Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Killer Shrike

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

Recommended Posts

And to double post:

 

Complexity.

I also think...it might add "trap options" (I think this is the term from D&D family stuff).

Again, for new folks, mostly.

 

For instance maybe I (as a new player) want to play Phoenix (Rachel Summers) so I mostly boost my OECV and end up getting spanked in mind-to-mind combats with other mentalists because DECV didn't seem as relevant to my character concept during char gen. This seems reasonable because in my conception she's a more aggressive attacking psionic than a defensive one.

But if I just buy up Ego (in 4e\etc), and get balanced OECV\DECV then I'm (kinda sorta) prevented from self-gimping by spending my points in ways that *seem* reasonable at character creation but won't be reasonable in game. And of course I can still buy a +1 (O)ECV skill level to reflect being better at offense than defense.

 

 

Conversely, as an experienced player, I honestly can't think of a large number of cases where I'd be buying significantly mismatched OCD\DCV\STun\Bod. Not saying it doesn't happen, obvs, just...it doesn't seem like a huge issue.

 

So...what's gained? What improves in playing the game? Are there character builds that are possible in 6e that can't be done as neatly and cleanly in 5e?

 

Honest question. 6e seems logical to me, but, in games, what does it actually add?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toxxus regards to weapons. Since fifth you can chose which STR min you want for your weapon which is easier to build than based on ACT cost. Remeber the old way was that if you didn’t like what the STR Min you adjusted with another modifier. So the question (which I don’t really have hard data) how many weapons became adjusted and therefore a pain? 

 

As to weapons doing the same damage. Remember too, the lower the STR Min, the easier to be able to add STR Damage. At STR 10 both weapons do identical damage as you noted but at STR 15 the mace gets added +1 DC to damage whereas the sword doesn’t. And also, isn’t a Great sword 2 handed whereas the mace one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duke I hope you enjoy 6th Basic but if I’d known sooner, I would’ve pointed you to Fantasy Hero Complete. It has more rules than Basic. (Basic intentionally left out 5 Powers) and at $20  (that was the price I paid-hope it’s still the same.) physical copy, you got a PDF for free. It’s the better deal. And yes it does cover Supers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK.  There is a community here that has grown up with multiple versions of this system.  Each of us will have a golden period they remember that makes the system at that time shine in their brain, it is also, likely, the time when they had the greatest knowledge of a ruleset.  For me that was probably just prior to and after publication of the BBB.  I had a group of five players and we played multiple times per week and lived superheroes, burning through a huge number of 4th Ed published adventures.

 

I have played HERO much less since then but despite enjoying a number of other systems, this is the only game forum I frequent regularly.  This is the only system I think in.

 

I have picked up each edition as it is published, every publisher needs to update its ruleset to keep it fresh, to make it new for new audiences and to provide something for long-standing fans to buy.

 

HERO is distinct in that it does not have lots of black box surprises that can be added to new editions to make it new and shiny and different.  It simply seeks to achieve a better mechanical balance between the various powers and effects it provides.  Characteristics were one of the remaining black boxes, 6th Edition removed those and made more archetypes available without going through the sellback contortions that figured characteristics would require to get, for example a gymnast that was a poor combatant, and to remove the incentive for almost every player to buy raised CON and STR due to their figured characteristic value.

 

What drives the impression of complexity is the amount of explanation and example provided.  Champions Complete shows that the explanation can be removed to expose quite a simple system that is not hugely different from its roots, probably just more flexible and balanced.

 

I do think that Steve missed a trick.  The focus was on character creation, something each edition has done.  What remains almost the same as those very first poorly typeset rulebooks is the core system.  It remains a sophisticated point buy system resting upon an ancient game, I think that some of the rules could have been updated and made the core system as sophisticated as the character creation has become.

 

I think, mechanically, 6th is the best in character creation.  I think it is a tough call when you talk gameplay after character creation as that has not significantly changed.

 

Doc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantasy Hero Complete has the same problem as Champions Complete. It's long.

 

6e Basic is borderline readable, but obviously as dry as dust. There are a few bits that are interesting.

 

Naturally the omissions are annoying. The absence of Combat Luck bugged me, but I've subsequently stopped using it in superhero games anyway. (I just buy a little bit of Resistant Protection/Armour and justify it as the character not dying when they otherwise might.)

