Help me create some alternate rules for streamlining HERO

[Tasha]

"An Action Which Takes No Time" is simply a category of actions which do not require a full or half phase, and can be performed even when it isn't the character's phase. I don't think that actually means no time passes while you are speaking. I give characters some latitude in my aforementioned ruling when it comes to presence attacks, but only some.

I also just don't buy that a villain can monologue for three paragraphs without giving the heroes an opportunity to do anything about it (or at least take recoveries). The stretching of time to allow them to do so is just bad storytelling in my opinion, and it really annoys me in comics, cartoons, and cinema, so I squash it with vehemence in my games. I give my players the opportunity to interrupt the villain's monologue (and vice versa). Call it a house-rule if you like, but it does speed up gameplay. Like I said before, players find it a little frustrating at first, but once they get used to it its not hard to fit a soliloquy or warning into 2-6 seconds. Speaking isn't actually necessary to make a presence attack, any number of high presence characters (like Batman) can do it with a stern glare.

 

I try to always encourage roleplay. Telling someone that they are spending too much time speaking seems to counter to actually roleplaying.

 

Allowing the Villain to spill their masterplan is genre appropriate for many cinematic genres. Also players can be taught to listen to it, because they simply want to know which of their Hypothesis' are correct, or to fill in the blank in what they know. YMMV. Keep it fun for players, interruping them when they are roleplaying is not fun.

[eepjr24]

​Getting back on topic...

 

 

I can totally empathize with your opinions regarding the Speed Chart. In theory, I love the speed chart... But in practice, not so much. The Speed Chart interacts strangely with other aspects of the rules (Vehicles/Mounts, Velocity-Based Maneuvers, etc). If you want to ditch the Speed Chart entirely: I suggest going with treating everyone as though they had a SPD of 3. There are three reasons for picking SPD 3 over SPD 2 or 4.

The first reason is simple precedent. Bases, which don't have SPD scores, are treated as though they have a dormant SPD of 3 for the purposes of Constant Powers and such.

The second reason is interaction with other aspects of the rules. SPD 3 is the minimum SPD score necessary to provide a mechanical differentiation between Extra Time (Extra Phase), and Extra Time (1 Turn). SPD 3 (as compared to SPD 4 at least) also minimizes the amount of "free movement" this optional rule grants a 0-point character (and by extension, every character).

The third reason is the SPD 3 is the value suggested in HERO System 6th for "Removing Speed" in one of the tool kitting sections. So it is, after a fashion, RAW.

I agree with either 3 or a multiple of 3. In Heroic, 3 works fine. 

 

In Supers and high powered Fantasy or Space Opera it is going to feel forced. Speedsters are not impossible to do without speed, but they are certainly more difficult. You end up with lots of VPP's or tons of linked powers or oodles of combat levels with speed special effects. High powered opponents in Heroic who could do things like Block and then attack before the hero could react are more expensive and kludgey to do. The impacts are subtle but far reaching. Get used to hand waving effects that have been made too difficult by the simplificatoin.

 

Maybe you can do a half way. Base speed is 3 for everyone. If you buy more it must be in multiple of 3 and you simply let them act at Dex and half dex. Delayed phase for first action is at 3/4 dex, 1/4 dex for second action. I dunno, maybe not that but you could play with numbers.

 

- E

[Christopher]

Hi there! I would like your help in coming up with some alternate/streamlined rules for HERO. While I don't necessarily want to strip away everything and make it into a different game, I would like to see what options we can come up with that won't require rewriting vast chunks of the system. Also, this stuff is pretty much all subjective. I'm not really interested in a debate over the necessity or lack thereof here; mostly I want to see what options are doable, and then go from there.

 

Roll-Under to Roll-Over

Purely an aesthetic thing, but I really dislike roll-under. I especially dislike it when mixed in the same game (possibly in the same turn, even), such as rolling low to hit and then rolling high for damage. I would like to convert all target number rolls to roll-over, but preferably without breaking anything. Is this possible? If so, how do we do it?

 

SPD Chart = RIP Chart

I don't much care for the Speed Chart and multiple actions per turn. I'd prefer to simplify it down to a single round's worth of actions per turn, without necessarily having to lose Post-12 Recovery, or at least having Recovery still be a thing.

 

Related: I'd also like to make this easier when figuring out movement rates in more common/intuitive values. For me, MPH (even KPH) is a little easier to grok than "moves 2500m in a half-phase action." Or at the least, the "move 2500m as a move action" thing would be easier if I didn't also have to consider each segment in a turn. Since a lot of the games I'd like to use HERO for would involve trying to figure movement stuff like this, I'd like to find a way to make this much simpler.

 

Examples of Play and of Character Builds

I might need some help on specific builds or examples of play in action, to get a better feel for how things work, if anyone would be up for that. If so, I will come up with a few things and list them here. For now, I want to start with the above two items.

 

Oh, I guess one thing that comes to mind is adding DCs, especially with HKAs involved and such. Can someone break down a few different examples of how it would work if a character used an HKA, and what would happen if that character picked up, say, a broken bottle, a staff, or a boulder?

For game design questions, i would really advise taking a look at Shadowrun 4E. And 5E.

I played/learned 4E before Hero and the similarities are surprising.

 

Now recently I played 5E and I think there are lot of good lessons to be learned. For each of your points:

 

Roll-Under to Roll-Over

I think this was added/kept so there is a "difference in Kind".

Differences in kind play a important role in game design, so you find them in just about any system.

I recently realised that D&D saving throws are actually just "inverted Attack Rolls". Attack rolls are 1D20+Bonus (stat and level based) vs a fixed value (stat and gear based, thus indirectly level based). While Saving throws are just that, the other way around. And spell resistence is kind of just a normal attack roll, with fewer people having the defenses.

I can not say if we still need it. It is a bit bothersome in actuall play.

 

SPD Chart = RIP Chart

What I liked most about SR5 over SR4 was the changes to initiative.

SR4 had the exact same issues that Hero SPD chart has. It just had a the advantage of slightly shorter turns (4 phases over 3 secons).

SR5 is a massive improovement here. So much In propose the option of porting it to Hero:

www.herogames.com/forums/topic/92713-initiative-spd-and-shadowrun-5e-initiative/

 

Examples of Play and of Character Builds

As far as power goes, here is my old Power Guide:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/index.php?/topic/85482-power-guide/

 

One thing I like in particular about SR 5, is that they streamlinde the Character creation with the Priority System. And the Sum-to-Ten variant.

