HS 6e is mechanically the best version of the rules; dissenting views welcome

[Toxxus]

If you allow Grabs as part of the Guarding attack then you give defenders one possible option to stop the heroic charge.  But, it shouldn't be a guaranteed outcome.  We see attackers smash the line every week during football games.  It's a contest.

[massey]

19 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

 

As an aside, I'm curious about two things? 

1. What edition of the Hero System do you use (you may have said, but if so I missed it)
2. If you don't think the Hero System is a successful universal system (which is how it positions itself post-3e), why do you use it at all? What does it do for you that a dedicated non-universal game system wouldn't do better?

 

1.  We play 4th edition with elements of 5th incorporated into it.  Sort of a 4.5 edition.

2.  It's a great system for superheroes.  We don't really use it for heroic games because I don't think it does those games very well.

 

[Killer Shrike]

8 minutes ago, massey said:

 

1.  We play 4th edition with elements of 5th incorporated into it.  Sort of a 4.5 edition.

 

Which bits of 5e, out of curiosity?

 

8 minutes ago, massey said:

2.  It's a great system for superheroes.  We don't really use it for heroic games because I don't think it does those games very well. 

 

Personally, I think it's a great system for all genres I've applied it to. It all comes down to which options are on or off. A lot of the options, particularly in 4e, are in a "superheroic" preset by default, but it just requires toggling a few settings to dial in a different feel. I'm pretty sure that if you played in one of my heroic level campaigns, I'd give you cause to reconsider.

 

But, I'm happy to agree to disagree, and I appreciate you taking the time to participate in the discussion.

[Killer Shrike]

2 hours ago, Toxxus said:

If you allow Grabs as part of the Guarding attack then you give defenders one possible option to stop the heroic charge.  But, it shouldn't be a guaranteed outcome.  We see attackers smash the line every week during football games.  It's a contest.

 

If we want to discuss this could we start a new thread, or maybe resuscitate one of the old ones? It's an interesting topic, but maybe this isn't the best place to talk about it.

[Killer Shrike]

On 2/1/2019 at 3:43 AM, Tech said:

Reading through this, no one is changing their opinions based on personal preferences being stated. I think it was Lord L who said he's just tired of debating nowadays (correct me if I'm wrong.) I agree. For the most part, I don't bother debating anymore.

 

I will say that 6e went to two books whereas 5th was one. I haven't bothered to look at other genres or systems - not interested. I'm sure D&D has alot of books but I'm not talking about D&D: I'm talking about this system. I've heard the complaints of new people saying it's like reading an encyclopedia and I believe there's validity in such a complaint. Whether it's a better system than before or not, did 6e make it easier for new players to enjoy it?

 

Well, the 6e core rulebooks themselves definitely did not make it easier for new players to join the player base or enjoy the experience of learning the game.

 

As an onboarding tool, 6e vol 1 & 2 are abysmal. However 6e Basic is a really good and easy way for new players to get into and learn the Hero System. If they had called Hero Basic something like Hero System Rulebook or Hero System Core, and called the multi-volume big book full version something like Hero System Unabridged or Hero System Encyclopedia, and pushed the lightweight version of the rules as the mass consumer version with the full desk reference set as a specialty item for the hardcore...

 

That has issues as well. Steve, as the walking breathing rules repository, had to keep track of the rules as printed; juggling the abridged and unabridged versions when answering questions and writing supplements would have been a challenge; even more so for other authors trying to write for the product line. They would have to be careful about including references to rules text that only appeared in the full set which players may not have. Some people might feel like they were being asked to buy two sets of rules or that the best bits were behind a paywall (buy the big books for a hefty chunk of change). Some of the hardcore fans might feel like they were being marginalized as the company went after new players rather than catering to the diehards.

 

I've never started a game company and tried to grow a customer base of gamers, while retaining the ones I've already got. However, I have been a driving force in several startups and companies trying to go from small to medium or medium to big, and the one thing I know for certain is you have to decide if you are trying to maintain status quo and hold on to the customers you've gotten thus far, or you have to cast your net wider and get many more new customers even if that means you lose some of the ones you've already got. It's a balancing act. If you are trying to retain what you have, you focus on quality and niche features that the existing customer base wants, or on adding things your competition offers so you can compete on even footing. If you are trying to grow you go the other way, and try to wow the potential customers with something that makes them pay attention to you; it could be a killer feature, it could be a lower price, it could be nothing more than attention getting style. 

