Use of the Hero System's Older Editions

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yep, I find that converting 4e to 6e there's no real effort required. Just mapping abilities across.

 

 

There aren't really too many changes, on occasion I find one of the 4th edition builds can be done better with 6th rules, but most of the time for me after several hundred is that its just a matter of recosting a few things.  The real problems come when a power like missile deflection or find weakness/lack of weakness shows up and you have to re-model it.

[zslane]

After having done my share of "porting" characters from 2nd to 4th, I am disinclined to make that effort for 6th. I prefer the "no porting at all" approach to playing Champions. This is quite doable (for me) by sticking with 4th ed. and cherry-picking those mechanics and ideas from 5th that don't affect the point costs of anything.

[Tasha]

After having done my share of "porting" characters from 2nd to 4th, I am disinclined to make that effort for 6th. I prefer the "no porting at all" approach to playing Champions. This is quite doable (for me) by sticking with 4th ed. and cherry-picking those mechanics and ideas from 5th that don't affect the point costs of anything.

 

Second to 4th was a major PITA in places. Esp since Elemental controls changed to completely between editions. Some characters took advantage of a second edition loophole with the way that EC's were built and had to be reworked in a major way. There were lots of other changes (ie Martial Arts), that were also difficult. 4-5er is so simple that it's hardly a change. 4-6 is still easy, but you do have to deal with the Limitation (Unified Power -1/4) replacing Elemental Controls. Though it's more than made up for by Unified power being able to be on any and all powers (even Multipower pools and slots).

 

YMMV. Oh, Hero Designer makes all of this easier. If you were using Creation Workshop/Metacreator for 4e characters, there's a filter that will update the PC to 5e and to Hero Designer. Which is how I converted all of Aaron Allston's Strike Force Archive Characters that were created in Metacreator into Hero Designer.

[assault]

Why is "a highly skilled normal" the system benchmark for player character point efficiency? Does this reflect some massive shift away from supers in the post-4th ed. Hero System landscape?

 

Basically, a "highly skilled normal" will usually be the strongest character without superstrength, the fastest character without superspeed, and the toughest character without invulnerability/force fields/whatever.

 

They provide a good baseline for other characters, and the rest of the world.

 

Unfortunately, there's also a common misconception that they should be restricted in ways that other superheroes aren't, making them the weakest, slowest and most fragile characters. That is, unplayable.

[assault]

Oh and fwiw, I use the 4th ed design of characters as a template for my own characters.

 

I use 2e for mine. Aside from anything else, 225 point 2e characters convert nicely to 300 point 6e characters, and 250 point 5e ones. (Just add skills in the latter case).

 

I find this helps me focus on what is important, and not over-complicate things.

 

100 points Characteristics

100 points powers

25 points spent on one or the other, or skills.

 

(4e/5e options - spend another 25 points on skills/perks/fluff.)

 

It does tend to push towards 8 DC attacks, or else the use of limitations, but that actually works well with a lot of characters.

[Ninja-Bear]

There aren't really too many changes, on occasion I find one of the 4th edition builds can be done better with 6th rules, but most of the time for me after several hundred is that its just a matter of recosting a few things. The real problems come when a power like missile deflection or find weakness/lack of weakness shows up and you have to re-model it.

Slick's slick fields and marbles became more logical build with the expansion of Change Enviroment in 5th. In the marbles case, cheaper too.

[Ninja-Bear]

I can see where 5th and 6th edition seems like overkill for basic character design. (Characters that have one main power but used straight from the book.) However though when it comes to more complex designs or using powers in  non obvious ways to achieve a special effect, say Slicks non friction field, would be more of a test of the editions usability. I remember being frustrated with Marbles for Ninja Hero because RAW had them way expensive to put in a Ninja Multipower. I broke down and bought it as a martial throw with limitations. One version was to buy it as flight UAA but then I didn't know if the GM would approve. Now with Change Enviroment expanded, I now buy with that power and the advantage is, now RAW not GM approval territory.

[Hugh Neilson]

Skill levels are not an equal buy in 6th edition. They are, in most cases, inefficient now. 20 points will buy +2 OCV and +2 DCV or +2 with All Combat, which is significantly less useful / efficient. 5e had skill levels priced correctly. The bean counters lost sight of the forest for the trees.

