What happened to HERO?

[Solitude]

3 hours ago, sentry0 said:

 

We also have Hero Designer which does what it's supposed to do: make characters for 5th and 6th edition.  While it's true that it doesn't work on phones or tablets it still runs on desktop and laptops which gives it a lot of device share.

 

Theoretically, I could add in the ability to actually make characters in the HERO System Mobile app but that does 2 things:

 

  1. Reinvents the wheel; for better or worse, we have Hero Designer

  2. Takes money out of Hero Games pockets as my app is free

 

The current experimental work I'm doing for reading in HD files could be expanded to write as well.  I'm just not super interested in doing it for the above reasons.  If there's a big demand than I would consider it but I've literally only had one person ever mention it.

 

 

Hmm. 

 Takes money out of Hero Games pockets as my app is free

 

 

I think I see the problem. 

[sentry0]

The BR is actually a pretty good attempt at trimming down the rules, I'm quite fond of it as it's written.  Yes, it's missing some power write ups but it's a great soft entry into the system and clocks in under 140 pages and can be purchased for $15.

 

Writing this theoretical product to introduce players to the game could be based around the BR instead of the encyclopedia heroica.

 

Slightly off topic; I don't think that many people will pick up HERO as their first gaming system with things like Critical Role and the massive popularity of D&D.  Going after virgin gamers like that is a losing proposition instead I would focus on people who already have a game system or two under their belt.  

[sentry0]

5 minutes ago, Solitude said:

 

Hmm. 

 Takes money out of Hero Games pockets as my app is free

 

 

I think I see the problem. 

 

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at but my app is designed to work with HERO Designer and not step on either Hero Designer or Hero Combat Manager's toes.  I develop the app for free and give it away to a marginalized gaming community as a way of giving back.

[Scott Ruggels]

Well Hero coul re-release the First and/or second editions as a “Facsimile 40th Anniversary Edition ” with the book, map, dice and adventure included in a box, and that would serve to cover everything we have been thinking about. The summer of 2021 is a year and a half off, time to organize crowd funding with a big enough goal to print retail copies as well as cover the backers. 

[Chris Goodwin]

5 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Well Hero coul re-release the First and/or second editions as a “Facsimile 40th Anniversary Edition ” with the book, map, dice and adventure included in a box, and that would serve to cover everything we have been thinking about. The summer of 2021 is a year and a half off, time to organize crowd funding with a big enough goal to print retail copies as well as cover the backers. 

 

One of my pipe-dream projects was to take the Champions 3rd edition corebook, plus Champions II and III supplements, and organize them into one book.  Just the rules that were in those books, nothing added from the standalone games, no rules changes, and print it up for myself as "Champions Pi", for the 3.14 edition.   

[DreadDomain]

On 12/18/2019 at 1:53 AM, GM Joe said:

It could be helpful if we returned to simpler builds for published characters, like was the norm for published characters up through early 4e.

 

 

On 12/18/2019 at 3:44 AM, Spence said:

Well IMO 5th and 6th set increasingly higher levels of complexity.  Yes, secret ID can be replaced by a social complication.  But really, what was achieved besides added hoops to jump through.  5th and especially 6th was riddled with low or no value changes that catered to rule accountants rather than rpg fun. 

Also all just my opinion. 

 

But "cool! I'll buy Instant Change" is way more funner than "so I want to Instantly change into my costume, that is cosmetic what?"  Not intuitive at all.

Still just my opinion.....

 

 

 

These two comments plus the lack of complete pre-packaged games (DI, JI, etc...) for later editions sum where I think HERO went wrong.

My favorite edition is 6e but some of the deconstructivism for the sake of point balance or for the sake of bundling similar powers together went to far. Adding complexity (sometimes only apparent complexity) for little gain. Also the anally retentive way to make character builds more complete/accurate/complex and write everything (in long form) and the wall of characteristics just make the character difficult to read.

Again, I like 6e and I appreciate the completeness of the Basic Set but at the very least it should have been coupled with Danger International, Justice Inc and Fantasy Hero as complete games using the toolkit, not showing the toolkit.

[Sketchpad]

4 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Again, I like 6e and I appreciate the completeness of the Basic Set but at the very least it should have been coupled with Danger International, Justice Inc and Fantasy Hero as complete games using the toolkit, not showing the toolkit.

