desolid or invis isn't so bad.  Make it an and, and it becomes much worse.

 

However, at this point, I don't want to present any changes to the character, since I'm afraid that you will throw me out, even if they make the powers weaker.  However... I'll send you an e-mail when I get home, and can look at the sheet.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Hi, I'm the player in question, and I am enjoying the game a lot, but if I'm really making the game less fun for everyone else, then you should ask me to leave.

I want to play, but if I'm ruining everyone else's fun... that's not something that I want to be doing.  I didn't think that I was messing up this badly.

 

I think I'm in a relatively bad position as far as character building goes.  I know the character creation rules fairly well, but what I don't know is how powerful things are in game, which makes it hard to know if something is over the top, or if it is useless.

 

I would be happy to talk with you about character design, and go through things with you, and we can try to work things out.  Alternatively, I would be quite willing to send you a list of what I want the character to be able to do(Which will probably be based on a 3.5 class), and you build him as you want, and I will then play that character.  

 

I want to play, and I'm hoping that once the character is finished, things will be fine.

Build a character according do concept, not according to game mechanics.  Concept characters built to fit within a specific genre/campaign setting are a joy for Gm's to work with.

 

This doesn't mean you can't come up with cool and interesting things for your character to accomplish.  You absolutely can.  You simply need to discuss with Aversil what he's okay with your character acomplishing at the start of the game.

 

So build your character to concept to fit the campaign.  Work with your GM to make sure your character fits.  Then hopefully, your GM will work with you to give your character the potential you want him to achieve.  

 

What kind of character are you playing?  And what about it is considered abusive?  We can help a lot easier if we get some specifics from you two.

[Aversill]

I generally don't do this because I don't want to hear the obligatory...why did you do it that way?

 

You want the guts or the description?

 

The game is Fantasy Hero, but it's pretty close to Champs.  There's a 325 point total with a 55 Active Point cap.  I have a defense cap of 55 Active divided between regular, resistant, damage reduction, and damage negation, except that on the latter two, I generally don't count it if it's sufficiently limited (fire immunity, for instance).  I'm running equipment through power pools because that's what I'm comfortable with:  

 

Equipment Pool, X base + 55 control cost, No Skill Roll Required (+1) (Y Active Points); Extra Time (Extra Phase, Delayed Phase, -1), Stocks and Stores (-1/2), Limited Special Effect:  Equipment Very Common SFX (-1/4), Equipment has reasonable mass (-1/4); all slots IIF (-1/4)

 

Characters are required to buy armor proficiency as well.  The above power pool can actually be bought up to whatever the character wants in Active (after all, as GM I control what the characters get to add, generally, to their stocks and store).

 

If characters want more than this, they have to buy perks to be able to access other powers and etc.  Perks range from 1 point (I've got a power) to 16 points (I can basically summon spells at will).  There really isn't a limit in terms of what the characters can take as powers so long as it fits the conception and power level of the game.  That being said, magic is normally bought through a VPP.  The goal here is to have the characters able to play strange and exciting fantasy heroes.  One character is a pirate with a scimitar and a belt of giant strength, another character was a halfling with a bunch of poisons, another character is a bard with all kinds of mental abilities.

 

Magic in populated areas requires a power roll.  Magic outside those areas does not.  Anything that qualifies as "magic" is bought with a 1 segment delay to represent the ability to interrupt spells.  Basically, I want spells and spell like abilities to be somewhat consistant with the 1st edition D and D game upon which this Hero game is based.

 

Maxes are 17 for Str, Dex, Con, Int, Ego, and Pre.  PD, ED, Rec at 10 (with the above stipulation), 30 for Stun and End, 20 for Body, 6 for the CVs, and 3 for Speed.  Everything above these costs double.  This is true for Cha bought as powers.  It is not true for Aid.  Characters may not buy Skill Levels but they may buy CSLs and do.  CVs as a result tend to run high, but they run high for everyone.  Most everyone has bought their speed above max.  I allow people to buy combat luck once, but not twice and it doesn't stack with armor.

 

Because of the 55 Active max, damage from weapons runs a bit high (3d6 for greatswords, but most attacks are between 1 1/2d6 and 2d6).  Almost all attacks are killing.  Armor itself runs between 3 and 15 Resistant.  Solid armors have damage negation.  Sharp weapons reduce it.  I use knockback, but it's only happened once.  I only use hit locations if something would be impaired or disabled by the attack or if someone calls shots.  I don't use bleeding.  For the most part, if the players get the rules, I'd be willing to use optional rules, and I'm certainly into the swordplay kind of rules for FH, but 4 of the 5 players have never played Hero before and the fifth played Champions 1st printing, 1st edition.  I myself played 1st edition Champions from about 85 until 92 a whole bunch.  Every game we played was translated into Champions except for Call of Cthulhu and later Vampire: the Masquerade.  I have been playing 6th edition for about 2 1/2 years (If you want to know my skill level, I recommend you check out the mechwarrior stuff below).  Two of the players are making their own stuff (characters, spells, etc.).  Archmage1 is one of those players.

