Ballistic Armor in modern or near future campaigns

[JesseBFox]

Hi there,

 

I plan on running a hero session in September where I am taking existing Shadowrun characters, converting them to Hero 6ed and running a shadowrun story. I am converting the characters and world in general now, looking at different ideas others have done. Here is one I haven't quite seen and I think is unique to 6ed:

 

So I was thinking about ballistic armor (I am using sectional defenses and hit locations) combined with the penetrating power of some firearms over others. What affects APDS and AP rounds have vs gel etc. I had an idea, which I wonder if anyone else has used in practice. I think before I am happy with it I will have to run it in a computer simulation so I can see what the results will look like with different weapons vs different armor, but here is the idea:

 

Ballistics armor would have resistant pd & ed (more pd than ed) but also would have 1-3 levels of damage negation based on the type of armor, with the damage negation only vs small arms fire.

Then when I build the firearms, if they have a high amount of penetration the firearm would be built with reduced negation, with more reduced negation the more penetration the weapon should have. AP/APDS rounds would be built as reduced negation as well.

 

I wanted to get opinions on this idea, and if anyone has ever done this before could they tell me the results and if it seemed to work out well? It seems like an interesting solution, if a bit complex at the table as you are reducing damage from a killing attack in real time which will take a little explaining since the players are all new to hero. But heck, everything will be a little explaining anyway.

 

On a side note, for balance, the armor would be less resistant defenses than I normally would give them to keep the APs about the same. It also means that the ballistic armor will be more vulnerable to things like knives and melee weapons, due to the damage negation not applying towards them.

[Duke Bushido]

Personally, I say do what you like best: that's what the game touts as it's strongest point anyway: you can do anything. 

 

My only comment about this relates to your mentioning that the players are all new to HERO. 

 

HERO has, no matter how much we fans enjoy it, hands-down the slowest combat system for any tabletop RPG (with the _possible_ exception of the original Aftermath from way back when, and even then only if you were using every possible option). 

 

Given that this is a hard enough sell to new players, I'd be a bit hesitant before I added the amount of crunch you're considering. 

[sentry0]

17 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Personally, I say do what you like best: that's what the game touts as it's strongest point anyway: you can do anything. 

 

My only comment about this relates to your mentioning that the players are all new to HERO. 

 

HERO has, no matter how much we fans enjoy it, hands-down the slowest combat system for any tabletop RPG (with the _possible_ exception of the original Aftermath from way back when, and even then only if you were using every possible option). 

 

Given that this is a hard enough sell to new players, I'd be a bit hesitant before I added the amount of crunch you're considering. 

 

This is well said.  I actually will gloss over the use of END for a couple of games unless things get really out of hand (powers with Increased END basically).

 

You may want to consider a soft entry into the system and add more crunch as you go until you've hit the "realism" level you want. 

[JesseBFox]

13 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

HERO has, no matter how much we fans enjoy it, hands-down the slowest combat system for any tabletop RPG (with the _possible_ exception of the original Aftermath from way back when, and even then only if you were using every possible option). 

 

 

Have you ever played Shadowrun (Any version)

 

or Phoenix Command?

 

Or in fact D&D with newer players who are cycling through a list of abilities and dealing with spell slots, and have to re-read every spell before they can cast it. Out loud. To the group. Just to find out it doesn't apply to the situation?

 

I agree, it can be slow. There are a number of things to keep track of that other systems do not have. It will take some getting used to. But these particular players are coming from shadowrun. In which the simplest character has a combat round like this: (not even factoring in intiative and combat passes)

 

I want to shoot something. Hmm Yes, with this ak-97. OK. So um, single shot, short burst extended burst? Ok short burst. oh focus the burst for more damage, or a spread short burst to cause the enemy to lose defense pool? Hmm spread.