 

Despite its intentional limits, it's the version of 6e closest to what I would prefer to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Doc Democracy said:

I think that some of the rules could have been updated and made the core system as sophisticated as the character creation has become.

 

OK, at the risk of a derailing the thread, could you provide some details?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In defense of 6e, the Champions Character Creation Card idea was long overdue.

 

I've been using template systems for ages, but having a system like this as an official thing is a Very Good Idea. Naturally, it goes against the super-grognard DIY ethos, but that ethos is strictly optional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Chris pointed out "Mechanically Best" is a matter of taste, of opinion.  Best how? 

 

I mean, you could say "mechanically best" means that the rules cover more detailed situations, making it less likely that the GM has to house-rule anything.  The sheer size of the 6E rules seems to imply this would indeed be the case.

 

Or "mechanically best" might mean it's simpler to use in game play.  In which case, any additional fiddly details 6E added, which the GM and/or players would need to remember, seems to imply that 6E is not "mechanically best."

 

Or "mechanically best" might mean that it's easier to create characters and powers.  I'd say (and yes, this is my opinion) that 6E made some things easier, and some things harder.  Which (again, IMO) means that 6E is "mechanically equal" to past editions.

 

Personally, I look at the different editions like I look at, say, the various pastors my church has had.  Each has pros, and each has cons.  (Or more appropriately, Advantages and Limitations.)  In some cases, the pros outnumber the cons, and in other cases, the cons may outnumber the pros.  But a lot of that is personal taste.  IMO each one brings something to the table.  Except Fuzion - that's right out.  :winkgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, assault said:

In defense of 6e, the Champions Character Creation Card idea was long overdue.

 

I've been using template systems for ages, but having a system like this as an official thing is a Very Good Idea. Naturally, it goes against the super-grognard DIY ethos, but that ethos is strictly optional.

 

I grabbed it myself during the Kickstarter.  I'll be honest; I want to recreate it for 3rd edition!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than a few stumbles (combat skill levels costs, damage negation, some pricing of stats) it is solid build and structure, just poorly presented and built not as a game but as a system in order to build games with.  I like most of the changes, find some pointless (why get rid of Comeliness, again?) and think some ideas were noble but didn't work out like folding Transfer and Suppress into Drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, assault said:

Fantasy Hero Complete has the same problem as Champions Complete. It's long.

 

6e Basic is borderline readable, but obviously as dry as dust. There are a few bits that are interesting.

 

Naturally the omissions are annoying. The absence of Combat Luck bugged me, but I've subsequently stopped using it in superhero games anyway. (I just buy a little bit of Resistant Protection/Armour and justify it as the character not dying when they otherwise might.)

 

Despite its intentional limits, it's the version of 6e closest to what I would prefer to play.

FHC and CC is long? Sorry not trying to be contrary but I really don’t see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, assault said:

240 pages, versus just over half that for Basic.

Yes but you also get more powers, samples and role playing ideas. CC explains what is the Superheroes genre and gives some ideas as to archetypes, ideas for builds with sfx, and complication builds. These add greatly to the value of the book imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a point of clarity, I consider Champions Complete and 6e Basic to be 6th edition; I didn't back FH Complete KS as I wasn't paying attention when it happened, but I assume it is similar to CC. They may be _subsets_ of 6e, but they are still 6e.

 

Ergo, I would consider an argument that CC or 6e Basic or FH Complete are mechanically superior to 6e to be a spurious argument as a thing cannot be superior to itself.

 

However, I hesitate to state that with 100% conviction because I myself used Sidekick and Basic extensively and distributed copies of it to many players to use as their at the table copy of the rules. I also often took CC to game sessions I was running at someone else's house rather than lug my hardbacks and used that as the at-table rules reference. Now, mentally, I ran the game with my knowledge of the full ruleset and treated the subset / streamlined versions as a convenience, and mentally would not and do not categorize the sessions ran in that way as "Sidekick" or "Basic" or "Champions Complete" edition games.

 

Additionally, back in 4e days, I ran nearly all of my campaigns using the Hero System #500 book rather than the "BBB" hardback. It was slim and wonderfully comprehensive considering its page count and I had a party trick where I could flip to the exact page for a given rule with nearly 90% accuracy. But those campaigns were 4e, not HS 4e #500 campaigns.