I don’t think we’ve reached perfect pricing for skill levels in 6e, but I think it’s much better than 5e. Hence I say it fixed much of the discrepancy.

 

In 5e, I can buy +15 DEX for 45 points. But that’s really 30 points since 15 come off SPD (or, if you prefer, can be recoupled by making your DEX “no figured”). For that price, you get +5 OCV, +5 DCV and +3 with al DEX skills.

 

What combination of skill levels gets the same result in 5e?

 

If I want to be able to select between +2 OCV, +2 DCV or +1 OCV and DCV, I could buy a 6e Multipower with a 10 point reserve and two flexible slots for 2 points each, so 14. I can`t use that to bounce an attack or add a DC, like I could with skill levels, so the skill levels with All Combat must be worth more. The only question is how much more?

 

8 points feels more right than 10 to me, but even then 16 points to have +2 to either OCV or DCV seems pricy compared to buying +2 to both for 20 points. I think combat skill levels are not worth the price unless you will use them for things other than OCV or DCV, just like a 7 variable slot Multipower is pretty overpriced if you always just use Slot 3 at full power.

[Tholomyes]

Personally, I'd be happy to just do away with CSLs and have it be handled with either Multipowers, Martial arts, or just basic maneuvers, depending on how much you wanted out of it, and maybe PSLs for things not covered by any of them (for example, bouncing an attack could have a penalty to OCV, rather than requiring skill levels, and PSLs could cover that type of thing). For large swings of OCV/DCV (I'm thinking +/- 3 or more), Variable slot multipowers could be used, for medium swings (+/- 2) Martial arts (though this could run in to issues, not being able to be combined with other martial arts; an alternative could be just adding it as a separate property, like bonus DCs), and for small ones (+/- 1), that could just be a basic maneuver, akin to Spreading an attack.

 

CSLs have always felt to me like a relic of previous editions, kept in because it'd be too much hassle to change. Perhaps they made more sense when figured characteristics were a thing, but nothing about them seems particularly appealing. At the high end, there's not much point in taking them, as opposed to just taking more OCV and DCV, and at the low end, it seems like the game is ignoring its own rules about "If a limitation isn't really a limitation, it's not worth any points), since that's largely what low-point CSLs are: Someone with only 1 attack is probably more likely to take the 2 point CSL than just taking OCV, and while it does limit things (you can't, say, use it to try to disarm, or with improvised weapons or the like), it wouldn't be (effectively) a -1 limitation's worth. With 3-point or 5 point OCVs, it's more negotiable, since the limitation also applies to the DCV portion, but in those cases, usually the amount that they are limited usually doesn't make up for the savings that their effective limitation value would correspond to.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Second to 4th was a major PITA in places.

 

 

Yeah those are the ones I have the most trouble converting because the basic rules changed more between 2/3 and 4 than between 4th and later editions.  Lots of added skills for one thing.

[zslane]

It's just that I reached porting saturation after adopting 4th edition, and have no interest in rewriting characters (or re-wiring my brain with new terminology, new calculations, new point strata, etc.) again. Just re-calibrating my brain from the fundamental notion that 250 points is a starting character to 400 points being a starting character rubs me wrong in all kinds of ways, for reasons I can't perfectly articulate.

 

Sure, Hero Designer could make some of the transition easier, but wouldn't make the end result any more palatable.

 

At the end of the day I just don't like 6E, for myriad reasons. If it was an update that I was in love with, I'd probably put up with the porting effort, but that's simply not the case.

[Christopher R Taylor]

The starting points are just suggestions.  In my experience, a 250 point 4th edition character translates into about 300-325 points in 6th edition.  There are more options so you can make them have more stuff, but its not necessary to spend 400 points.

[Hugh Neilson]

There's a lot of "point inflation" that has been with us since 1e. Why does an "average" Super need a DEX of 23+/CV's of 8+, if an Olympic gymnast can get by with an 18 DEX? With 20/20 hindsight, we could have treated DEX and CV a lot like STR, EGO and INT - the average Super need not be all that different from an average person. Drop, say, a 20 DEX, 7 CV Brick to 8 DEX and 4 CV's. In 6e, that takes off 54 points. Let's drop his 4 SPD to 2 and shave off another 20. Factor in the lowered need for END, reduced END and REC, and we probably removed 100 points easily.