Ok. That's 3 bullets. What did I do last round? I shot a single shot. The round before? Shot then moved. OK, so that is 1 recoil from last round + 3 from the bullets this round. Recoil of 4! But my gas vent on my gun gives me +1 recoil compensation plus 2 more for my base strength means I have 3 points of recoil compensation. 4 recoil  - 3 = 1 dice penalty for recoil. What are the lighting and wind conditions DM? OK  range? ok got all that down. I now roll 11d6 and count successes (5's and 6's). Oh wait there are a bunch of 1s there too, are there 6? If so that is a glitch. No no , just 4. OK, so I got 4 successes. Now the defender rolls his defense pool, reaction + intuition. Wait, does he have enough intiative that he can abort to a defensive manuever? Or has he already done a full defense manuever? Add the dice from that. He rolls and gets only 2 successes so I hit! I have net 2 successes over him. My gun does 9 base damage + the 2 extra successes is 11 base damage. So now the defender has to roll body + armor. He has 5 body and 12 armor. But my weapon has a -1 AP so that reduces his armor by 1. What kind of ammo am I using? I have APDS loaded, that is -2 AP, for a total of -3... so their armor is 9 and 5 body. GM rolls 14 dice and counts successes to negate the damage. What? We forgot to do penetration? Oh well the modified armor is 9 and the modified damage is 11, so the damage is more. so this penetrates and is physical damage, not stun. Phew. OK, where were we? Oh yes GM soaks the damage, rolls 5 successes. So 6 damage boxes get x'ed out. Bad guy is still up, but let's look at his damage monitor. OK, now he is at -2 to all dice rolls due to his condition monitor because he has no pain negating cybernetics...

 

No joke. This is not even calculating cover, casting spells, deckers performing matrix actions and attacks during the combat, riggers and their drones or any of that.

 

Hero isn't the quickest to resolve an action, but at the same time you rarely have extended combats like some other games with tons of HPs and you go many rounds in a big fight. But hands down the slowest combat system for any tabletop RPG? I disagree there.

 

However any system, introducing the crunch slowly is a good idea for people. But coming from Shadowrun I have a feeling they will have a sense of the combat being quicker and easier. Which is one reason I am hesitant of adding in the extra overhead of the damage negation. But some players I think will appreciate how the armor piercing factor works. My main concern is balance of weapons vs armor and how it will change fights to make them longer/shorter or have a different feel. And the extra time of damage negation factoring in and that they will need to have a DC chart to start letting them know how it scales (and anyone using a Katana may need to know that anyway for str bonuses and str boosts)

 

Point taken on the crunch. But I also think you underestimate the slowness of some other systems and their complexity.

[JesseBFox]

I need to read the APG front to back. I have not yet. I think maybe piercing (pg 113 APG) that I saw referenced in another thread regarding AP may be more appropriate, and quicker to use here. Does anyone know if there is a similar defense built for this in a book? I could homebrew it easy enough if I needed to. Like Reinforced, for every point that is reinforced on a defense, it negates 1 point of piercing.

 

I didn't see anything like that in the APG but maybe I missed it. If I use piercing (I likely will) I probably won't bother with anything special on the defenses, just make them higher as appropriate. 

[ScottishFox]

Sounds like you want a little more granularity than the typical bullets, armor piercing bullets, armor and hardened armor.

 

Using Piercing point by point will get you a high degree of control over it.

 

So your final construct will be bullets, bullets with amounts of piercing vs. armor.

[JesseBFox]

Exactly, and exactly what I was thinking. I was pondering going further and building armor with resistance to piercing but I think that is unnecessary.  Instead I will just build the armor with enough resistant defense to take into account the piercing of weapons. 

 

Also thinking of building advantages/limitations into ammo. So Gel rounds would be reduced penetration & +1 stun multiplier as an example. But I think piercing is the way to go for the more granular flavor of the setting, where each weapon has a penetration factor, which is then modified by the choice of what kind of rounds the character is using. It will be more overhead and things to keep track of, but less than the system they are coming from.