 

So, I acknowledge that it might make sense for someone to prefer, say Champions Complete over 6e core, as they prefer the thinned down version (most of the utility, a fraction of the verbosity!). However, to say that its mechanically a better version of the full ruleset of which it is a subset, one would have to establish that the things removed from the full rule set to make the subset made it better...like going on a diet losing only fat and no muscle or bone mass and without incurring organ damage or other health detriments. Now, personally, it was pretty common for me in my usage of subset rules to go the other way; bemoan the missing entries or clarification in the full ruleset absent from the abridged version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Killer Shrike said:

As a point of clarity, I consider Champions Complete and 6e Basic to be 6th edition; I didn't back FH Complete KS as I wasn't paying attention when it happened, but I assume it is similar to CC. They may be _subsets_ of 6e, but they are still 6e.

 

FHC is like CC with some minor changes. One is that FHC has Ranged martial arts whereas CC doesn’t. FHC also has everything presented as well Fantasy. It still has Super stuff on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

So...what's gained? What improves in playing the game? Are there character builds that are possible in 6e that can't be done as neatly and cleanly in 5e?

 

 

A skilled combatant who is not an olympic gymnast.  An olympic gymnast who is not a skilled combatant. 

 

A high OCV character with low DCV. 

 

High, rapidly recovering STUN and END as a viable option to higher defenses and reduced END.

 

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Other than a few stumbles (combat skill levels costs, damage negation, some pricing of stats) it is solid build and structure, just poorly presented and built not as a game but as a system in order to build games with.  I like most of the changes, find some pointless (why get rid of Comeliness, again?) and think some ideas were noble but didn't work out like folding Transfer and Suppress into Drain.

 

Comeliness always comes up.  As I recall, Steve made the decision mainly because COM was not really a characteristic as it had no mechanics of its own.  Any mechanics suggested always modified PRE, so another characteristic.  Why retain Comeliness, again?  Why not have a stat for Muscular, that means your character sure looks buff, but has no mechanics of its own?

 

I found Transfer problematic in that it cost an excessive amount to add advantages (since you had to pay them on the Aid cost they did not impact).  5e worsened this by adding issues like "you can't drain if the Aid is maxed out"; "AoE has to divide up the points rather than affect multiple targets like every other AoE power" and some advantages having to be purchased twice to affect the Drain and Aid components.  Practically, if Hero 1e/2e/3e had Drain and Aid from the outset, I think Transfer would likely never have been its own power.

 

I agree that the pricing of skill levels vs stats is still off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As I recall, Steve made the decision mainly because COM was not really a characteristic as it had no mechanics of its own.  Any mechanics suggested always modified PRE, so another characteristic.

 

Actually in the discussion quite a few mechanics and ways of using comeliness were offered, and ignored.  All he had to do was say "this is optional" and leave it at that, not simply delete a state because you don't see how to use it.

 

Transfer worked fine (needed some adjusting of cost, but was fine).  If you want to vary the parts of the power you can buy aid and drain as needed.  Now instead of one streamlined obvious power that is used constantly in all sorts of genre origin and literature, you have to build a giant paragraph of text.  That is not an advancement, its a step back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

Actually in the discussion quite a few mechanics and ways of using comeliness were offered, and ignored.  All he had to do was say "this is optional" and leave it at that, not simply delete a state because you don't see how to use it.

 

Transfer worked fine (needed some adjusting of cost, but was fine).  If you want to vary the parts of the power you can buy aid and drain as needed.  Now instead of one streamlined obvious power that is used constantly in all sorts of genre origin and literature, you have to build a giant paragraph of text.  That is not an advancement, its a step back.

"Aid foo xd6 self only linked to Drain bar yd6" is a giant paragraph of text?  Misrepresenting things doesn't help your stance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

to using terms like "detest" at that other end of the spectrum,

 

Well if you're going to call me out by name like that....  :lol:

 

Nah; I kid-- I've got big shoulders. :)  And I'm certain that you know I'm always a willing example. :D

 

(nice to see you back, by the way)

 

I really don't have time to get too deeply into it right now, and as I mentioned, I have scored a copy of the Basic Rules, and I really do want to see if I feel better over-all about 6 after I read that.  Being honest?  I don't expect I will, over-all.  But there is the chance that I will find the presentation much more suitable to actually learning / teaching the game.