 

Now drop every other character in the campaign by 3 CV, 2 SPD and 12 DEX. That typical Blaster now has 11 DEX, 3 SPD and 5 CV. The traditional Martial Artist? 18 DEX, 4 SPD, 7 CV. The high end speed/DEX guy? 23 DEX (35 - 12), CV's of 9 (12-3) and SPD 5 (7 - 2).

 

But now we DO have to re-write all the old characters. One difference between Hero editions and many other games is that Hero is the same game, with very high levels of backward compatibility. You can pull characters from 2e and run them pretty much as written in 6e. Sure, they aren't written up quite right, but how much does that matter in-game? He's still a 60 STR, 23 DEX, 8 CV Brick with 28 PD and ED. Try running a 2e D&D character in a 5e D&D game! Which is probably better marketing - if you want to play the current edition of most games, you have to (re)purchase all the books because none of the rules are the same as they were last time.

 

Do people value keeping some reverse compatibility? I don't know - ask Pathfinder how that worked out. When a new edition is really a new game, appealing to the fan base of the old game may be a viable marketing strategy.

[Tholomyes]

I would largely agree with that, though to a point. I think it's reasonable to bring down DEXes and the other 5 Primary characteristics, because 10s in all of them already represent "above average" compared to the average population. the DEX inflation is particularly egregious (though not as bad in my games as it seems apparent for others'; for me, 23 is high DEX, not average, where averages are in the 18 range, though compare that to EGO, where the averages are maybe 11-12, and that's still quite an inflation), and CON is an issue as well, based off the nature that it scales with DCs (I've tried working on a CON roll based system for stunning, but I can't seem to find one that works well).

 

However, in terms of CVs, SPD, and the like, I'd actually disagree. CV averages of 7-9 I think work pretty well, because they allow for gradation, where you can have highly skilled enemy agents, in terms of normal human skill level, that are mere mooks when you have superheroes in the picture. Likewise, SPD I think works, both on that gradation sense, as well as how SPD affects the math of the system, in aiding genre conventions. In superhero games, there are more Phases per Recovery, so dealing damage primarily with Normal Damage attacks, and trying to bring down their STUN is a lot more viable, compared to heroic games, which tend to be more lethally oriented, where STUN recovers faster (effectively), so Killing attacks and dealing Body Damage is more effective.

 

I would say, though, that based on my limited experience with 5e, I can't imagine stat inflation has exactly gotten worse in 6e (or, at least, I couldn't imagine how it would), simply because figured characteristics are no longer a thing. I forget the exact math of it, but with figured characteristics often providing a substantial cost savings, as well as gunning for breakpoints, I remember most characters had incredibly high characteristics in 5e, where my experiences with 6e have largely been that DEX is high, CON is often high, but otherwise, if it's not a character's Schtick, the 10-15 range is where a lot of characteristics wind up. Granted, a lot of us were still in the class/level based hyper-optimization mode, and even those of us with more experience with point buy ended up optimizing based on a lack of clear universal guidelines for what characters should be.

[assault]

There's a lot of "point inflation" that has been with us since 1e. Why does an "average" Super need a DEX of 23+/CV's of 8+, if an Olympic gymnast can get by with an 18 DEX? With 20/20 hindsight, we could have treated DEX and CV a lot like STR, EGO and INT - the average Super need not be all that different from an average person. Drop, say, a 20 DEX, 7 CV Brick to 8 DEX and 4 CV's. In 6e, that takes off 54 points. Let's drop his 4 SPD to 2 and shave off another 20. Factor in the lowered need for END, reduced END and REC, and we probably removed 100 points easily.

 

 

Then a mook shoots your character dead.

 

Unless, of course, those extra points were spent on making every character invulnerable. Shame about Batman.

 

"Inflated" characteristics have the benefit of separating PCs from the riffraff that would otherwise kill them in the second adventure.