 

[Duke Bushido]

Oh yes; I'm quite familiar with Shadowrun-  at least the first two editions.  (I got suckered into it by being told it was cyberpunk.  It wasn't until after I had bought the damned book that I realized it was Dungeons and Cyborgs).  I was familiar with it when I commented that HERO combat-- while exquisite in possibilities and modeling--is the slowest modern system of which I am aware. 

 

Lots of fun, but very slow. 

[Manic Typist]

Wait... maybe I'm being dense here.

 

Why not just use various levels of Hardened, Armor Piercing, and Penetrating? Base "small arms" have no AP, stuff not available to typical civilians has one level of AP, scale up from there.

[JesseBFox]

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

Oh yes; I'm quite familiar with Shadowrun-  at least the first two editions.  (I got suckered into it by being told it was cyberpunk.  It wasn't until after I had bought the damned book that I realized it was Dungeons and Cyborgs).  I was familiar with it when I commented that HERO combat-- while exquisite in possibilities and modeling--is the slowest modern system of which I am aware. 

 

Lots of fun, but very slow. 

I suppose agree to disagree then. I don't think Hero system is "fast" (Cypher system I would call "fast") but I certainly don't think it's the slowest. Phoenix command was lovely to read and think of, but even the scaled down light version of the Aliens adventure game was a slog to run.

 

 

[JesseBFox]

48 minutes ago, Manic Typist said:

Wait... maybe I'm being dense here.

 

Why not just use various levels of Hardened, Armor Piercing, and Penetrating? Base "small arms" have no AP, stuff not available to typical civilians has one level of AP, scale up from there.

 

That is a possibility. In the end, I broke it down in my head and realized I really don't need many levels of different resistance for armor. But needed more granular control over how much some weapons penetrated defenses without being crazy. In the end, I settled on the optional piercing from Advanced Players Guide. The reasoning, is to simulate the various levels of penetrating, and keep the flavor I was looking for I needed various effectiveness levels of piercing. With AP/Hardened it is either: Full defense, or Half defense. Also the straight up reducing the defenses applied makes a few things easier and quicker when it is on the table, in addition to being able to calculate averages in my head a little easier. Basically every point of piercing is the same as +1 damage, only vs armored enemies. If you follow what I am saying. It also allows a weapon that is good at penetrating personal armor (Such as a high powered sniper rifle) be able to use bullets designed to pierce defenses (APDS) and actually have it impact the damage done. Where the straight AP vs Hardened, it would be a double penetrating weapon, which means against 99% of the targets it has the same effect (Half the armor).

 

In the end, both would work. It's just how you want the end results to play out.

 

In the end, for me and in this particular case, I think piercing is just right. Damage negation would introduce more slowdown than desired, as others pointed out, and basic AP would not allow enough granularity while also introducing more slowdown than piercing (1/2 the armor is slower than a simple -2 armor).

[Duke Bushido]

3 hours ago, JesseBFox said:

I suppose agree to disagree then.

 

Fair enough, Sir.

 

3 hours ago, JesseBFox said:

Phoenix command was lovely to read and think of, but even the scaled down light version of the Aliens adventure game was a slog to run.

 

 

 

 

This being the first time I've ever heard of Pheonix Command, I'll have to take your word for it.

[JesseBFox]

2 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

Fair enough, Sir.

 

 

 

This being the first time I've ever heard of Pheonix Command, I'll have to take your word for it.

 

I was using it as an extreme example. I read through the rules, and even had 2 of it's "Lighter" version, the aliens adventure game and Living Steel. The latter was a rulebook filled with awesome one liner quotes, such as 2 of my favorites that were from a legal judge in the setting "If you cooperate we will reduce the charge from hit and run manslaughter to littering" and "I might have ruled it an accidental shooting if you didn't reload. Twice."

 

Anyway you can see the wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Command 

The system was incredibly detailed. Like a bullet you would track what hit location of many, if it would penetrate armor, it entering the body, any vital organs in that location, if the round would penetrate bone, if it travels to another body part due to angle of attack, if it exits or bounces, etc. Oh. My. Word. Reading it as a teenager, it sounded like the most realistic awesomest game ever. Then I tried to run it. Lesson learned. Anyway, between that, and rolemaster, spacemaster (whipping out the pythagorean theorem anytime you need to navigate) and a number of late 80s super complex games, I just never thought of Hero as the slowest ever.