 

Which brings me to an abbreviated list:

 

As mentioned by someone else above, the changes break the feel of progression.  Yes: the argument can be made that "this is the next logical step."  I don't agree because it doesn't feel like a step in the game that I've always played as much as it feels like a veering off.  I wish I had a better way of expressing this, but it doesn't _feel_ like any of the changes were made to streamline play or increase enjoyment of the game; it feels like a purely gamist exercise in math.  Sure, there is value to that for a lot of people.  I'm just not one of them.  i get more joy out of playing the game than I do analyzing it and breaking it down to the ittiest parts and measuring them, then breaking down further any that might be bigger than the smallest.  6e feels like it was written by and exclusively for the the folks that derive their enjoyment of the game from that aspect.   That aspect doesn't help me play or enjoy the game, but I still pay the verbiage tax any time I want to look something up.  Don't take this for a pointless insult, because I mean it as the truth, and the vibe I get when I read it the first time and very few times I've flipped back through it:

 

Remember when Champions: New Millennium came out?  How we all ran out and bought it and got halfway through and thought "Oh Dear God!  We had something wonderful!  Don't let this be the way it dies!"

 

That's it.  That's the feeling I got reading it, and the feeling I get when I reference it.  It doesn't vibe "next logical step" as much as it does "here's someone else's version of it."  Kind of the American Godzilla (of which I will proudly stand as the only living fan! :lol: )

 

The "Complete" books kind of drive home the next point, which actually I think Hugh put into words way better than I ever could (which is to say, "succinctly." :lol: )  I didn't find it at a quick scan, so I will have to paraphrase: It's not a game anymore.  It's a system from which games can be built.  I'm a huge advocate of the "one thin book" approach (which is part of why I think "Basic" has a shot at altering my opinion of 6e).  To this end, I have fully supported and purchased Monster Hunter (don't like the original source material, but I want to support both HERO and the OTB approach), Champions Complete, and Fantasy HERO.  (I also bought Lucha HERO, but it wasn't until I opened the mailer and noticed the cover that it was a 5e product.  Still, lots of fun, and if they do it for 6, I will probably support that, too).

 

The games made from the system are actually more appealing.  Yes, MHI reads pretty dry, and they all read heavily compressed, but the fact is that I can see myself enjoying those games (except MHI: the source material is so over-the-top macho it out-luchas actual Luchas).  But they don't feel like HERO.  They feel like they should say "inspired by HERO" or something like that. 

 

I must add this, if only for honesty:  I came to understand more about 6e by reading CC and FHC (MHI was a bit buggy) than I did reading the two tomes of actual rules.  I've been playing this game since '81, and was lost in the rules of the latest edition.  There were a number of reasons-- the short list is 1) really, really dry.  Text book dry.  And I've been shot at for this point in the past, but the fact is that after a thirteen-hour work day, coming home after my wife has left for work, having to cook and feed myself and the kids, then knocking out house-related tasks while cycling the kids through the tub and helping with homework, then dammit, if you want me to read you, then do _not_ do everything within your power to knock me out cold.  No; it's not a mechanical issue per se; it makes it extremely difficult to learn with the mechanics actually _are_, however.  The last thing I read that dry was a microbe text back in ....  was it '88?  either way; doesn't matter. But I've read enough other stuff by Steve to know that he _can_ write lively text.  Sorry; I'm going to wrap this up.  I'm getting a bit groggy, and I've got work tomorrow.

 

The text is spread out-- way, way out.  Yes: there are many, many examples.  How many of those would we not need if the book wasn't trying to hard to reduce itself to components and sub-components, and turn power builds (like armor or Force Field) into buy this one thing, then modify the Hell out of it.  Boom.  Easy-peasy.  Reducing everything to perfect equality requires the assumption that there _is_ perfect equality.  It also requires you step everything way, way back into the totally generic.  This means that anything that isn't in and of itself already totally generic can only be built; it can't be bought.  You can't buy armor: you have to build it.  It will take four modifiers and a line and a half on your character sheet.  A force field will probably cost END, so that's two whole lines.