 

Power types are reminiscent of 1st edition dungeons and dragons, but as I'm not playing D and D, I'm not against making the game better by translating it into hero.  I've included A spells and spell like equipment to give you a basic feel for what I'm going for.

 

That's the campaign...

Power Pool.hdc

A spells.hdc

[NuSoardGraphite]

With free use of powers and such a high starting point level, it's going to be difficult to balance that.  Maybe.

 

Sounds to me like you have the basics well in hand.  I'm not a fan of equipment pools  because I'm the type of GM to give out lots of stuff.  I don't want to be limited by a characters pool points.  As far as using a VPP for spells, thats perfect for a D&D style spell system where all the character has to do is find and "study" the spell then they gain the capability of casting it.  Is the VPP on Charges to limit the number of spells one can cast per day?

 

It looks to me like your average damages are pretty consistent with the Characteristic maximums, but the defenses (being up to 55 active) might run a bit high for consistent damage.  How does this play out in the actual game?  10 resistant PD/ED at 0 End is  30 active points.  55 Active points is around 18pd/ed which is pretty high.  What is the average resistant defense in your game?

 

*I don't have Hero Designer, so I can't read your files*

[Archmage1]

Moderator delay.  The issue was not what I was thinking it was.  Not even a little bit.

Edited April 16, 2014 by Archmage1

[Aversill]

Oh sorry.  Let me know what you'd like to see and I'll paste it in.  Defenses tend to be around 9 resistant.  Basically, if you have a 10 PD, and a 10 Ed, you only have 35 points left over for resistant, and you want to have PD and ED because Stun multiples will screw you up otherwise.  That being said, almost every character has gone the DCV or Block route, which is fine.  DCV after dodge can get up between 14-18 (yeah I know, but it works out).  The highest defenses tend to be with the casters.  

 

The 325 reflects the fact that the characters are buying huge perks or a huge equipment pool.  Without it, I expect that the characters would be around 250-275.  I also make the characters buy 25 points worth of flavor skills or perks.  Stuff that doesn't have a combat analog.  Finally, the 55 point max was chosen because, lower than that, and I find mental powers have little chance of ever working.  In my experience, Hero doesn't work very well below 50 points, and really 60 is probably best, but I don't know, that's just my experience.

 

The power pool the spell caster, not Archmage1 has, is:

 

Wish Pool, 60 base + 55 control cost,  (88 Active Points); all slots Extra Time (Extra Segment, -1/2), Side Effects: Character gains Distinctive Features as a Spell Caster (20) and enough  complications to make up the difference (half active), Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-1/2), Banality (-1/2)

 

Where Banality is a limitation that amounts to a power roll, modified by circumstances, and which effects the nature of the side effect (if the distinctive features doesn't matter, it becomes something else, generally damage).

[NuSoardGraphite]

Ah, that totally makes sense with the extra points going to Equipment pools.

[Aversill]

In terms of balancing, the problem here is that I have seen versions of this character as high as 6 a day for two weeks straight.  To those of you who feel I have not done that preliminary work...yeah.    I just keep getting sent new and improved versions of the character that eek out points over and over and over.

 

Often, the new and improved characters highlight places where I've said, in general conversation, that the rules are a bit lacking.  So, for instance, we had a long winded conversation about healing.   Healing didn't really work in the game, or at least, it seemed hard to figure out.  So, in comes a version of Archmage1's character that now has lots of healing.  Basically, if I didn't know how to balance that power, he wanted in on the action.  Then, here on the forums I had a discussion of healing and I got all the kinks worked out.  Healing was now going to be limited and defined.  Having read that forum, here comes a version of his character with regeneration.  Then I outlaw regeneration as it really doesn't work as I see it now (why would anyone buy healing?), so here comes a version of his character with an Aid to Body with a reduced diminishing rate of once per 5 minutes and a low enough endurance cost that it acts as improved healing.  I dare not explain AVLD's that do body.

 

I mentioned in coversation that autofire is really powerful if combined with surprise attacks.  Next thing I know the characters main attack is a penetrating, armor piercing autofire.  When I rule that that consitutes a non-standard attack power, the power is rolled back to an armor piercing autofire, which he haymakers while invisible.  Yay!

 

At one point the character had four multipowers.  One for attacks, one for movement, one for strange defenses (including 55 points of Power Defense and 55 points of Mental Defense), and one for resistant defenses.  He was hoping that the 55 active could oscillate between PD and ED, depending on the enemy he faced, until I put the keebosh on that, so he took them out of the multipower and bought +12 rPD and +12 rED seperately.  This particular character had desolidification (requires End to Activate), Invisibility (ditto), images (on a trigger), autofire AP blast, flight, two kinds of teleport (one megascaled), flight, flash, darkness, and an aid to two characteristics simmultaneously.  This was after I scaled this character back, over and over again for two weeks straight.

 

Keep in mind, this may sound excessive, it is, but what can I say.  First, other characters have power pools.  I mistakenly assumed that since they could summon these powers too, what was the difference (the difference is skill rolls and multiple phase delays).  Second, seriously, he wore me down.  How many times can you read the same character without finally saying, "fine.  Let's see how it plays."