 

Finding out about phoenix command and reading into it may prove entertaining as to the level of detail they went to, and if you get tickled by it at all looking into it, I am glad I could introduce the entertainment. It was cra-cra. And vehicular combat was just as detailed. it  makes shadowrun look like fudge in comparison.

[Duke Bushido]

That explains a lot, actually.

 

I've read Living Steel (and thought I might possibly enjoy it, honestly, but as I've noted elsewhere, from the time I first found Champions way back  in 82 or so, pretty much every game I ever wanted to play, I just stuck on Champions running gear, with mods where appropriate).  I remember that I found the potential complexity of Living Steel to put me very much in mind of Aftermath (again, with all the options on)-- 

 

the guy who ran our short-lived Aftermath campaign was-- and I understand you have know way of knowing this, but if you don't mind, just accept that when it comes from me, it's really saying something-- an absolute gun _nut_.  Not just the "Oooh manly noise make dead thing" aspect, but the ballistics, etc.

 

Which meant that if there was an option with regard to combat, it was _on_.  All the multiple hit location charts (standing / sitting / prone / left / right / half cover / quarter-cover- blah blah blah---    d100 hit locations, section armor per hit location, damaged based on velocity / cross-section / mass of projectile---  you name it.

 

Mostly, it just made sure that five of his friends never, ever wanted to play Aftermath ever again.  

 

It's funny.  That was like....  forty years ago?  We were buddies; pals-- roommates, for about six months.   Without kidding, I can honestly say that after the prematurely-fizzled Aftermath campaign, I didn't even like him much.  Still don't like him much.  In a _bizarre_ bit of a twist, here about ten years ago, my sister-in-law married him.  (They're divorced now.  Oddly, they are _both_ serial romantics)  Hadn't seen him in thirty years prior to the wedding.

 

Still didn't like him, and it all seemed to revolve around just how painful that damned game was....

 

 

life's funny.  People are worse.  

 

 

[Manic Typist]

5 hours ago, JesseBFox said:

 

Basically every point of piercing is the same as +1 damage, only vs armored enemies. 

 

No objection to any of what you said (what works is what works), but I just wanted to flag that this is substantively different from how Penetrating works. I understood it was meant as an analogy, but it's so different from how it actually works that I wanted to make sure you'd reviewed the rules on it recently so you're sure your target solution is what you think it is versus what a player reviewing the rules might think.

[JesseBFox]

13 minutes ago, Manic Typist said:

 

No objection to any of what you said (what works is what works), but I just wanted to flag that this is substantively different from how Penetrating works. I understood it was meant as an analogy, but it's so different from how it actually works that I wanted to make sure you'd reviewed the rules on it recently so you're sure your target solution is what you think it is versus what a player reviewing the rules might think.

Piercing, not penetrating. From Advanced Players Guide #1.

[JesseBFox]

14 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

That explains a lot, actually.

 

I've read Living Steel (and thought I might possibly enjoy it, honestly, but as I've noted elsewhere, from the time I first found Champions way back  in 82 or so, pretty much every game I ever wanted to play, I just stuck on Champions running gear, with mods where appropriate).  I remember that I found the potential complexity of Living Steel to put me very much in mind of Aftermath (again, with all the options on)-- 

 

the guy who ran our short-lived Aftermath campaign was-- and I understand you have know way of knowing this, but if you don't mind, just accept that when it comes from me, it's really saying something-- an absolute gun _nut_.  Not just the "Oooh manly noise make dead thing" aspect, but the ballistics, etc.

 

Which meant that if there was an option with regard to combat, it was _on_.  All the multiple hit location charts (standing / sitting / prone / left / right / half cover / quarter-cover- blah blah blah---    d100 hit locations, section armor per hit location, damaged based on velocity / cross-section / mass of projectile---  you name it.