 

Well the "ENTER" button on my keyboard just died, so I'm done sooner than I thought.  Forgive the massive block of text that's going to follow as a result.                                         Well, space bar still works.  That's something, I guess.  Anyway, the idea that everything must be built-- if you don't want anything more than some characteristics, a nondescript  blast, and some flight, you're going to take one thing, apply mixed handful of modifiers, some math (no different than before, really, save that you're no doing it in new places, and more often in the old ones), and write up the whole shebang.                                                                                                                                                                                                     Now all these things go together.  The dryness and excessiveness of the text.  The fact that if you are _not_ already familiar with how HERO does things (and even a portion of those of us who _do_), and all this comes at you out of the blue: seven-hundred or so pages of "the super-generic, mechanically-perfect system," and trying to figure out what it what, what does what, how to add and cobble, how to work modifiers-- as in how to select them, which ones do what, which ones for which specific result-- "how to build Force Field" with Resistant Defense-- how to know that "Resistant Defense" is what you want, even!---                                                                                                                                                                      All of this, and more, is going to come together and hit the potential new player square in the "who the hell has time for this?!" gland.   Fortunately, there aren't that many game shops left, so he's not as likely to see M&M, V&V, SAS, or any of the _much_ more user-friendly supers competitors on the shelf next to it.                                                                     Maybe that's another part of it.  Everything 4e and back was easier to thumb through, scan through, and soak up in the first or second reading.  4e took a bit more reading than anything before that, but it was also the single most user-friendly edition to date, what with the first of HERO's now-trademark indexes / table of contents and the meticulous attention to layout.   5e tried, but there was so much more material, and the layout was....  odd?  Different?  Well, no; it was _similar_.  It's just that each "quick run through of what this thing means" sections became so large as create a major disconnect between sections.  6e, as a reference, or as something you're trying to teach yourself without ever having played HERO before, is downright user-surly.                                                                                                                                                                                                                             There's more, some even related directly too mechanics, but I'm too groggy to carry on, and as I stated, I really want to give Basic a chance; venting my dislike with the current rules is not going to help me keep an open mind.  Fortunately, to chop up and address a couple of other things in your quote post, I had to start at the bottom, so the rest of this is a bit more legible. :)

4 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

I've been away from these board for a while,

 

Actually, yeah--

 

were _have_ you been, anyway?  Sean Waters popped back up after you left; I hope you haven't missed him.

 

Just as an update:  I've incorporated your idea for skill advancement through allowing skill-specific EP for critical successes into two of the three games I'm running.  The control group is a well-established campaign with players I've had for years.  They seem to appreciate it-- anyone likes a little extra experience, right? :)  

 

The other is my youth group, which had only had a handful of sessions prior to introducing it.  As I was easing into the rules, a few at the time as they caught on, I don't think they noticed anything out of the ordinary, so not a lot of feedback there.  For what it's worth from the GM's point of view, I think it might be better suited to supers (my youth group), who are spending EP on every aspect of the game, and where really high skill levels are part of the theme.  In Heroic, if there aren't a lot of skills in play (i.e., a GM who doesn't get too deeply into hair-splitting, like turning  "Biology" into "human anatomy," "immune system science," "microbiology," "physiology," and ten other houses), a character can become "super skilled" well in advance of what the GM might have hoped for.  I have curbed this a bit by awarding those bonuses at the end of the session: if you got a natural 3 during the session, you get that bonus EP.  If you got _four_ natural 3s on that same skill during the session, you get a bonus EP: one bonus EP for the skill in which the nat 3 was rolled.  If more than one, then it's the one that got the _most_ nat3s, or if tied, then the first one.  I will allow 2 bonus EP this way: one per skill per session.  if you got a nat3 in three skills, I'm sorry: only the first two get a bonus point.

 

 

Not trying to drift off the subject; I just thought you might like an update from someone who has tried it.  I really like it.  I expect it will be a standard part of everything I do going forward. Thanks again. :D

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

 

 I would like to hear it if you would take the time to type it out.

Crap!  I did all that in the wrong spot!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       I was going to (sorry; RETURN button is still out) add one last thing: the mechanics are not the only reason I went with HERO way back when, and not the only reason I stayed there.  Believe it or not, the simplicity of HERO and how quick it was to pick up and understand immediately-- that was a large part of it.  5e stabbed it a little bit, but it got better with re-5.  6e  handed the corpse of simplicity to simplicity's children and laughed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

Actually in the discussion quite a few mechanics and ways of using comeliness were offered, and ignored.  All he had to do was say "this is optional" and leave it at that, not simply delete a state because you don't see how to use it.

 

Transfer worked fine (needed some adjusting of cost, but was fine).  If you want to vary the parts of the power you can buy aid and drain as needed.  Now instead of one streamlined obvious power that is used constantly in all sorts of genre origin and literature, you have to build a giant paragraph of text.  That is not an advancement, its a step back.