SR4/5 is about as complex during creation as Hero. With the Priority system they simplified it. But in turn the Priority system does not take it too precisely with the Point accounting. Since it does not work precisely with acconting, it allows you to go for the specialty area a lot harder (normally the cost for Skills increases the higher it goes. But with Priority you just got points to distribute, regadles of how many points that 6 skill would normally cost).

[Claire Redfield]

There is a section in Combat that described exactly how Added Damage works, I would suggest reading it with a highly critical eye. One of the donwsides of Champions Complete being so condensed is that many important rules are only one or two sentences in an otherwise boring chapter.

 

The long-ish version however is that an "Added DC" regardless of its source (such as strength adding to an HKA) is equal to +5 active points to the "base power" (strength is a power too) it is being added to. If the base power (Strength, Blast, HKA, what have you) doesn't have advantages, everything is fairly simple; +5 APs = +1d6 Normal Damage and +15 APs = +1d6 of Killing Damage. If the base power does have an advantage things get complicated; but here is the gist.

When adding DCs to an attack power with advantages, you still have to "pay for" those advantages out of total number of active points added to it. There is a list of what advantages generally have to be "paid for" in this manner. So if you have a Normal Damage power with +1 in advantages, than you need to add +10 APs to gain +1d6 Normal Damage (with that advantage). If you have a Killing Damage power with +1 in advantages, you need to add +30 APs to gain +1d6 Killing Damage (with that advantage). If the Normal Damage power only has +1/4 in Advantages, it needs to gain 6.25 APs to gain +1d6 Normal Damage (with that advantage). If a Killing Damage power only has +1/2 in advantages, it needs to gain 22.5 APs APs to gain +1d6 of Killing Damage.

 

This is where it loses me a bit, figuring out how to add DCs with Advantages. That sort of thing is quite difficult for me to process on the fly, and I often don't like feeling like I'd have to stop to calculate something if a player grabbed, say, a sword off of a fallen enemy and used it. At least improvised weapons rules are fairly easy, and I like the way they do that. I'm not anywhere near 100% on adding DCs with Advantages, though. Maybe if I did it a bunch or saw it in action.

 

In terms of understanding Speed versus "Movement Speed" I like to start by looking at Velocity Per Turn (which you calculate by multilying the value of their Movement power in meters by their Speed), then by minute (by multiplying by 5), then by hour (by multiplying by 60). How fast a character moves in a single phase is largely irrelevant unless you need to pull off a Velocity Based maneuver. It is nice to think about how long their phases are however, although it happens such on paper, not everything actually happens in the single second One Segment represents. A character with a SPD of 2 has a phase 6 seconds long (just like DnD/Pathfinder), a character with a SPD of 3 has one 4 seconds long, and one with a SPD of 6 has one only 2 seconds long. 2 seconds isn't a lot of time for a villain to monologue inbetween Blasts.

 

And see, this sort of thing is what makes me want to get rid of SPD. Chris Goodwin's suggestions about converting it to multiple actions is a great one; however, I've found that multiple actions in general are problematic, and basically a fun tax — if you don't pay it, you don't get to have as much fun as everyone else. I don't use them anywhere that it is possible to avoid.

 

 

This is pretty easy. Just a matter of flipping things over.

 

Currently you need to roll equal to or under 11+OCV-DCV. If OCV = DCV then you have a 62.5% chance to hit.

 

To maintain that chance to hit you need, if OCV = DCV, to roll 10 or over.

 

In this case you need to remember that you add levels to OCV or DCV to keep the effects right.

 

So, you roll OCV + 3d6 vs. DCV + 10? What about with skill rolls?

 

 

It is up to you here too. You can remove SPD from the game. What you need to decide is how many actions you want people to have before they get a recovery. Effectively you are then setting the SPD of the game. So if you decide the players will get 4 actions before a recovery then the speed of the game is 4. It also means that all of the opponents of the heroes will have SPD 4 too (though you can highlight a dangerous opponent by giving them bonus actions).

 

With a spd 4 game is means that 2500m in a half phase action means 2500m in 1.5s (which equals 6,000,000m per hour) pretty fast! :-)

 

In a fixed SPD game though, it means that if you have 20m movement that you can move that distance as your full action. If you want to do other things during your action then you move half that (or less) and do other stuff (like attacking).

 

However, it is easier to think about when everyone is moving at the same time.

 

I may go with a fixed SPD, as described below, or maybe I'll come up with something else. It would certainly make this easier on me figuring out how fast characters are and proper movement rates with a fixed speed value.

 

 

I guess a lot of what you want to do might depend on the genre of campaign you plan on running.

 

What you playing? Superheroes? Super-Agents? Fantasy? Sci-Fi??

 

A lot of what I would would be superheroes, including lots of high-powered stuff. But I would also use this for, say, an Aliens game or the like, because it would be fun for that. Also, I'd like to build lots and lots of characters like I do with other supers systems (have a big thread on conversions on the M&M site).

[Claire Redfield]

If it's an actual weapon, then it does its base damage. Adding to that... that's where you could write a book. If there are no Advantages on it, you can add +1 DC per 5 STR. If it has a STR Minimum, it's +1 DC per 5 STR above the minimum. If there are Advantages, you pro-rate them into the added STR, essentially reducing the amount of DCs your STR adds.

 

Up until 6e, you could only increase an HKA weapon to double its base damage as a hard and fast rule. In 6e that's still strongly recommended but up to the GM.

 

Edited to add: I was on my phone earlier. Pro-rating STR added to attacks definitely has some math quirks, especially when taking Advantages into account. Essentially you would treat STR as added Active Points, taking into account the Advantages that modify Damage Classes, which include Armor Piercing but the rest of which I don't know off the top of my head. But, for instance, as Armor Piercing is a +1/4 Advantage in 6e, it would take 6.25 points (5 * 1.25) of STR to add +1 DC to an Armor Piercing melee weapon. As of 5th edition the rules had more or less accreted from five editions plus the pre-4th edition standalone genre-based games (Fantasy Hero, Danger International/Espionage, Justice Inc., Robot Warriors, Star Hero). So there were a lot of quirks in them. In 6e they were meant to be somewhat simplified but I'm not sure how well that goal was met.

 

Yeah, the Advantaged Strength and DC addition is kind of a headache for me. As it is, I'm not even sure how you factor in "6.25 points of Strength" to begin with, you know? I really think there's gotta be an easier way to deal with this issue, but at any rate, maybe if I get to see it and use it in action it'll make things easier to grok.