[Tasha]

Yep having the PC's be averageDex 23, Spd 5 has the intended effect of making Superheroic characters head and shoulders above even "elite" normals. It is a feel that I really like. Which is why I guess I am a lover of Late Bronze Age Play and not iron/rust age (Where the Hero(ines) are closer to regular people in capabilities). It's pretty clear that Champons was built for Bronze Age play.

 

As for the Myth of Points Bloat, there were NO character generation guidelines in the first two editions of Champions. We saw characters build from 150total points up to 600+ points for a beginning character. Also with no real idea of good powerlevels characters were all over the place. Some of my own first characters only threw 6d6. Later after playing a bunch our GM settled on 250pt characters. There were few skills in the early editions. The Supplement Champions II brought some skills over from Espionage/Justice Inc, but it was hard to have a decent character with anything but a handful of skills with a 250pt point limit. When 4e came out all of our characters became about 50pts more expensive, we grandfathered those in. New characters continued to be built on 250pts. After playing quite a few Heroic level games where we fell in love with non combat skills, we raised our Champions Point limits to 300pts (150 base +150 disads). ~50 points were supposed to be used for non combat skills. 

Point limits for Champions weren't officially raised until 5th edition which brought the total up to 350pts. We used this to build characters rounded out with skills and to stomp out cheeze limitations on powers (ie doesn't work in intense magnetic fields, and other similar cheese)

[Hugh Neilson]

I would largely agree with that, though to a point. I think it's reasonable to bring down DEXes and the other 5 Primary characteristics, because 10s in all of them already represent "above average" compared to the average population. the DEX inflation is particularly egregious (though not as bad in my games as it seems apparent for others'; for me, 23 is high DEX, not average, where averages are in the 18 range, though compare that to EGO, where the averages are maybe 11-12, and that's still quite an inflation), and CON is an issue as well, based off the nature that it scales with DCs (I've tried working on a CON roll based system for stunning, but I can't seem to find one that works well).

CON is a big one, and has to exceed average damage past defenses for characters to be combat-viable. But supers engage in intensive exercise pretty regularly, so OK, maybe we give that a bye. I would expect DEX to come down in 6e, because it is no longer essential to have a viable character.

 

However, in terms of CVs, SPD, and the like, I'd actually disagree. CV averages of 7-9 I think work pretty well, because they allow for gradation, where you can have highly skilled enemy agents, in terms of normal human skill level, that are mere mooks when you have superheroes in the picture. Likewise, SPD I think works, both on that gradation sense, as well as how SPD affects the math of the system, in aiding genre conventions. In superhero games, there are more Phases per Recovery, so dealing damage primarily with Normal Damage attacks, and trying to bring down their STUN is a lot more viable, compared to heroic games, which tend to be more lethally oriented, where STUN recovers faster (effectively), so Killing attacks and dealing Body Damage is more effective.

I find in Supers games, REC is also a lot higher as well. I also don't find soldiers miss average DEX characters in the comics all that often. Commonly, it is the DC vs Defense arena where the Super shines. Dropping the big, tough Brick to a 3 CV doesn't break my heart. Most will be a bit higher - that's a 7 in our present model. 4's make Our Heroes a bit better than non-combat trained normal, so we put normal with a bit of training (soldiers, police) at a 4, highly trained agents at a 5, etc.

 

Nick Fury is just a highly trained superspy, and he seems to have a pretty rock solid CV. But it's not so high that he doesn't have to worry about Hydra goons unless they roll a 3.

 

I don't think it has escalated with editions -  it started with the sample characters in 1e.

 

Then a mook shoots your character dead.

 

Unless, of course, those extra points were spent on making every character invulnerable. Shame about Batman.

Are you referring to the Batman with an armored costume who has been around for the last 20 - 30 years, the one who at one time commented that the symbol on his chest draws fire to the protected part of his body with that lightweight bulletproof material under it despite looking like he was wearing spandex or the 1940's - 1970's one with combat luck? He's been shot at far too many times for a mook not to roll a 3 by now!

 

Oh, and Bats, like most highly trained normals, would have that 7+ CV that's reserved for elite combatants now. Mooks with a 4 or 5 OCV don't hit trained combatants with an 8 DCV (higher if they use martial maneuvers) all that easily.