 

Mostly, it just made sure that five of his friends never, ever wanted to play Aftermath ever again.  

 

It's funny.  That was like....  forty years ago?  We were buddies; pals-- roommates, for about six months.   Without kidding, I can honestly say that after the prematurely-fizzled Aftermath campaign, I didn't even like him much.  Still don't like him much.  In a _bizarre_ bit of a twist, here about ten years ago, my sister-in-law married him.  (They're divorced now.  Oddly, they are _both_ serial romantics)  Hadn't seen him in thirty years prior to the wedding.

 

Still didn't like him, and it all seemed to revolve around just how painful that damned game was....

 

 

life's funny.  People are worse.  

 

 

Wow, yes people are.

 

And Aftermath! Flashback, I had completely forgot about that game. It lasted 1 session with us. Back then in one of my gaming groups, half the group were cops. One guy really really loved the concept of aftermath and the detail of it. I can picture this guy you are talking about like that but to the nth degree to where it just isn't fun. 

 

Living Steel did seem like it could be fun, I never actually ran it. Just read the rules thoroughly and did some solo testing to make sure I understood how it all worked. 

 

I found Champions somewhere around 84 I think it was. An early edition, my brother introduced it to me. If I recall correctly, he had 2nd edition but picked up 3rd brand new and I was with him, and we played (He is 8 years older than me and introduced me to RPGs). It was totally different than D&D, Gamma World, mutants and masterminds etc. I fell in love. I was visiting him in Wash DC, and when I got home I had to find a copy for myself and introduce it to my friends. We loved it. I had no idea it had other genres until I saw a fantasy hero book and then my mind was blown and I started to use it for almost every game I played. I ran it exclusively for a long time, but still read other systems as a nut for game design. It was either homebrew or hero for many years.

 

Then life put me in situations where I had no face to face group. I didn't roleplay consistently for a long time. I had a champions campaign I ran that I literally drove 3 hours one way to get to. That lasted about 5 months. Well 2 years ago I found a local gaming group, but they were all about D&D. After a few months I introduced them to shadowrun as an alternative and they fell in love, and been slowly introducing them to new stuff since. But most weren't interested in supers, until recently a couple people started, so I was able to introduce them to hero....That's when the bug bit me again, I was like "Why did I not introduce them to this before?" and so now I am doing the shadowrun crossover to try to plant the seeds. 

 

So yeah, slowly converting them. 

 

We went way off topic, but yeah it's great to reminisce. Aftermath. Holy cow did that bring back a flood of memories and ideas from back then. Yeah that is over 35 years ago. Wow.

[Chris Goodwin]

Aftermath is indeed the reigning grand champion of slow combat.   

Hero combat may be slow, but it's also the only RPG I've ever been able to play entire sessions of -- including combat -- without anyone at the table having to crack a book open, and that's also without using a GM's screen.  Never seen that in any other game.  (As a counterexample, with my D&D 5e group, I've used Hero Lab, which is character generation software for multiple systems, including D&D 5e (but not including the HERO System).  It gives the option for printing out the full text of character special abilities and spells.  Even in that game, despite having that complete text printed out, we've still had to refer to the books multiple times during a session, including noncombat time.  When I create D&D characters, or use pregens, I go through the character sheet and write down the page numbers for everything I may need to refer to during the game, so that I don't need to go flipping through to look for them.  I'm willing to assume the difference between them is familiarity, but despite a huge gap in actually playing any Hero System game between 2009 and 2018, and very sporadically between 2003 and 2009, I was able to jump right back in like I'd been playing weekly.  

 

Hero may have a lot of exception-based play, but it's all logical exceptions, organized within subsystems and frameworks.  For instance, the combat maneuvers may provide exceptions to some rules, but they're small enough to be expressed with keywords -- things like Abort, Prone, +v/10 damage, and the like -- and modifiers to OCV or DCV.  Those have also always been written on the standard character sheets, so everyone has them to refer to, along with blank spaces to write down your specialized maneuvers, or for the software to print them from export.  