 

I would do away with the generic rule set as presented. Tie the system into properties. Looking at the past, I'd rather see a Champions book marketed akin to 4e BBB, then have a fantasy book that ties in vague setting, as well as a sci-fi book, a new Justice Inc., Danger International, etc. The mechanics would be compatible with one another, but like the older editions, there may be some genre rules that are specific to that rulebook.  I believe this might make the game more attractive, particularly with some nice art and a solid design specific to that book. 

 

In addition, I would get rid of the "you can build everything" mentality. Do we really need to build a cellphone to use it? Couldn't it just provide a bonus and a radio without breaking down every point? 

[Duke Bushido]

On December 17, 2019 at 3:11 PM, GM Joe said:

thing to fix system-wise in order to make it more newbie friendly would be to make 11 + OCV - DCV (or OCV + 11 - 3D6 = hittable DCV -- same thing only different) a thing of the past

 

See?  This is why there will never be a "perfect" or flawless edition of HERO:  we _all_ (on this board or not; it makes no difference) have different-- slightly? Radically?  "YES!" to all! -- different ideas about what is or is not "fundamentally HERO." 

 

That mechanic that you're wanting to remove?  That was the hook for me: that's the moment I knew there was something awesome under the hood of that little blue book with the boring superfight on the cover.   I understood it immediately, and I _loved_ it! 

 

Until Champions, I played either Traveller or D&D (Mostly because that's what there was back then, unless you were living in California and attending Cons to check out all the people peddling the home brews) 

 

 

No more "Roll your shoot this gun" skill to hit. No more "because he rolled his skill; that's why you're dead!". No more bulky armor makes you harder to hit. ". (dont; don't waste your breath: I'll be sixty in a couple of months.  I know damned good and well all the justifications about" but THAC0 doesn't mean they missed!  It means that you didn't take damage!  They might have been just whaling on that armor like a drum line! ". It stops holding water when that same extra-xumbersome armor makes it easier for me to hit the naked guy. 

 

And best of all, no more" okay, the wizard hits you with lightning!  Roll to not get hit! "

 

Wait; what? 

 

Saving throw!" 

 

Are you flickin' kidding me?  He hit me, fair and square; we saw it; you declared it.  Now I roll to not get hit?  

 

Well, to see if you took any damage, then. 

 

Why can't we roll the damage?  I've got some _great_ armor. 

 

Yeah, but that's not how it works. 

 

Excuse me? 

 

Armor doesn't protect you; it makes you harder to hit. 

 

What?  But you just said-

 

Well, yeah, but it boils down to the same thing.  Now roll to not get hit. 

 

. Yep.  Don't miss that crap _one bit_. 

 

I absolutely _loved_ (and still do) the idea that my natural Dex let me jockey for a good strike posture or to jerk aside and duck and weave, and that my skills (levels) could unbalance the odds.  I loved that there was a separate to-hit mechanic for things that are _not_ based on physical attacks (ECV, though later as we explored different themes and genres, we would expand on that). 

 

Are there other things that I like?  Oh, you betcha!  But if someone told me to pick the very best thing about HERO, that would be it.  Truth be told, and "point balance" be _damned_, the one thing I hate above all others in 6e is the divorcing of those CVs from their parent characteristics.  Do they work the same?  Yeah: math is math.  But I don't play recreational math; I play to create a story with my friends, to stir action excitement--to feel like something other than a powerless college kid or a rapidly-aging old man.  And that "liberation" of CV from parent characteristics liberated that wonderful and unique _feel_ right along with it. 

 

So no; I wouldn't get rid of that, not ever.  If I was going to change anything about that, it would be to change it back.  Seriously: there is a lot I don't like about 6e, but I can forgive it: all the editions are pretty much interchangeable anyway.  The only thing I can't forgive is that oft-applauded "advancement" that reads to me of little more than officially proclaiming that math is more important than the feel of the game ever should be. 

 

 

Quote

 

If I could fix that and make it a unified mechanic that works for skill throws, too, I'd be very happy

 

It already _is_ a skill contest; it's been simplified. 

 

However, to create a more skill-like mechanic, try this:

 

Create some Fight skills.  I'll keep it simple with two:

 

Fight: attack.and Fight:  defend. 

 

I'm not mocking, but without the character being active in his defense, you can't really replicate what makes Hero's combat unique. 

 

Attacker rolls his dice and succeeds by two. 

 

Defender rolls his dice and success by four.  Attacker fails. 

 

Or we can say attacker rolls his dice and success by six while defender succeeds by four again, and gets hit. 