 

The 6e core rules didn't really do either. It certainly appealed to the most diehard existing fans, but not so much the more casual existing fans. It may have appealed to certain subset of potential new players, maybe bibliophiles who find something deeply satisfying in multi-volume encyclopedic unabridged works (don't judge us, our pain is real); but most rpg players are not looking for rulebooks that can be weaponized as heavy mallets.

 

Quote

My major concern isn't which edition people is using or debating who thinks which edition is better. No. I'm looking for whether or not this system will ultimately disappear because of lack of advertising or interest. When Champions 1, 2 and 3 were going strong, I saw advertising. What about now? Are we reaching new players still, is my big concern. I've heard some current players introducing family or friends to the system and I'm glad, but it's still in because of the current players.

 

The Hero System is not really a gateway game. It's main competitive aspect vs other more mainstream games, is that if you are the sort of player who struggles within the narrow confines of character creation found in most games (particularly back in the day), the Hero System has freeform character design. Back when I actively proselytized for the Hero System and roped in new players, that was the hook that got most of them to give it a try. "Think of a character you wanted to play in [system they said they played in], but can't because the system wont let you make that character. Ok, now I bet you that the Hero System will let us make that character. Let's do it.".

 

Nowadays a lot of game systems are much less restrictive than used to be the norm. The existence of such games undermines one of the compelling features of the Hero System.

 

I honestly don't know what type of advertising would help make HS more visible and pull in new players. 

 

Quote

I've got the (relatively) recent Champions Complete. It was a single book at 250 pages (vs 5th ed at 372 pages) and contained enough to get new players interested.

 

Agreed. CC is 6e, I will point out.

 

Quote

So, is 6e mechanically etc? I have my preference; others differ and that's fine. I think the more important question is are more players joining us, and whether this system will be around in ten years, whether 1st - 6th, 7th, rebooted system, etc.

 

I'm pretty sure it will be what it was between 4e and 5e. Hardcore players still using it, bringing in the occasional new player here and there to join existing groups / campaigns, but dwindling. Maybe as our generation retires and has more time on their hands there will be some kind of resurgence of play in the old folks homes, but our retirement wont look the same as that of the baby boomers; most of us will work until we die and not have the time and resources for leisure activities that fueled similar resurgences in some of the generational hobbies of prior generations.

[Chris Goodwin]

2 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

 

I've never started a game company and tried to grow a customer base of gamers, while retaining the ones I've already got. However, I have been a driving force in several startups and companies trying to go from small to medium or medium to big, and the one thing I know for certain is you have to decide if you are trying to maintain status quo and hold on to the customers you've gotten thus far, or you have to cast your net wider and get many more new customers even if that means you lose some of the ones you've already got. It's a balancing act. If you are trying to retain what you have, you focus on quality and niche features that the existing customer base wants, or on adding things your competition offers so you can compete on even footing. If you are trying to grow you go the other way, and try to wow the potential customers with something that makes them pay attention to you; it could be a killer feature, it could be a lower price, it could be nothing more than attention getting style. 

 

 

With gamers, you can't bring in new customers without people running games.  You can't keep existing customers without people running games.  

 

In order to get customers, you have to get them playing the game.  To get them playing the game you have to have people running games.  

 

You have to have people running games.

 

<deep breath>

 

You have to have people running games.

 

[Killer Shrike]

I thought at some point there was some kind of group of hero gamers who did do that, organize games at cons and brick & mortars and what not. Anyone recollect something like that?

[assault]

5 hours ago, massey said:

2.  It's a great system for superheroes.  We don't really use it for heroic games because I don't think it does those games very well.

 

 

Personally, I exclude cinematic Pulp games from that. Hero does them well.

 

On the other hand, I wouldn't use Hero for Call of Cthulhu style horror, despite also being "Pulp". It can be done, but simply playing a game designed for that is easier.

 

When I say "Hero does them well", of course, I mean Justice Inc. did it well. 5e Pulp Hero would be a good supplement for Justice Inc.

[Doc Democracy]

24 minutes ago, assault said:

When I say "Hero does them well", of course, I mean Justice Inc. did it well.

 

Seconded. 

[Spence]

4 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

 

With gamers, you can't bring in new customers without people running games.  You can't keep existing customers without people running games.  