 

As for the Myth of Points Bloat, there were NO character generation guidelines in the first two editions of Champions. We saw characters build from 150total points up to 600+ points for a beginning character. Also with no real idea of good powerlevels characters were all over the place.

Very true. 1e also started characters with 10's, but provided sample characters with 18 - 30 DEX, without setting the standard that slow, plodding Bricks are Olympic gymnasts in their spare time because we did not know normals would cap out at 18 - 20. It evolved in its own way.

[Christopher R Taylor]

As for the Myth of Points Bloat

 

Its no myth, its easily traced through each edition from 4th onward.  I mean, its obvious that each edition suggested more points for your superheroic characters (even if some GMs like me ignored the increase). Whether that represents a real increase in power for characters is debatable, but there's not really any way to label that increase as "mythical."

[Tasha]

We figured that Normals ran 10-20 in the primaries. Mostly because we picked up Justice Inc and saw that the characters in there were in that range. Also many of the non supers (ie agents and police) that had writeups had stats in the 10-20 range.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I figured 10-20 because characters started at 10 and 20 was a reasonable max for human strength - lifting 800+ lbs over your head is someone who is in really terrific shape.  It seemed to make sense if you extrapolate from STR to the other stats.

 

Figured was a bit less clear, since there were no benchmarks, but you could just use max stats to figure from and see what you got.

[Tasha]

I figured 10-20 because characters started at 10 and 20 was a reasonable max for human strength - lifting 800+ lbs over your head is someone who is in really terrific shape.  It seemed to make sense if you extrapolate from STR to the other stats.

 

Figured was a bit less clear, since there were no benchmarks, but you could just use max stats to figure from and see what you got.

 

Using an essay in the back of 4e Champions I worked out the numbers for how to make sure that your character doesn't get koed in one punch. I didn't actually work the numbers out until about 7 years ago.

[Surrealone]

Yep having the PC's be averageDex 23, Spd 5 has the intended effect of making Superheroic characters head and shoulders above even "elite" normals. It is a feel that I really like. Which is why I guess I am a lover of Late Bronze Age Play and not iron/rust age (Where the Hero(ines) are closer to regular people in capabilities). It's pretty clear that Champons was built for Bronze Age play.

Only if you incent building that way.  Example: Professor Xavier certainly is NOT DEX 23 -- and I doubt he's SPD5.  He's probably closer to DEX 8 (tops), and SPD 3 (perhaps 4).  What he lacks in the DEX/SPD race he more than makes up for with other capabilities.

 

My point is this -- the DEX/SPD race need only be played if one chooses to do so.  People insisting on certain averages for supers drives me nuts because of this -- since the comic books show us plenty of superheroic examples that are NOT beyond human averages, at all, when it comes to DEX and SPD.  Mentalists, bricks, spellcasters who are otherwise normal humans, and the like are all good examples.

 

 

Using an essay in the back of 4e Champions I worked out the numbers for how to make sure that your character doesn't get koed in one punch. I didn't actually work the numbers out until about 7 years ago.

 

Why?  Some character concepts may entail being KO'd in one punch.  (Example: Professor X, again.)  So the point of that exercise was what, exactly?  To work out the numbers for how to build a character for a certain damage level regardless of character concept ... in a game where character concept should drive the build and not the other way around???

[Christopher R Taylor]

I typically build bricks with low speed, but mentalists fairly high because they're usually acting mentally which is quite fast - especially in someone trained with mental powers and an unusually keen brain.  The typical hero seems around 5 speed, with 3 quite low and 6 very fast.  Anything above that is speedster territory to me, but I could see a really well trained martial artist having 6 speed.  I've had a few fantasy hero characters played in my games with 5 speed.  Just that 1-2 points over everyone else really shows up.

[Tasha]

Only if you incent building that way.  Example: Professor Xavier certainly is NOT DEX 23 -- and I doubt he's SPD5.  He's probably closer to DEX 8 (tops), and SPD 3 (perhaps 4).  What he lacks in the DEX/SPD race he more than makes up for with other capabilities.

 

My point is this -- the DEX/SPD race need only be played if one chooses to do so.  People insisting on certain averages for supers drives me nuts because of this -- since the comic books show us plenty of superheroic examples that are NOT beyond human averages, at all, when it comes to DEX and SPD.  Mentalists, bricks, spellcasters who are otherwise normal humans, and the like are all good examples.