 

 

There's a rule hidden on 6E2 173 and CC 146. If the PD + BODY of an improvised weapon is greater than the STR dice of the character wielding it, the attack deals an extra +1d6 for every 2 full points the PD + BODY exceeds the STR dice, to a maximum of double damage.

 

A normal human (STR 10, 2d6 damage) hitting someone with a light wooden chair (3 PD, 3 BODY) would deal 4d6 damage. The chair would also take the same damage every time it was used as a weapon, so the bonus would gradually fade and then go away completely as it broke.

 

Interesting. I like that idea, though!

 

 

Why not just find a set of rules you like better and play that instead?

 

I didn't mean it to sound unfriendly, it just looks like he's looking for a game without some of Hero's more complicated mechanics and with different roll structures, and there are a lot of systems out there they might like better. The problem with text is that there's no tone of voice, so you have to guess at what people intend. Probably its best to not presume malice without some sort of cause or indication?

 

She, first of all, is looking for ways to help mold HERO into what I want it to be. And no, you're right, congratulations. You've unsold me on HERO and by extension the group I was trying to get into playing it. I'll go play something else and never buy or recommend another HERO book to anyone, and if I ever see anyone being curious about HERO, I'll quickly convince them not to bother, since if you change it, well, you're not truly playing HERO, are you? You might as well just play a different game that you like better.

 

Do you see why this general attitude is harmful? Because yes, I read that first reply as just more dismissal. I didn't come to the HERO board to ask about helping tweak things to how I want them in HERO because I really wanted to play another game. I have M&M 3E, I can indeed just go play that.

 

HERO is purported to be a toolkit for creating just what you want. I'm not talking about jettisoning powers, or skills, or talents, or the entirety of the combat system. I'm talking about changing a few things I don't like: roll-under, SPD and multiple actions. Maybe they can't be done, or maybe they can, but I didn't come here to ask about them because I was just goofing around or confused about what game I really wanted.

 

Some quick conversions:

 

Meters/Turn * .1875 = MPH

 

Meters/Turn * .3 = KPH

 

This is about the closest you can get. Phased movement doesn't really lend itself to spot-determining a character's velocity in MPH or KPH, beyond converting as above. If you settle on, for instance, SPD 4 for all characters, then that simplifies it somewhat:

 

Meters * .75 = MPH

 

Meters * 1.2 = KPH

 

Hm. So in this case, is "per Turn" meaning the 12-segment turn? Though I really do want to figure out a good alternative to doing that, and hopefully with you folks helping I'll be able to.

 

There's a lot of really great stuff to like about the HERO System. Different strokes for different folks. Some people love green peppers, and add them to everything. Some people can't stand them, or have a bad reaction to them. so they leave them out of recipes that otherwise call for them.

 

Some of the rules in the system are baked in as options to choose from: Hit Locations, Bleeding, Impairing Disabling, Knockback vs. Knockdown. Lots of Hero gamers ignore END use, because of the bookkeeping; lots of others use roll-high for combat because it's easier to add numbers than subtract on the fly. I don't see altering or ignoring the SPD Chart as being much different from that.

 

Yeah, as much as in theory I like Hit Locations, Bleeding, etc., especially for a game set in the Aliens universe or something like that, for the most part I don't bother with them. But I like the way HERO does Endurance, and the way it does powers, and I want to figure out if I can keep the stuff I want while changing the things I don't much care for. Here's hoping!

 

A quick search leads to some podcasts that purport to be actual play of Hero:

Happy Jack's RPG Podcast

Drink Spin Run: DSR Learns the HERO System

HERO System Super Agents: Mystic Force

I haven't listened to any of them so can't speak to the quality, but I'm going to bet they're pretty helpful. I've also got a How to Play Hero System link in my signature (here if you're viewing with signatures turned off) which includes links to other helpful documents and threads here, at RPG.net, and elsewhere.

 

Edit: Also added The Big Thread of Helpful Howto's to my signature.

Thank you, I will definitely check those out!

 

People have covered roll high very well. I am someone who also likes roll high. It works well with "Target Numbers".

 

I do like the Spd Chart a lot. It gives a great way to differentiate between Mooks(ie weak opponents, untrained folk) Spd 2, Trained individuals (ie Combat Veterans), and Elite (Special Forces guys, Top tier Martial Artists etc).The Spd chart doesn't really do much to speed or slow things down in my experience. Unless you are playing Champions and you have characters with a Wide range of SPD values. Even with that having players who are ready to take their action when their phase comes up fixes a lot of that issue. Which IS an issue with ANY RPG. Players who can't decide or who who don't decide what to do until their phase comes up. There's easy fixes for that. Also the SPD chart is a bit easier to remove in a non Superheroic game where setting everyone to the same SPD doesn't hurt much. In a Supers game, putting everyone at the same speed really makes Martial Artists and Speedsters feel the same as the slow team Brick. Which is not good for the Genre IMHO. YMMV

 

I like to think you could accomplish this stuff fairly well via powers and other traits. The Martial Artist would presumably have a lot more CSLs and much higher DEX, have faster initiative, possibly faster movement speeds and traits representing their agility. Same with speedsters, for whom I would much rather use autofire attacks, area attacks, and various speed powers and traits rather than extra actions. That way, you can have the speedster still feel awesomely fast without having so many more attacks and actions than others, which feels like a "fun tax" in our group. Simply put, if you don't have it, you can't compete, and also running many actions per character per turn really slows things down.

 

 

I can totally empathize with your opinions regarding the Speed Chart. In theory, I love the speed chart... But in practice, not so much. The Speed Chart interacts strangely with other aspects of the rules (Vehicles/Mounts, Velocity-Based Maneuvers, etc). If you want to ditch the Speed Chart entirely: I suggest going with treating everyone as though they had a SPD of 3. There are three reasons for picking SPD 3 over SPD 2 or 4.

The first reason is simple precedent. Bases, which don't have SPD scores, are treated as though they have a dormant SPD of 3 for the purposes of Constant Powers and such.

The second reason is interaction with other aspects of the rules. SPD 3 is the minimum SPD score necessary to provide a mechanical differentiation between Extra Time (Extra Phase), and Extra Time (1 Turn). SPD 3 (as compared to SPD 4 at least) also minimizes the amount of "free movement" this optional rule grants a 0-point character (and by extension, every character).