 

In order to get customers, you have to get them playing the game.  To get them playing the game you have to have people running games.  

 

You have to have people running games.

 

<deep breath>

 

You have to have people running games.

 

 

Wow'zers....  I had never thought I'd see someone else on these forums have this epiphany. ?

 

That hits dead center on why Hero has become a dead game. My definition of a dead game is one that is not generally available for purchase via standard distribution.  And Hero is a game that can only be purchased in electronic form if you know it exists.  

 

But back to your post.  I'll complete your main theme:

"In order to get customers, you have to get them playing the game."

"To get them playing the game you have to have people running games."

"To get people running the game you have to provide adventures to start them off."

 

The problem with Champions Complete (CC) and Fantasy Hero Complete (FHC) is they are complete kits to build games.  They are not a Complete Games. 

 

Now I know the "let Hero die away quietly" crowd will immediately chime in with "Real gamers don't use pregenerated adventuress and campaigns!"  and then point to the existing products like The Turakian Age as proof.  But they refuse to realize that TA's layout was enough to send potential players running.  A new player (or GM) has to wade through 175 pages of in depth world descriptions before they hit the section of building a PC.  To build a Wizard TA tells you that it has a 100 extra spells in TA, but you need the Grimoire (another product).  FHC on the other hand just tells them a Mage gets 50 CP's of magic and spells, but doesn't contain any or give any usable advice on which ones to start with. 

 

D&D 5th may have the entire spell list in the PHB, but a new player only has to read and understand 1 or 2 out of a list of 10 or so in the beginning.   What FHC should have had was detailed templates for Human, Elf, Dwarf and Halfling Warriors, Wizards, Rogues and Priests.  These would be rounded out with prebuilt and short spell lists, abilities/powers, weapons and gear appropriate to beginning adventures in a very very reduced slice of TA.   A village on the frontier where the PC's stop goblin raiders.

 

My point is that CC or FHC is not ready to play.  And unless there is a ready to play version, people will not play it. 

 

Sure, like everyone in this forum, I refer my own homebrew campaigns and worlds.  But CC and FHC is exactly like all the other RPG's in that people need to play it and learn how it works in play before they can really begin creating their own stuff.  I am pretty sure that everyone that has played 1st thru 4th editions has played Vipers Nest.  We played it because it was a great way to try out Champs and see how things actually worked.  In hindsight I believe it would have been even better if they had included 5 or 6 pregenerated Heroes.  Not The Champions, but a few initial build PC's.  But that is just my opinion.

 

Take CC and FHC as written, reformat into a modern book.  The text can be reformatted to fit a modern layout with art.  But the actual rules do not, that is DO NOT need yet another rewrite.  But they do need a third section at the end.  Six pregenerated Heroes and a short three connected scenarios adventure. A mini-campaign with all the villains, monsters etc. ready to go.  They do not need to be elaborate and world shaking.  They can be just tough enough for initial builds.  They need to provide opportunities for combat and non-combat skill use. 

 

This would allow new to Hero players to actually experience the game in play and give them something to look at and say "I get it, that is what they meant".  

 

With Hero, once the system clicks you will never look back.  But it will never really have an opportunity to click if no one ever plays it. 

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

Spence I would add that imo, 400 CP starting characters are a bit much too. They could’ve built several 300 CP characters and then give a Hero or Villain option (which I liked from 3rd ed) to get things going.

[Spence]

34 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Spence I would add that imo, 400 CP starting characters are a bit much too. They could’ve built several 300 CP characters and then give a Hero or Villain option (which I liked from 3rd ed) to get things going.

 

Very good ideas. 

 

I would also suggest that the pregens have simple power sets over efficiency of build.  The idea is to give new players easy samples to play and digest.  Not try to dazzle anyone with how cool the builds are. 

[Ninja-Bear]

Yup that too!

[Tech]

I think Spence nailed it:

 

"That hits dead center on why Hero has become a dead game. My definition of a dead game is one that is not generally available for purchase via standard distribution.  And Hero is a game that can only be purchased in electronic form if you know it exists.  

 

But back to your post.  I'll complete your main theme:

"In order to get customers, you have to get them playing the game."

"To get them playing the game you have to have people running games."

"To get people running the game you have to provide adventures to start them off."