 The game itself and player nature also define how PC's are built. Professor X (assuming the walking version) isn't Dex 23, but he IS Ego 23 (I would allow him to use ego instead of Dex on the Spd Chart). He also COULD be SPD 5 with how fast his brain seems to move. Also Prof X acts more like an NPC than a anything. He tends to stay very far away and use mind control for his attacks. More than that he is there to give tactical direction to the team. He doesn't often engage the enemy, his Xmen do that for him

 

Oh, and I don't think we ever had a Dex/Spd Race. We always had limits and tended to automatically balance stuff. ie High Dex(high CV)/High Spd Characters would often be DC 9-10 to make up for going more often than the Energy Projector at spd 5. Again it all depends on what era of comics you base your write ups on, also what comic you are basing write ups on. (ie Batman tends to be pretty much a trained normal guy in his comic, in Justice League he tends to be more powerful to keep up with Supes and Wonder Woman. Also like everything we talk about on these boards. 3 Posters could read the same comic and come up with wildly different write ups depending on their biases and how they approach the game.

 

Why?  Some character concepts may entail being KO'd in one punch.  (Example: Professor X, again.)  So the point of that exercise was what, exactly?  To work out the numbers for how to build a character for a certain damage level regardless of character concept ... in a game where character concept should drive the build and not the other way around???

Because too many people don't seem to understand how the numbers work in this game. If you want to build someone who will be one shotted, great. At least you know that you are doing that and that's a CHOICE you made in character gen, and not a MISTAKE because you didn't understand the system. Also GM's understanding the numbers can do a better job setting campaign limits for combat. On top of that most new players have Zero Idea of what are decent stats, what are low and what are high stats. It's worse with the secondaries where you can really make a super weak character if you don't understand what is going on.

 

BTW IF you check out my Character Building posting, you will find that I do direct people to have a concept first. I also give them basic things to think about when building a Character esp a Superhero(ine). The numbers come later, but are still important.

[Hugh Neilson]

I figured 10-20 because characters started at 10 and 20 was a reasonable max for human strength - lifting 800+ lbs over your head is someone who is in really terrific shape.  It seemed to make sense if you extrapolate from STR to the other stats.

I suspect that is a lot of how we evolved to "normal stats tend to cap out at 20". But we would not look askance at a mentalist, blaster, speedster or sorcerer having a 15 STR, and suggest he is a puny weakling because he can't take home a medal in weightlifting. We would not suggest a character with a 15 INT is a drooling idiot. Yet a Brick with a 18-20 DEX is slow and clumsy compared to other Supers, but Olympic level gymnast level when benchmarked against our "real world" standards. 

 

Only if you incent building that way.  Example: Professor Xavier certainly is NOT DEX 23 -- and I doubt he's SPD5.  He's probably closer to DEX 8 (tops), and SPD 3 (perhaps 4).  What he lacks in the DEX/SPD race he more than makes up for with other capabilities.

As others have noted, I don't think Prof X is PC material. Jean Grey, Nate Grey, Rachel Summers, Psylocke, Moondragon, Saturn Girl (DC is rather lacking in pure mentalist heroes) - they seem more consistent with the typical Super levels of DEX and SPD. Were I building Prof X as a Hero PC, pre-6e (where our DEX mentality came from), he does not need DEX as he has no need for OCV and by concept has no DCV. He would have a 23+ EGO, so he has huge CV. I would almost certainly give him limited SPD for mental abilities only.

 

Of course, the GM likely would not allow him to attack from half a world away, or make a building full of people stop in their tracks, or forget having ever seen Supers combat, or resolve two of our the first three scenarios by making the villain forget his powers.

 

He would work only as one of the most reviled character concepts ever to rear its head in Hero - the Mentalist Sniper. Were we to build him to fit a conventional Champions game, he would either need to be "walking Xavier" or "hoverchair Xavier", and would undoubtedly have either an armored costume/conveyance, or a combat luck style build reflecting use of his mental powers passively to predict attacks and roll/dodge or influence the attacker to pull his punch/only graze him.