 

[Chris Goodwin]

On 8/23/2019 at 7:51 AM, JesseBFox said:

So I was thinking about ballistic armor (I am using sectional defenses and hit locations) combined with the penetrating power of some firearms over others. What affects APDS and AP rounds have vs gel etc. I had an idea, which I wonder if anyone else has used in practice. I think before I am happy with it I will have to run it in a computer simulation so I can see what the results will look like with different weapons vs different armor, but here is the idea:

 

Ballistics armor would have resistant pd & ed (more pd than ed) but also would have 1-3 levels of damage negation based on the type of armor, with the damage negation only vs small arms fire.

Then when I build the firearms, if they have a high amount of penetration the firearm would be built with reduced negation, with more reduced negation the more penetration the weapon should have. AP/APDS rounds would be built as reduced negation as well.

 

To answer your questions...    I'd say generally speaking, these are good ideas.  However, if I were you, I would pick up the HERO System Equipment Guide if you have not done so already, in order to avoid reinventing too many wheels.  There's a section in there on modern firearms, including builds, ammunition types, scopes and other targeting aids, etc. etc. etc., statted up with point costs and so on, along with many, many optional rules.  

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

49 minutes ago, Chris Goodwin said:

Hero combat may be slow, but it's also the only RPG I've ever been able to play entire sessions of -- including combat -- without anyone at the table having to crack a book open, and that's also without using a GM's screen.  Never seen that in any other game.  (As a counterexample, with my D&D 5e group, I've used Hero Lab, which is character generation software for multiple systems, including D&D 5e (but not including the HERO System).  It gives the option for printing out the full text of character special abilities and spells.  Even in that game, despite having that complete text printed out, we've still had to refer to the books multiple times during a session, including noncombat time.  When I create D&D characters, or use pregens, I go through the character sheet and write down the page numbers for everything I may need to refer to during the game, so that I don't need to go flipping through to look for them.  I'm willing to assume the difference between them is familiarity, but despite a huge gap in actually playing any Hero System game between 2009 and 2018, and very sporadically between 2003 and 2009, I was able to jump right back in like I'd been playing weekly.  

 

Hero may have a lot of exception-based play, but it's all logical exceptions, organized within subsystems and frameworks.  For instance, the combat maneuvers may provide exceptions to some rules, but they're small enough to be expressed with keywords -- things like Abort, Prone, +v/10 damage, and the like -- and modifiers to OCV or DCV.  Those have also always been written on the standard character sheets, so everyone has them to refer to, along with blank spaces to write down your specialized maneuvers, or for the software to print them from export. 

The big thing that HERO does it that it's all about a set of reused building blocks and modifiers.  Once I know what Drain, RKA, Blast, Armor Piercing, AoE, and Autofire do individually, I know what any combination of them do because their meanings don't change.  There's a finite pool of things to learn, and a much smaller pool of things that come up frequently.  Once I know them, I know them. 

Contrast this with things like D&D, where every feat, spell, magic item, and monster ability is a brand new and totally unique thing.  No amount of playing in a cleric-less party will let me the player pick up what cleric spells do.  The instant a new monster comes out, the GM has that many new things to learn and keep track of.  So on and so forth, with each new splat or module pushing the rules larger. 

HERO might seem complex at first (it is) but as soon as you're over the hump, you're a master since it really is all in the core book(s). 

[JesseBFox]

13 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

 

To answer your questions...    I'd say generally speaking, these are good ideas.  However, if I were you, I would pick up the HERO System Equipment Guide if you have not done so already, in order to avoid reinventing too many wheels.  There's a section in there on modern firearms, including builds, ammunition types, scopes and other targeting aids, etc. etc. etc., statted up with point costs and so on, along with many, many optional rules.  