The third reason is the SPD 3 is the value suggested in HERO System 6th for "Removing Speed" in one of the tool kitting sections. So it is, after a fashion, RAW.

 

This seems like it might work well. It only takes up 10 points and might work out well. I'll keep checking out options.

 

In Supers and high powered Fantasy or Space Opera it is going to feel forced. Speedsters are not impossible to do without speed, but they are certainly more difficult. You end up with lots of VPP's or tons of linked powers or oodles of combat levels with speed special effects. High powered opponents in Heroic who could do things like Block and then attack before the hero could react are more expensive and kludgey to do. The impacts are subtle but far reaching. Get used to hand waving effects that have been made too difficult by the simplificatoin.

 

Maybe you can do a half way. Base speed is 3 for everyone. If you buy more it must be in multiple of 3 and you simply let them act at Dex and half dex. Delayed phase for first action is at 3/4 dex, 1/4 dex for second action. I dunno, maybe not that but you could play with numbers.

 

I'm okay with that, though. In other games (notably, M&M again), you don't need multiple actions per turn to do speedsters justice. I like to think HERO could compensate in various ways.

[Cantriped]

I try to always encourage roleplay. Telling someone that they are spending too much time speaking seems to counter to actually roleplaying.

 

Allowing the Villain to spill their masterplan is genre appropriate for many cinematic genres. Also players can be taught to listen to it, because they simply want to know which of their Hypothesis' are correct, or to fill in the blank in what they know. YMMV. Keep it fun for players, interruping them when they are roleplaying is not fun.

Those are valid points, and I can certainly appreciate that opinion and your concerns regarding the effects of my rules, please don't take the following explanation as argumentativeness.

 

Much of how I try to avoid strife within the way I rule speaking is in how I present the rule to my players. First, I am consistent in my handling of speech, the rule applies to PCs and NPCs alike. I explain the rules in great detail before the session begins so as not to surprise players used to more lax rules regarding speech. Secondly I never tell a player "they are spending too much time speaking", I tell them "what you want to say will take X number of segments". That way it feels little different then when they tell me they want to pick a lock, and I tell them how long the roll will take. Additionally, I usually present players with the option the truncate or rephrase their speech (especially as they are getting used to the rule), act while speaking (since speaking is still a No Time Action), or Hold Action until they get a response.

 

Since it is cinematically appropriate for Supervillains to monologue, mine still do. The fact that that isn't "efficient" is irrelevant. I avoid metagame efficiency at all costs, because in real combat you don't usually have time to sit back and examine the field before making a decision like we do when deciding a character's actions in a table-top RPG. My villains make snap decisions, waste time (and their phases) on inefficient actions, or even let themselves become paralyzed by indecisiveness.

I've found my players are usually happy to let them. While the enemy is in the middle of a monologue or paralyzed by indecision they aren't blasting the PCs, and everybody is getting to take Recoveries (which usually benefits the players more than the enemies since they spend more time "on-screen"). My players also know I will let them use that time to attempt whatever trickery they think they can get away with while the enemy is distracted. Such as freeing the hostages (or themselves), lining up a surprise attack, diffusing the bomb, etc.

 

Furthermore, if a player starts a long speech (perhaps in an attempt to talk a villain down for example), a sentient enemy is quite likely to let them. From the enemies' perspective the PC might let useful information slip, give his death ray time to charge, or give him time to recover from the beating the PCs are dishing out.

[Claire Redfield]

I can totally empathize with your opinions regarding the Speed Chart. In theory, I love the speed chart... But in practice, not so much. The Speed Chart interacts strangely with other aspects of the rules (Vehicles/Mounts, Velocity-Based Maneuvers, etc). If you want to ditch the Speed Chart entirely: I suggest going with treating everyone as though they had a SPD of 3. There are three reasons for picking SPD 3 over SPD 2 or 4.

The first reason is simple precedent. Bases, which don't have SPD scores, are treated as though they have a dormant SPD of 3 for the purposes of Constant Powers and such.

The second reason is interaction with other aspects of the rules. SPD 3 is the minimum SPD score necessary to provide a mechanical differentiation between Extra Time (Extra Phase), and Extra Time (1 Turn). SPD 3 (as compared to SPD 4 at least) also minimizes the amount of "free movement" this optional rule grants a 0-point character (and by extension, every character).

The third reason is the SPD 3 is the value suggested in HERO System 6th for "Removing Speed" in one of the tool kitting sections. So it is, after a fashion, RAW.

 

Also, can you tell me where in the 6E books it talks about removing Speed? I can't seem to find it, even on a search, in my 6E books or Champions Complete.

 

Edit: Never mind, I found it in the "Speeding up combat" section.

[Cantriped]

Also, can you tell me where in the 6E books it talks about removing Speed? I can't seem to find it, even on a search, in my 6E books or Champions Complete.

I honestly don't remember, but I will go looking for it tonight and update this thread when/if I find it. I know it isn't in Champions Complete or Fantasy HERO Complete (since neither book included the "Toolkitting" segments that the 6e books did, and I'm sure it was in one of those).

[Cantriped]

 

Yeah, the Advantaged Strength and DC addition is kind of a headache for me. As it is, I'm not even sure how you factor in "6.25 points of Strength" to begin with, you know? I really think there's gotta be an easier way to deal with this issue, but at any rate, maybe if I get to see it and use it in action it'll make things easier to grok.

It took me actually running the calculations three or four times during game sessions to really understand how it worked. Thankfully most heroic equipment doesn't have advantages that count against Added DCs. Now days when I build a character that uses a Power with advantages that count against Added DCs I'll note how many active points the Power has to gain to actually gain 1 DC. For example:

 

Firebolt:  RKA 1d6, Penetrating (+1/2) (22 APs); Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), Restrainable (-1/2). Cost: 11 points.

Note:  +1 DC per 7.5 APs.

 

Which means I need gain at least +8 APs from Aid/Boost, or +2 DCs from a martial art or combat skill levels in order to actually gain 1 DC (increasing the damage to 1d6+1 RKA). If I gain +15 APs from Aid/Boost, or +3 DCs from a martial art or combat skill levels, then Firebolt actually gains 2 DCs (increasing the damage to 1d6+2, 1½d6, or 2d6-1... any of which are "legal" versions of a 5 DC Killing Attack depending upon your campaign).

[Cantriped]

Also, can you tell me where in the 6E books it talks about removing Speed? I can't seem to find it, even on a search, in my 6E books or Champions Complete.