 

and

 

 

"My point is that CC or FHC is not ready to play.  And unless there is a ready to play version, people will not play it. 

 

Sure, like everyone in this forum, I refer my own homebrew campaigns and worlds.  But CC and FHC is exactly like all the other RPG's in that people need to play it and learn how it works in play before they can really begin creating their own stuff.  I am pretty sure that everyone that has played 1st thru 4th editions has played Vipers Nest.  We played it because it was a great way to try out Champs and see how things actually worked.  In hindsight I believe it would have been even better if they had included 5 or 6 pregenerated Heroes.  Not The Champions, but a few initial build PC's.  But that is just my opinion."

 

 

 

 

How can people run a game if they don't know it exists? Is everyone who currently plays the HeroSystem supposed to introduce someone else? As Spence said, you need adventures. What I'm understanding is people want a game to buy & play, not a game system. You don't see the D&D system being advertised. It doesn't help that Champions Online is merely inspired from the HeroSystem (combat-wise) and I don't see it being advertised either.

 

My apologies - this is a bit off the topic.

[Joe Walsh]

16 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

 

With gamers, you can't bring in new customers without people running games.  You can't keep existing customers without people running games.  

 

In order to get customers, you have to get them playing the game.  To get them playing the game you have to have people running games.  

 

You have to have people running games.

 

Right. And that gets to why the question this thread poses is moot outside of these hallowed halls.

 

The market for games with chargen as complex as HERO System is tiny. Infinitesimally small.

 

But the market for games with the rest of HERO System's mechanics? That's bigger. It's a fine system that works well for a wide range of genres.

 

Making the chargen even more finely grained doesn't help interest people in using the system.

 

It needs to be much less finely grained for people to use it, at least on their first encounter.

 

Templates are great for that. Prebuilt powers are fine as well.

 

Either way, explain the abilities in plain language.

 

Give potential new players and GMs a chance to learn the system without earning a PhD in character generation the HERO way. They can look into the atom-by-atom power building system later on if they want to. Or they can buy more books with premade stuff if they want(!).

 

A book with templates, the game system, a world for the characters to exist in, and some introductory adventures would be great.

[Toxxus]

The Champions Cards thing they're doing to simplify character creation could be extended to the other genre's to breathe them back to life as well.

 

Hell, I'd actively work towards creating the cards for Fantasy Hero characters.

 

I've converted one of my D&D tables to Fantasy Hero and after I finish another round of tweaks I'll see if I can pitch it for my Wednesday night group as well.

[Chris Goodwin]

13 hours ago, Spence said:

But back to your post.  I'll complete your main theme:

"In order to get customers, you have to get them playing the game."

"To get them playing the game you have to have people running games."

"To get people running the game you have to provide adventures to start them off."

 

And this is what I was getting at.  We don't need every single aspect of every single game we play with Hero to be DIY.  It's not even a short-attention-span Twitter/Instagram/Pokemon Go thing, and if I were part of that generation I'd  be insulted at hearing that over and over again.  It's a taking care of the kid plus a 40 hour workweek plus cooking dinner plus taking care of the house thing.  I did run a short Champions campaign DIY for a group this past year... it tanked, and I think I may have turned them off of Champions and Hero in the process.  It would have been nice to have had something to start them with. 

 

---

 

In other news, I'm honestly getting tired of bickering over which edition of Hero is best or worst.  I know, I've done some of it myself, but I'll try to police myself in the future.  

 

What edition of Hero am I not currently playing?  All of them.  

 

What edition of Hero would I rather be playing?  All of them. 

 

If I had to put them in order, then yeah, I'd put 3rd edition and the 2nd-3rd edition era standalone games first.  But I now have at least the core rules for every game of every edition, at least in PDF, and I really want to play something.  I will play any of them.  

[Killer Shrike]

6 hours ago, Tech said:

How can people run a game if they don't know it exists? Is everyone who currently plays the HeroSystem supposed to introduce someone else? As Spence said, you need adventures.

 

I agree re: need for adventures. I've always been consistent on that point. I even wrote some for use by others rather than just talking about how there should be some; a couple of them were printed in Digital Hero. I converted other game systems to the Hero System for multiple reasons, but one prominent one was to make it easier for me to cannibalize adventure materials from those game systems for use in the Hero System. 