Thank you for a good idea. I do not have the equipment guide. I may pick up the character pack to get the Hero Designer files, that should cut a lot of time off my prep. Sometimes you need someone to say something obvious for it to occur to you 😛

[JesseBFox]

13 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

The big thing that HERO does it that it's all about a set of reused building blocks and modifiers.  Once I know what Drain, RKA, Blast, Armor Piercing, AoE, and Autofire do individually, I know what any combination of them do because their meanings don't change.  There's a finite pool of things to learn, and a much smaller pool of things that come up frequently.  Once I know them, I know them. 

Contrast this with things like D&D, where every feat, spell, magic item, and monster ability is a brand new and totally unique thing.  No amount of playing in a cleric-less party will let me the player pick up what cleric spells do.  The instant a new monster comes out, the GM has that many new things to learn and keep track of.  So on and so forth, with each new splat or module pushing the rules larger. 

HERO might seem complex at first (it is) but as soon as you're over the hump, you're a master since it really is all in the core book(s). 

 

This.

 

I think this adds to the slowness of other systems. They seem quick, and like combat resolution shouldn't take long, but with all the rules references, calculations, etc it seems to take time to grow. I find once the GM knows Hero, things can move pretty quick because the rules are so modular, and what seems to take the most time for new players is learning to count body + stun on normal attacks. 6e I find myself looking things up during character gen to make sure it still works the same because I haven't run it a billion times yet, but actually during the session, lookups rarely occur.

[mallet]

God, I loved Living Steel and Phoenix Command back in the day. Me and a buddy still talk about playing it again once and awhile. 

 

Yes, the detail was insane and combat could take forever at first, but once you played enough, especially in Living Steel you got to know which charts you would be using constantly (based on the weapons the players had access to) and just photocopy them out of the book and have on hand, and then things sped up a far amount, to being pretty much equal in time to a Shadowrun combat. 

 

One of our favorite campaigns in the last 25+ years of roleplaying was a Living Steel/Phoenix Command game I ran back in the day. But that was just me with one player, so things were a lot fast in play. 

 

The level of detail and threat of death or serious injury forces players to take combat seriously and try and think of other ways of accomplishing their goals or how to stack every available odd in their favor (elevation, cover, distraction, surprise, etc...)

 

And the Living Steel main campaign/setting was awesome and still one of my favorites. "You wake up after 200 years of cryo-sleep on a planet decimated by war, including biological warfare, some of which turned massive parts of the population into violent psychopaths. Now your final orders are to regain control of this post-apocalyptic planet and re-establish order and government so that it can be resettled." It was just a crazy mix of Twilight:2000, Mad Max and Fallout (which it predated by a decade and which I have read were actually based on Living Steel. Heck, Fallout 3 & 4 are the exact storyline of Living Steel except it takes place on Earth rather then far in the future on a colony world) and it used some of the Phoenix Command rules for how they programmed the combat in those games. The creators of Fallout originally made it as a TTRPG setting and game using GRUPS).

 

And, yes, the quotes were the best: 

"If violence doesn't get you what you want you aren't being violent enough."

[JesseBFox]

I never got a game of Living Steel going. Loved the concept. I played 1 session of Aftermath and Phoenix Command each. I enjoyed Phoenix Command but my players couldn't grasp it. For a gaming store I ran a 5 hour session of the Aliens adventure game, which is basically Living Steel but set in the Aliens movie. The players played as colonial marines and had to deal with corporate nonsense. That session I ran had human adversaries, not aliens, but also involved some combat between a drop ship and ground based AA. It was fun, but the players were overwhelmed.

 

I imagine like anything, once you get it down things move a lot faster. I also played a long campaign that my brother ran of Rolemaster, where he used every optional rule he could, from the action points on. I ran about a 9 month campaign of Space Master back in the day. 

 

Those old complex games were a ton of fun in the day if you got the right crowd. With all of those, it never really made me think Hero was overly slow or complex. it felt very modular and all the mechanics worked pretty similarly.

 

This thread has been a jaunt down memory lane.

[mallet]

26 minutes ago, JesseBFox said:

This thread has been a jaunt down memory lane.

 

Same.