 

Edit: Never mind, I found it in the "Speeding up combat" section.

My memory seems to have gone faulty, I found something close to it in Nine Ways to Speed Up Combat (HERO System 6th vII ​52), Under point 2: Abolishing the Speed Chart. It doesn't explicitly say to use SPD 3, but the values it does use equate to SPD 3 (three actions per turn, with each action being 4 seconds long).

To be fair... I skipped straight from playing 5th revised to GMing Champions Complete. I rarely, if ever, actually look at my 6th ed core rule books.

[Armitage]

I try to always encourage roleplay. Telling someone that they are spending too much time speaking seems to counter to actually roleplaying.

 

Allowing the Villain to spill their masterplan is genre appropriate for many cinematic genres. Also players can be taught to listen to it, because they simply want to know which of their Hypothesis' are correct, or to fill in the blank in what they know. YMMV. Keep it fun for players, interruping them when they are roleplaying is not fun.

 

 

Also, just look at how many comic books have characters practically delivering Shakespearean soliloquies mid-leap or mid-punch.  It's completely genre appropriate.    

[eepjr24]

I'm okay with that, though. In other games (notably, M&M again), you don't need multiple actions per turn to do speedsters justice. I like to think HERO could compensate in various ways.

I am curious how you manage it? It is one of the very few complaints that I have heard about M&M is that it does not handle speedster tricks well. Both from a few past players and in threads like this one:

 

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?271005-Hero-System-Vs-Mutants-amp-Masterminds-Which-is-the-better-super-hero-game

 

Here is a quote snippet:

 

"My most recent M&M campaign fell apart in part due to the fact that M&M doesn't have a straightforward and intuitive way of having a speedster do an Autofire punch or series of move-by attacks over a wide area- classic speedster schtick.

There are ways to do it, yes, but they all look like extreme workarounds for the fact that M&M eschews iterative attacks in general. The suggestions floated here and at Atomic Think tank were not only dissatisfying to me as a GM who had run HERO, but also to the player designing the speedster."

 

The other I heard was that it really seems a stretch for Genre's other than Supers and some things feel non-authentic in other genre play. I don't have any real experience here, this is just what other players have mentioned to me. I'd like to try a game sometime.

 

- E

"My most recent M&M campaign fell apart in part due to the fact that M&M doesn't have a straightforward and intuitive way of having a speedster do an Autofire punch or series of move-by attacks over a wide area- classic speedster schtick.

There are ways to do it, yes, but they all look like extreme workarounds for the fact that M&M eschews iterative attacks in general. The suggestions floated here and at Atomic Think tank were not only dissatisfying to me as a GM who had run HERO, but also to the player designing the speedster."

[Lucius]

SPD Chart = RIP Chart

I don't much care for the Speed Chart and multiple actions per turn. I'd prefer to simplify it down to a single round's worth of actions per turn, without necessarily having to lose Post-12 Recovery, or at least having Recovery still be a thing.

 

Related: I'd also like to make this easier when figuring out movement rates in more common/intuitive values. For me, MPH (even KPH) is a little easier to grok than "moves 2500m in a half-phase action." Or at the least, the "move 2500m as a move action" thing would be easier if I didn't also have to consider each segment in a turn. Since a lot of the games I'd like to use HERO for would involve trying to figure movement stuff like this, I'd like to find a way to make this much simpler.

My suggestion:

A Turn is six seconds. Every character gets one action per Turn.

After taking your action, immediately gain half your RECovery in END and STUN.

 

If you take a RECovery as your action, you gain the full REC value and also gain the half REC afterwards.

 

Your Movement rate is the distance you move as a full action, and also as far as you can move in combat in one Turn. Multiply it by 600 to get velocity in meters per hour, or by .6 to get kilometers per hour.

 

 

This impacts the Time Chart because it abolishes the distinction between Turn and Phase. Most references to a Turn (Extra Time: One Turn or Continuing Charges, One Turn, etc) can now be read as two Turns.

 

 

Haymakers must be announced at the beginning of the Turn, and are resolved at the end after all other actions.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that this is changing Hero but isn't sure it's stream lining it.

[Ninja-Bear]

I know what slows down my character builds. its gadgets. Its not that its a hard concept but with all the minor limitations-what a pain. Im looking at handcuffs and line guns and net. It would be nice to either have a generic limitation like equipment -1/2 that would roll all those together.

[Nolgroth]

Lucius, with a little practice, your method would speed things up even more. If you got rid of the Post-6 Half Recovery and made characters decide when to take a full recovery, it would speed things up even more. Me likey.

[Doc Democracy]

Ok Claire, you asked if by turn we meant the 12 segment turn. I think people reckon that to be fine as it maps directly to a twelve second turn and you get five turns in a minute.

 

You can dismiss segments from your game if you want and use seconds instead.

 

However, if you have a more fundamental issue with breaking your game into 12 second chunks, let us know. Lucius suggested 6 second ones. You can do anything you want as far as this goes.

 

If you want to retain the concept of what is called post segment 12 recovery, then you need to choose a threshold for when that happens. Otherwise, chose the length of a combat round, abolish free recoveries and you are good to go.

 

You also asked about inverting skill rolls. Essentially most skills come as base 11 or less or base 9+(stat/5). I would be including ned to have skills presented as rolling 10 or over (equivalent to 11 or less). You can then have knowledge: Villains +5 noted on the sheet, that means you add five to the roll. You can either subtract difficulty numbers from the roll or have a range of target numbers for more difficult tasks. I fiddle that stat based skills, just divide the stat by 5 and subtract 2 to get the number to note next to it on the character sheet.

 

Doc

[Doc Democracy]

Claire, I have uploaded a few character sheets.  There are three that compare a standard presentation with a more stripped down version.  There are another 4 that actually use the roll over scheme and very closely hide the system from the players....though I used it in detail to design the characters and the rest of the game.
 
http://www.herogames.com/forums/files/file/337-simple-presentation-of-characters/
 
Doc

[Lucius]

Lucius, with a little practice, your method would speed things up even more. If you got rid of the Post-6 Half Recovery and made characters decide when to take a full recovery, it would speed things up even more. Me likey.

Well, yeah, that would tend to get everyone to zero STUN faster...

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Eventually I get around to a palindromedary tagline

[Hugh Neilson]

WHY NOT PLAY SOMETHING ELSE?