 

Later on, I eventually smartened up and started approaching the Hero System from a different perspective and put more emphasis on having example adventures (some examples: http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Vignettes/Vignettes.aspx ). If I could rewind and do the content-providing-fan-site thing all over, the thing I would change would be to focus more on adventures and less on character and crunch content.

 

It is really difficult to do adventures for a toolkit system (of any kind) because you have to assert your choices onto the content and the target audience of people who agree with every assumption you made is small. That sticking point (and related considerations) is why I stayed at the 10,000 foot level and instead tried to show how to apply the tools available in various ways, or to use the tools available to build more tools with. A Bob Villa / Roy Underhill approach, of sorts. I underestimated the desire of the bulk of people to just want decisions to be made for them and dropped in their lap as is. I'm not like that, and it is difficult for me to bite off on anything uncritically, so it is hard to put myself in the mindset of force feeding things to others.

 

However, later on in life I got turned on to dramatic structure concepts as a thing unto themselves, which I won't digress into here, but began to see the value of a basic 3-act or 5-act play as a sort of skeleton for arranging toolkit game adventures around. If an adventure is laid out like the synopsis of a play, even if a GM is using the system with different settings, the broad strokes of the adventure are still viable. It is also focuses on the overarching story rather than a room by room encounter by encounter procedural exercise, which better suits my own style of play. 

 

Quote

What I'm understanding is people want a game to buy & play, not a game system.

 

If you change that to "MOST people" I agree with you. SOME people do care. I happen to be one of them.

 

Quote

You don't see the D&D system being advertised.

 

Um...well...there was that "d20 system" thing that sort of dominated the industry for a lengthy stretch of time.

 

Quote

It doesn't help that Champions Online is merely inspired from the HeroSystem (combat-wise) and I don't see it being advertised either.

 

Champions Online the video game has nothing to do with the Hero System, and was never presented that way. I'll admit, I'm surprised that this has come up twice now; I thought how that deal went down was common knowledge among HS users.

 

Anyway, just to re-anchor the conversation, the through-line here is talking about the game mechanics of 6th edition compared to the game mechanics of every previous edition, and my opinion that the 6e game mechanics are overall the best version of those mechanics.

 

If my position were "6e is the most MARKETABLE edition of the Hero System" or "6e is the best at growing the player base" or "The era in which 6e is the current edition is the most successful in terms of health and growth of the community of people who play it", then the various objections of all the reasons why none of those things are true would be on topic.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Killer Shrike
added a smiley face so that people would understand I was being humorous not jerkish. because emojis

[Killer Shrike]

1 hour ago, Chris Goodwin said:

 

And this is what I was getting at.  We don't need every single aspect of every single game we play with Hero to be DIY.  It's not even a short-attention-span Twitter/Instagram/Pokemon Go thing, and if I were part of that generation I'd  be insulted at hearing that over and over again. 

 

Agreed.

 

1 hour ago, Chris Goodwin said:

It's a taking care of the kid plus a 40 hour workweek plus cooking dinner plus taking care of the house thing. 

 

I feel your pain. Middle-aged parent breadwinner gamers unite! We could form a club, if only we had the time to dedicate to it.

 

1 hour ago, Chris Goodwin said:

I did run a short Champions campaign DIY for a group this past year... it tanked, and I think I may have turned them off of Champions and Hero in the process.  It would have been nice to have had something to start them with. 

 

Getting any campaign off the ground with any game system is challenging. It's entirely possible that it would have tanked regardless of game system. 

 

From my background and perspective, each new campaign is kind of like a new startup. Lots of work, high hopes, and a good premise are not a guarantee of success.

 

1 hour ago, Chris Goodwin said:

In other news, I'm honestly getting tired of bickering over which edition of Hero is best or worst.  I know, I've done some of it myself, but I'll try to police myself in the future.  

 

My intent is not to bicker, but to discuss. Most of the people responding in this thread are also discoursing in a friendly and reasonable way. It's been surprisingly flame free thus far. Some people tend to get emotional when people don't agree with them, but those of us who show up on a discussion forum presumably have some tolerance towards discussing things in an open forum and understand that perfect unanimity is a rare thing.

 

I hope you don't feel like I'm bickering with you now, but rather am engaging you in friendly conversation.