 

Those suggestions tended to come uniformly back to interaction.  I was a COM proponent for much of the discussion,  but Steve's conclusion that COM, unlike any other characteristic, lacked any unique mechanic justifying its existence made logical sense to me.  Ultimately, it is a form of limited PRE.

 

I would not call Transfer "used constantly" in any genre.  Many of its source material uses (hey, Rogue, Parasite, etc.) were not well reflected by Transfer.  If you want to vary the power, back to your wall of text.  And I never found it all that streamlined when compared to a combination of Aid and Drain.  Especially when we started getting rules like "if you have the maximum enhanced points, the drain stops working" or "AoE Transfer does not work like any other AoE power".

 

What I would have liked to see was Transfer as an example power build, going beyond 6e V1 p 197 to note that you're paying 12.5 points for each 1d6 of "Transfer", so just multiple the number of dice you want by 12.5 and round down.  An alternate version where the Drain has no range would also have been good.  That would have shaved off another 7 points on the 3d6 example, giving us 10 points per 1d6 as a baseline. 

 

WOW - 50% off the 5e cost, and the Drain can still work when the Aid is maxes out.  No wonder few 5e characters used Transfer!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Duke I hope you enjoy 6th Basic but if I’d known sooner, I would’ve pointed you to Fantasy Hero Complete. It has more rules than Basic. (Basic intentionally left out 5 Powers) and at $20  (that was the price I paid-hope it’s still the same.) physical copy, you got a PDF for free. It’s the better deal. And yes it does cover Supers.

Thanks, NB, but thus far, I have (as far as I know) all of the "one thin book" games built with 6e, to include FHC.  And yes: I found the same book/PDF deal.  Very nice. :)

 

What the Crack?!  My space bar is working again?  Dude, I have _got_ to get a new keyboard.....

 

And go to bed before I say something offensive.

 

Night, all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

"Aid foo xd6 self only linked to Drain bar yd6" is a giant paragraph of text?  Misrepresenting things doesn't help your stance. 

 

In the interest of fairness:

 

STUN Transfer:




Drain STUN 3d6 (30 Active Points); Unified Power (-¼) (total cost: 24 points) plus Aid STUN 3d6, Trigger (when character uses Drain, activating Trigger takes no time, Trigger immediately automatically resets; +1) (36 Active Points); Linked (-½), Unified Power (-¼), Only Aid Self (-1) (total cost: 13 points). Total cost: 37 points.

 

By comparison:

 

Combat Luck: Resistant Protection (3 PD/3 ED), Hardened (+¼), Impenetrable (+¼) (13 Active Points); Luck-Based (encompasses all the restrictions described in the text; -¾), Nonpersistent


(-¼). Total cost: 6 points.

 

Only a bit shorter and that limitation is a shortcut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Killer Shrike said:

As a point of clarity, I consider Champions Complete and 6e Basic to be 6th edition; I didn't back FH Complete KS as I wasn't paying attention when it happened, but I assume it is similar to CC. They may be _subsets_ of 6e, but they are still 6e.

 

 

Oh, man-- I hope you managed to pick it up anyway.  It's pretty good.  First thing I've ever read by Surbook, and was actually rather surprised as how much I enjoyed reading it.  That boy's got skills. :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duke, if I might make a suggestion:

 

KS started with the statement 6e is the best edition mechanically.

 

I suggest that you do not place a premium value on mechanics, which would be why you do not consider it "the best edition".  However, KS has also not suggested it is "the best edition", but "the best edition mechanically". 

 

I do agree that the presentation is an issue.  "Games Powered by HERO System" can be written with more genre (or even setting) specific terminology, likely making for a more fun read, and can leave out rules that are not germane to the specific game.  The full-powered 2 volume tome is the full system manual (well, almost - I believe ranged martial arts belong in the core rules).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Drain STUN 3d6 (30 Active Points); Unified Power (-¼) (total cost: 24 points) plus Aid STUN 3d6, Trigger (when character uses Drain, activating Trigger takes no time, Trigger immediately automatically resets; +1) (36 Active Points); Linked (-½), Unified Power (-¼), Only Aid Self (-1) (total cost: 13 points). Total cost: 37 points.

That's horribly verbose. 

"Drain STUN 3d6 + linked triggered (no time, immediate) Aid STUN 3d6 self only, both Unified Power, 30+36 AP, 24+13 real" is a third that length and conveys the same information. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...