 

Why not just find a set of rules you like better and play that instead?

Maybe because Hero comes closest to the poster’s ideal game, perhaps even to the point where she would prefer to use its RAW to any other system. But she’d like to tweak it just a little bit more to adopt some of the bits she likes from other games which, overall, she likes less.

 

Trying to use Hero to perfectly simulate another game is, I agree, a wasted effort. Buy trying to toolkit Hero to align it better with the group’s overall preferences – make it more fun – is what a toolkit is all about.

[Hugh Neilson]

DAMAGE ADDING

 

If it's an actual weapon, then it does its base damage. Adding to that... that's where you could write a book. If there are no Advantages on it, you can add +1 DC per 5 STR. If it has a STR Minimum, it's +1 DC per 5 STR above the minimum. If there are Advantages, you pro-rate them into the added STR, essentially reducing the amount of DCs your STR adds.

 

Edited to add: I was on my phone earlier. Pro-rating STR added to attacks definitely has some math quirks, especially when taking Advantages into account. Essentially you would treat STR as added Active Points, taking into account the Advantages that modify Damage Classes, which include Armor Piercing but the rest of which I don't know off the top of my head. But, for instance, as Armor Piercing is a +1/4 Advantage in 6e, it would take 6.25 points (5 * 1.25) of STR to add +1 DC to an Armor Piercing melee weapon. As of 5th edition the rules had more or less accreted from five editions plus the pre-4th edition standalone genre-based games (Fantasy Hero, Danger International/Espionage, Justice Inc., Robot Warriors, Star Hero). So there were a lot of quirks in them. In 6e they were meant to be somewhat simplified but I'm not sure how well that goal was met.

I think 6e did a decent job of making the damage adding rules more consistent. For example, martial arts DC’s formerly were halved when added to killing attacks, an inconsistency that was also not intuitive. Some adders pro rated for advantages and others did not.

 

The toughest part left is advantage pro rating. In the past, Hand Attacks could have advantages, and damage for STR could double that on a “5 STR per 1d6 normal damage” basis up to doubling the damage. That caused some balance issues. For example, my 15 STR adding 3d6 to my 3d6 AVLD Does BOD Penetrating Hand Attack. Funny how those characters always had exactly enough STR to double their HA damage.

 

A compromise might be setting breakpoints. We can take our cue from other rules. 5-8 charges have the same limitation value, and you can have three or four duplicates if you pay 10 points to double twice. That is, if you want a bit more, you pay the full extra cost. Maybe that means 5 STR adds 1 DC to an attack with no advantages. Adding a DC to an attack that costs up to 10 points per DC costs 10 STR. It also costs twice as much velocity to add 1 DC, and 2 Martial Arts DCs, etc.

 

All we’ve done is reduce the number of breakpoints. The math gets easier, but that AP Killing Attack requires way more STR to enhance.

 

Want to make it even easier? STR, velocity, etc. don’t add damage. That’s a logical disconnect, but we make the rules more complex to have them feel logical.

 

Up until 6e, you could only increase an HKA weapon to double its base damage as a hard and fast rule. In 6e that's still strongly recommended but up to the GM.

In 6e, RAW is that the doubling rule does not apply to killing attacks, but the we got that annoying sidebar that reflected cold feet in making the change. You can’t add STR to any other attack form, which makes the HKA a challenge. With the doubling rule, how many characters who typically attacked with a 4d6 HKA did so with a combination other than 30 STR + 2d6 HKA?

 

This also causes an issue for weapons. Your hulking 30 STR brute picks up a 2 DC weapon? Why? Your damage dropped instead of rising. In any source material, would such a character do less harm with a tire iron than with his bare hands?

[Hugh Neilson]

SPEED CHART

I do like the Spd Chart a lot. It gives a great way to differentiate between Mooks(ie weak opponents, untrained folk) Spd 2, Trained individuals (ie Combat Veterans), and Elite (Special Forces guys, Top tier Martial Artists etc).The Spd chart doesn't really do much to speed or slow things down in my experience. Unless you are playing Champions and you have characters with a Wide range of SPD values. Even with that having players who are ready to take their action when their phase comes up fixes a lot of that issue. Which IS an issue with ANY RPG. Players who can't decide or who who don't decide what to do until their phase comes up. There's easy fixes for that. Also the SPD chart is a bit easier to remove in a non Superheroic game where setting everyone to the same SPD doesn't hurt much. In a Supers game, putting everyone at the same speed really makes Martial Artists and Speedsters feel the same as the slow team Brick. Which is not good for the Genre IMHO. YMMV

I can totally empathize with your opinions regarding the Speed Chart. In theory, I love the speed chart... But in practice, not so much. The Speed Chart interacts strangely with other aspects of the rules (Vehicles/Mounts, Velocity-Based Maneuvers, etc). If you want to ditch the Speed Chart entirely: I suggest going with treating everyone as though they had a SPD of 3. There are three reasons for picking SPD 3 over SPD 2 or 4.

 

The first reason is simple precedent. Bases, which don't have SPD scores, are treated as though they have a dormant SPD of 3 for the purposes of Constant Powers and such.

 

The second reason is interaction with other aspects of the rules. SPD 3 is the minimum SPD score necessary to provide a mechanical differentiation between Extra Time (Extra Phase), and Extra Time (1 Turn). SPD 3 (as compared to SPD 4 at least) also minimizes the amount of "free movement" this optional rule grants a 0-point character (and by extension, every character).

 

The third reason is the SPD 3 is the value suggested in HERO System 6th for "Removing Speed" in one of the tool kitting sections. So it is, after a fashion, RAW.

I think the first step is assessing what you dislike about the Speed Chart. Any fix has to solve those issues. It sounds like the big issue is having PCs with different numbers of actions, because more actions = more fun. Replacing higher Speed with things like skill levels with Multiple Attack Actions, autofire, etc. can allow characters to still make multiple attacks, but does that solve the problem? If I’m making four attack rolls in my one action, I still take a lot more time than the guy who just makes one attack.

 

In any case, it seems like a standard Speed for all PCs could be the answer, whether they pay points for their SPD above 2 or not. That does not mean, however, that we can’t give the mooks lower speeds. Maybe those non-combat NPCs and mooks get a SPD of 2, and plod along. Combat trained NPCs get a SPD of 3. But only PCs and those PC level NPCs get the elite SPD of 4.

 

You can also use higher Speeds for really impressive bad guy NPCs, or just keep the top end at 4 – you never get better than a PC SPD.