 

This version enraged the rest of the table.  Partly because it was overbalanced, but also because the rule lawyering began and so there needed to be a million decisions on rule calls so as to get more power (did you realize that, according to the rules, you can do a flash while invisible without giving away your position.  Who allows that?).  So, yet another character was produced, this time very apologetically, most of the powers had been sheered of the most egregious of advantages, but lo and behold, suddenly there was Weapon Master to add 3 DCs to all the shadow powers.  I mean, seriously, everyone's mad, and now the character is attempting to get 3 DCs over the Active point max. 

 

This is really the problem, and the problem that this forum has otherwise not hit upon.  It isn't a balance issue, its that the balance issues are consciously inserted. If I were dealing with accidental problems or the mistakes of a neophyte, that's one thing, but when every correction breeds, like a hydra, two more problems that require correcting, and when those problems stem from identified problems with the rules, it stops being explainable as ignorance and looks like willful production of problems.

 

Now, some of you have said that you wouldn't tolerate such a player.  I hear that.  But at the same time, there's a kind of logic to this kind of character design.  You look for the line in the game and you toe it.  This is why I asked how you guys define the line so as to deter this kind of play style.  Not ejection, but deterrence because, at the end of the day, Archmage1 knows the rules and is a pretty good role player.  Moreover, he's not a bad guy...until he opens Hero Builder.  

 

That being said, he's now received 8 experience points and the very next day after the end of our last adventure, I had to answer a string of emails in which he asked whether he could buy off all the limitations that his powers had that had kept him from being cheesy the night before, and now he wants to know, generally speaking, how the construction of scrolls will work in my game.  I am babysitting a character.  I think that the rules should alleviate some of this or at the very least, I think there should be some mechanism by which I can say, here, here is what I don't want to see.  I'm still surprised that other people don't have such restrictions, but there you are. 

[Steve]

Hmm. As I see it, the problem is not the usual mechanisms meant to control effectiveness within prescribed limits (CV, Base and Active Points, Defenses, etc). I'm more than a little astonished at the level of DCV being thrown about, since I usually only see those on superheroic martial artists in my own campaigns. Still, one good Explosion or AE deals with sky-high DCVs.

 

You've set your numbers, and they seem to be working for the other players.

 

The problem is you've got one very determined player who wants to cover every niche he can get his hands on and break the system in the process. He's also driving you nuts with countless versions of characters, trying to break you down and get something past the judge (you).

 

Some things need to be understood by the player. Active Points and DC limits are meant to take into account everything on a character sheet. If the character is already at the limit for Active Points, something like Weapon Master is right out.

 

Regarding oddball defenses like Flash and Power Defense getting so high, I think it has to do with the way you are lumping together defenses into a single total number, unless I misread that. I'm used to a structure like Normal/Resistant defenses being set to 16/8 or the like, and things like Flash Defense would be limited to something like 5.

[Archmage1]

Ok, I did not think of it from that perspective.  My thought processes were more along the lines of: "Huh, you know, that could be cool".  The only thing that I did do in response to the game situation was add scent onto invis and images. 

 

This... was not what I was expecting the issue to be.

[Aversill]

That DCV is based on levels and an occasional Aid through magic items.  So, if base DCV is 6+martial dodge is 11, and the character has 4 levels with martial arts, that's 15 max.  I think the halfling has a base of 7 and adds two to range modifiers because of a persistent Change Environment.

 

Note, if the characters get those DCVs, they aren't putting anything into OCV and probably won't hit.  Also, when surprised, that DCV is still 6 (or 3 when halved).

 

I should point out that this falls in line with my general belief that the game uses the characters stats as the norm.  Unfortunately, that doesn't work if the stats vary greatly across the characters as they currently do.

[Steve]

It seems to me that the guy running the game in Hero basically has to constantly lay down the law and that if he or she just says, "make something and we'll play an adventure," the whole thing will turn to chaos before the game even begins.  The game gives Stop and Caution signs, but there are so many hidden combinations that are damnably easy to find that if someone wants to exploit the rules, you'll pull your hair out constantly trying to put a stop to their exploitation that you'll have no energy left for designing the adventures (or do you just start a cheese competition).

 

This question is less about how official boundaries work, since I don't think those work very well (I'm thinking of AP limits, DC limits, no Stop powers, etc.), and more about what you do as a GM when players bring you the BS.  Do you just say, "no," followed by "because I said so?"  Do you have rules in your campaigns that, if followed, will prevent BS, and if so, how did you do it given the labyrinthine ruleset and the nigh infinite ways in which the rules can be exploited.

 

I didn't see this as having been directly addressed, so I thought I'd add a comment.

 

Eight maxed slots in a multipower is not the same as eight attacks going off at once, even with Trigger on each slot. The points in the multipower don't get automatically redistributed by Trigger. The character has to select one slot to have active. Trigger doesn't control that.

 

Other than the core rules, what books do you have to work with? Fantasy Hero?