 

1 hour ago, Chris Goodwin said:

If I had to put them in order, then yeah, I'd put 3rd edition and the 2nd-3rd edition era standalone games first.  But I now have at least the core rules for every game of every edition, at least in PDF, and I really want to play something.  I will play any of them.  

 

Good to know. All this thread is asking of you is, if you feel like it, to make a statement as to whether you think the mechanics of 3e are better than 6e and if so why. That's all. It isn't challenging you to change your mind or to say that you are wrong to prefer 3e. It is just asking for a little bit of comparative analysis for purposes of discussion.

[Killer Shrike]

3 hours ago, GM Joe said:

Right. And that gets to why the question this thread poses is moot outside of these hallowed halls.

 

But we are in those hallowed halls, and thus it is not moot, and thus surely here is an appropriate place to pose the question. 

 

3 hours ago, GM Joe said:

The market for games with chargen as complex as HERO System is tiny. Infinitesimally small.

 

The market for supercars is infinitesimally small. That doesn't prevent people interested in them from discussing their comparative merits.

 

The market for a lot of things is small; however within the market that does exist discussion occurs.

 

3 hours ago, GM Joe said:

But the market for games with the rest of HERO System's mechanics? That's bigger. It's a fine system that works well for a wide range of genres.

 

Making the chargen even more finely grained doesn't help interest people in using the system.

 

It needs to be much less finely grained for people to use it, at least on their first encounter.

 

Templates are great for that. Prebuilt powers are fine as well.

 

Either way, explain the abilities in plain language.

 

Give potential new players and GMs a chance to learn the system without earning a PhD in character generation the HERO way. They can look into the atom-by-atom power building system later on if they want to. Or they can buy more books with premade stuff if they want(!).

 

A book with templates, the game system, a world for the characters to exist in, and some introductory adventures would be great.

 

I don't disagree with this, and have been a proponent (more than a proponent, a provider of such) for many years. 

 

I'm not sure what the relevance is to the topic however. Could you translate this into a position on game mechanics, re 6e vs 1e-5e? 

[Joe Walsh]

7 minutes ago, Killer Shrike said:

But we are in those hallowed halls, and thus it is not moot, and thus surely here is an appropriate place to pose the question.

 

I never said otherwise.

 

Quote

The market for supercars is infinitesimally small. That doesn't prevent people interested in them from discussing their comparative merits.

 

The market for a lot of things is small; however within the market that does exist discussion occurs.

 

I never said otherwise.

 

Quote

I don't disagree with this, and have been a proponent (more than a proponent, a provider of such) for many years. 

 

I'm not sure what the relevance is to the topic however. Could you translate this into a position on game mechanics, re 6e vs 1e-5e? 

 

Really?

[Killer Shrike]

30 minutes ago, GM Joe said:

I never said otherwise. (x2)

 

Ok, well, don't take offense. That's how I interpreted your statements in the context of this thread. What were you trying to say?

 

Quote

Really?

 

Um...yes? 

 

Maybe something like "6e mechanics may be more verbose, but [1|2|3|4|5]e's mechanics provided most of the utility at a fraction of the rules density. A leaner approach to rules has many advantages {such as...} and therefore [1|2|3|4|5]e's mechanics are better even if they are less comprehensive.", or whatever opinion you have in that vein.

 

Either you agree with the premise of the topic that 6e mechanics are better overall than the previous editions, or you don't; and if you don't please share which edition's mechanics you prefer. 

 

I'm just trying to keep the discussion on the track; any ruffling of feathers is unintended.

[Toxxus]

How many weekly Hero games do I have to run for Steve to hire me?

[Killer Shrike]

5 minutes ago, Toxxus said:

How many weekly Hero games do I have to run for Steve to hire me?

 

Infinite. Jason W. on the other hand... Well, actually, probably also infinite.

 

Yet, "he who labors in love does not labor in vain" may apply. In all seriousness though, I feel you. At some point championing your hobbies can start to feel like a chore or a second unpaid job.

[Toxxus]

5 minutes ago, Killer Shrike said:

Yet, "he who labors in love does not labor in vain" may apply. In all seriousness though, I feel you. At some point championing your hobbies can start to feel like a chore or a second unpaid job.

 

Nah, I love it.  But I do have a bucket list item of getting a working credit for HERO since it's been my favorite game system since the 80s.

 

Send me $1 for running a game at the local mall so I can add it to my resume and I'll be happy.  Well that and a shockingly small 1099.