 

Which SPD to pick? Good question. It has a lot of in-game ramifications. The lower the SPD, the more recoveries per action the characters get. Low SPD means Recovery is worth a lot more, and END and STUN are worth less. For example, assume we’re going to have attacks that cost about 4 END, and END-free defenses. Could spend 1 or 2 END on movement in a phase as well. Those attacks will be about 8 DC, and we’ll have defenses in the range of about 10 on average. Finally, assume CVs are set so we hit about 2/3 of the time.

 

So an average phase will swallow up 4 – 6 END, call it 5, and put an average of 12 STUN through (28 average roll on 8d6 – 10 defenses = 18 x 2/3 success ratio). Let’s assume the average character has 10 REC and 50 STUN.

 

If we set SPD at 2, he takes 24 STUN before getting a recovery. Combat should last 4 turns or more. If we set SPD at 4, he’s at risk of not lasting the turn, and combat should run 2 turns or so.

 

But maybe he should drop down to 40 STUN and buy another 5 REC. 2 hits in one turn and he’s likely still standing, and his STUN is recovering much quicker – he’ll probably last a few more turns. In the faster game, REC is less important, so maybe he should drop some REC to boost his STUN instead.

 

That’s the easy aspect. Flash is more useful if SPD is high, since it blinds in segments. Continuous Attacks are less useful as they go off less often, but Damage over Time is more useful as it gets more damage through per phase. Adjustment Powers recover every turn, so the faster a turn goes by, the less effective those powers are. Of course, all of these issues also impact power utility based on campaign average SPDs.

 

If it were me, and I may be misreading Claire’s objectives, I like a standard SPD of 4 because it will make the PCs, and their toughest adversaries, really special – a cut above most others. So, in a Supers game, the PCs and supervillains have SPD 4, highly trained agents have a 3 and most mooks – thugs, soldiers, alien invaders – have a 2.

 

Maybe that Aliens game works better with everyone getting a 3 SPD, and we have combatants who are a cut above noncombatants. Or maybe the Aliens are faster and have a 4 SPD – that feels more like the movies, and makes them more scary.

 

My suggestion:

A Turn is six seconds. Every character gets one action per Turn.

After taking your action, immediately gain half your RECovery in END and STUN.

 

If you take a RECovery as your action, you gain the full REC value and also gain the half REC afterwards.

 

Your Movement rate is the distance you move as a full action, and also as far as you can move in combat in one Turn. Multiply it by 600 to get velocity in meters per hour, or by .6 to get kilometers per hour.

 

 

This impacts the Time Chart because it abolishes the distinction between Turn and Phase. Most references to a Turn (Extra Time: One Turn or Continuing Charges, One Turn, etc) can now be read as two Turns.

 

 

Haymakers must be announced at the beginning of the Turn, and are resolved at the end after all other actions.

Gut feel is I don’t like halving REC for its most standard function. Maybe drop the base to 2 and double the cost (or give them the extra 2 as a higher baseline), to get a similar speed of recovery, but without the halving. Maybe you can sacrifice a half phase action to get a recovery, maybe it doubles if you sacrifice a full phase, or maybe we just have less effective in-combat recovery.

 

The “one turn equals two turns” aspect is painful. Having two “action phases” per turn would keep a post-turn recovery, avoid changes to REC and fix a lot of other nomenclature issues.

 

The Haymaker approach seems reasonable, except that now we have “Who acts first” being interrupted with anyone attempting a Haymaker. How big a deal that is depends on how often anyone uses a Haymaker. These now seem like D&D 1 Round Actions.

 

What seems streamlined to some may seem complicating to others, so I think it better to ask “what is the issue we are trying to resolve”.

[Hugh Neilson]

TALKING TIME (TANGENT)

 

I'll just leave this right here. It even calls out HERO System! (Warning: TV Tropes link. Major time sink if you're not careful...)

Hmmm…another Hero rule D&D added to their system. It’s funny how much work D&D designers go through to make D&D more like Hero 

 

Key line from that link, IMO, is “This is a case of Rule of Fun; spouting a Bond One-Liner during combat is awesome, but no one would do it when it would impair combat performance.” What makes the game the most fun? For Centriped's group, it may not be "talking takes no time".

 

"An Action Which Takes No Time" is simply a category of actions which do not require a full or half phase, and can be performed even when it isn't the character's phase. I don't think that actually means no time passes while you are speaking. I give characters some latitude in my aforementioned ruling when it comes to presence attacks, but only some.

I also just don't buy that a villain can monologue for three paragraphs without giving the heroes an opportunity to do anything about it (or at least take recoveries). The stretching of time to allow them to do so is just bad storytelling in my opinion, and it really annoys me in comics, cartoons, and cinema, so I squash it with vehemence in my games. I give my players the opportunity to interrupt the villain's monologue (and vice versa). Call it a house-rule if you like, but it does speed up gameplay. Like I said before, players find it a little frustrating at first, but once they get used to it its not hard to fit a soliloquy or warning into 2-6 seconds. Speaking isn't actually necessary to make a presence attack, any number of high presence characters (like Batman) can do it with a stern glare.

Sure – but Bats does not get the bonus for a soliloquy that way, which is why he typically speaks when it’s supposed to be really cool.

 

More on the other issues below

 

First, I am consistent in my handling of speech, the rule applies to PCs and NPCs alike. I explain the rules in great detail before the session begins so as not to surprise players used to more lax rules regarding speech. Secondly I never tell a player "they are spending too much time speaking", I tell them "what you want to say will take X number of segments". That way it feels little different then when they tell me they want to pick a lock, and I tell them how long the roll will take. Additionally, I usually present players with the option the truncate or rephrase their speech (especially as they are getting used to the rule), act while speaking (since speaking is still a No Time Action), or Hold Action until they get a response.

 

Since it is cinematically appropriate for Supervillains to monologue, mine still do. The fact that that isn't "efficient" is irrelevant. I avoid metagame efficiency at all costs, because in real combat you don't usually have time to sit back and examine the field before making a decision like we do when deciding a character's actions in a table-top RPG. My villains make snap decisions, waste time (and their phases) on inefficient actions, or even let themselves become paralyzed by indecisiveness.

 

I've found my players are usually happy to let them. While the enemy is in the middle of a monologue or paralyzed by indecision they aren't blasting the PCs, and everybody is getting to take Recoveries (which usually benefits the players more than the enemies since they spend more time "on-screen"). My players also know I will let them use that time to attempt whatever trickery they think they can get away with while the enemy is distracted. Such as freeing the hostages (or themselves), lining up a surprise attack, diffusing the bomb, etc.

 

Furthermore, if a player starts a long speech (perhaps in an attempt to talk a villain down for example), a sentient enemy is quite likely to let them. From the enemies' perspective the PC might let useful information slip, give his death ray time to charge, or give him time to recover from the beating the PCs are dishing out.

Your initial concern was players making huge battle plans during the course of a 2 second phase. That just sounds like “guys, use the rules reasonably and don’t abuse them for metagame effects” to me.

 

By allowing lengthy speeches as long as everyone waits patiently, I think we just create a new means of combat optimization by metagame effects. Running out of END? Need a few extra phases to free the hostages? Start talking – the GM will have everyone patiently listen, and you can stall for a couple of recoveries.

 

Why don’t the bad guys do the same thing? If they d0o, and the PC’s see them stalling for time, will they just allow it, or will they cut the speech off? And if that’s their tactic, isn’t it reasonably what the bad guys will do as well? It seems like we are back to “guys, use these replacement rules reasonably and don’t abuse them for metagame effects”

 

I don’t see “a speech can be made in much less game time than it would take in real speech” being any less a compromise of verisimilitude than “everyone respects the speaking character and will stop and listen”.

[Cantriped]

TALKING TIME (TANGENT)

... 

 

Your initial concern was players making huge battle plans during the course of a 2 second phase. That just sounds like “guys, use the rules reasonably and don’t abuse them for metagame effects” to me.

 

By allowing lengthy speeches as long as everyone waits patiently, I think we just create a new means of combat optimization by metagame effects. Running out of END? Need a few extra phases to free the hostages? Start talking – the GM will have everyone patiently listen, and you can stall for a couple of recoveries.

 

Why don’t the bad guys do the same thing? If they d0o, and the PC’s see them stalling for time, will they just allow it, or will they cut the speech off? And if that’s their tactic, isn’t it reasonably what the bad guys will do as well? It seems like we are back to “guys, use these replacement rules reasonably and don’t abuse them for metagame effects”

 

I don’t see “a speech can be made in much less game time than it would take in real speech” being any less a compromise of verisimilitude than “everyone respects the speaking character and will stop and listen”.

It wasn't so much a "concern" as an issue that actually came up during play. I had players trying to hold entire back-and-forth tactical discussions during one 2-4 second phase of a combat/scenario that was only going to last 24 to 36 seconds. Too me that kind of behavior breaks the tension of combat and damages suspension of disbelief. The RAW was silent on how to handle the abuse of speaking is a "Free Action"/"No Time Action".

Sure, it creates "a new means of combat optimization"... except that new means is not metagame. It is one that character's in almost every genre in media have already been using for decades... it's called stalling. Making time stretch for speech prevents that cinematic reality of being effective in gameplay.

Also I put in lots of qualifiers in my description that seem to have been ignored... up to and including outright saying "I give my players the opportunity to interrupt the villain's monologue (and vice versa)". The penalty for abusing the speech-takes-time rule is that the villain/player catches wise and blasts you in the face while you're talking.

[Hugh Neilson]

As I see it, the goal was to remove the metagame of "we can discuss strategy for an hour - it all happens in no time". That was achieved. It could also have been achieved by simply ruling that the ability of the GM to impose limits on "actions that take no time" will be implemented here - the rule is not there to allow for extended tactical discussions during combat, so you don't get to have extended tactical discussions during combat. Spidey still gets to quip.

 

What were the ripple effects of realistic timing for speech?

 

Do the PCs routinely blast the monologuing villain in the face to prevent him stalling for time? Do they also routinely have their opponents cut off their speech so they can't use it to stall for time?

 

Do the PCs refrain from monologues and soliloquys because their use can give the opponents time to recover or accomplish other goals?

 

 

I think you can have "time free speech" and "stalling for time" in the same game. Reasonable use of "speech without time use" is permitted, and unreasonable use is not. If everyone is playing to have fun, not to rules-lawyer every possible advantage, tactical meetings don't happen in combat. Deliberate stalling for time? Sure - let's pick the appropriate interaction skill to determine whether your attempt to stall for time works, or the villain sees right through it. Now you can actually build a character who has a mechanical advantage when trying to stall for time.

[Cantriped]

It is worth restating that I gave the players some latitude for soliloquys and presence attacks, and that "Combat Speech" is still a No Time Action in that it doesn't consume their phase, and can be performed outside of their phase. Most of the time when Spider Man quips, it is during another action (such a movement or to punctuate a successful attack), or during someone else's phase (such as when he successfully dodges an attack), either of which are still completely legal under my house rule.

 

What were the ripple effects of realistic timing for speech?

Do the PCs routinely blast the monologuing villain in the face to prevent him stalling for time? Do they also routinely have their opponents cut off their speech so they can't use it to stall for time?

Do the PCs refrain from monologues and soliloquys because their use can give the opponents time to recover or accomplish other goals?

No, the PCs didn't routinely blast monologuing villains when they stalled for time, and vice versa. Nor did the PCs refrain from soliloquys themselves

 

The main "ripple effects" of timing "Combat Speed" that I noticed were:

Combat lasted slightly longer In-Game. Out-Of-Game combat was slightly shorter, because players spent less time discussing tactics.

Everyone got more Post Segment 12 Recoveries.

PCs/NPCs frequently had to Hold Action to wait for a response, if the PC thought they would lose an action, sometimes they Guarded their Area, took Recoveries, or used Set and Brace, or used Cover.

PCs/NPCs used different phrasing, and spoke more succinctly when they needed to convey information in a short period of time. Long awkward phrases like "Watch out for the green dragon's acid breath" were replaced with impassioned cries of "Take Cover!"

 

Seriously, once players got used to the rule, I felt like it really improved roleplaying. In my opinion it was because:

1.  They had to think less about "efficient use of their phases", knowing that I wasn't going to punish them for "wasting" a few seconds. Especially when a character had "time to burn" because another PC was talking to an NPC and segments were actually passing during the exchange.

2.  They thought more critically about what they wanted to say, knowing it actually took time to say it. Which meant they were more likely to think about how their character would speak, and what they would say.

3.  They felt the passage of time more keenly In-Game. They felt the tension when they waited for an enemy to respond, not knowing immediately what would happen next.