 

If "shades" of victory are important, then subtract defender's success from attackers successes for that last round: attacker success by 2.  Or fails, or thee is a tie (wouldn't that be awkward?) 

 

What if you have a really wide difference in skill level, though?  It would become difficult if attacker had to roll 16 or under and defender had to roll four or under. 

 

At the end of the day, though, that's what the current method _does_, and it does it in one roll. 

 

Let's assume your attack skill is a Dex-based Skill (as CV used to be).  You've got a twenty Dex, right off you have a 14 or less roll, buy it up to 20 or less for next to nothing. 

 

Your defend skill is also 14 or less, etc. 

 

So you both succeed _a lot_, typically, and spend a lot of time subtracting your success from each other.  No biggee: it works fine. 

 

But it's not one quick roll. 

 

11 is the midpoint of results for 3d6.  It's also the thing you are most likely to roll, if you check every possible outcome. 

 

So start with a fight: attack skill dead-center at 11 or less.  That's what the 11 is for.  Then subtract his defend skill from your attack skill.  Roll that or less. 

 

It's beautiful in its simplicity.  I have no idea why the creator of it would want to change it, honestly, because not only does it handle a wide range of skill levels against each other, the built-in auto failure/auto success gives everyone a fighting chance.  But back on course:

You are essentially using "a skill type mechanic.". You're just skipping a coulle of tedious steps and keeping the game moving. 

 

I wouldn't change it for anything. 

 

 

Quote

 

 

[Chris Goodwin]

15 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Truth be told, and "point balance" be _damned_, the one thing I hate above all others in 6e is the divorcing of those CVs from their parent characteristics.

 

15 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

So no; I wouldn't get rid of that, not ever.  If I was going to change anything about that, it would be to change it back. 

 

Thank you.  A thousand times, thank you.  This has bugged me too, ever since.  I pulled hard for "decoupling" but wasn't thinking it would extend there.  

 

So, count me in.

[Duke Bushido]

It's the little things, isn't it?  You don't really notice how something _feels_ until it's been changed in a "inconsequential to the math" kind of way.  You know: _technically_ no change, but the feeling is _gone_....

 

And hey!

 

Someone _please_ remind me to Rep Scott when I've got more to give!

 

_Awesome_ idea!  

 

EDIT:  Finally managed to tag Scott

Edited December 20, 2019 by Duke Bushido
Because I managed to tag Scott with some rep, finally

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

I'm going to have to disagree. 

 

My group consists of two types of people. 

Half the group will take the shortest and most direct route in chargen.  So when the GM said "Campaign standard is a CV of 7", they responded by putting their DEX at 20 since that's the simplest way to get CV 7. 

The other half pokes at numbers and thinks about things.  So when the GM said "Campaign standard is a CV of 7", they responded by saying "Well I can get +1 CV via 3 DEX costing 9 points but -3 for the SPD rebate so +1 CV for 6 points.  Or I could buy CSLs for how much?  No thanks!" and put their DEX at 20. 

So in our first fight, we had one hero above 20, the mooks and a villain in the teens, and a six-way initiative tie at DEX 20. 

 

So my experience is that CV keying off DEX makes variation in DEX mostly go away.  Every other characteristic, my group has wonderful spreads going up and down the range.  But DEX is mostly a pile of 20s.  And I don't like that. 

[Ninja-Bear]

10 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

 

 

Thank you.  A thousand times, thank you.  This has bugged me too, ever since.  I pulled hard for "decoupling" but wasn't thinking it would extend there.  

 

So, count me in.

I wouldn’t. No lie It did take me some time to get the hang of divorced characteristics but now that I got the hang of it -nah. I look at CV as an abstraction. I now set agents and villains to the CVs I want independently if DEX and visa versa. Now justifying buying a higher DCV than OCV did take me a long while to consider. I’ve been playing around with a stretching type guy and it hit me to buy his DCV higher than his OCV. I feel it does represent his avoidance of being hit well.

[Chris Goodwin]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

I wouldn’t. No lie It did take me some time to get the hang of divorced characteristics but now that I got the hang of it -nah. I look at CV as an abstraction. I now set agents and villains to the CVs I want independently if DEX and visa versa. Now justifying buying a higher DCV than OCV did take me a long while to consider. I’ve been playing around with a stretching type guy and it hit me to buy his DCV higher than his OCV. I feel it does represent his avoidance of being hit well.

 

I totally get the abstraction, and even argued in favor of it in the alternative CV thread in Fantasy Hero.  But that doesn't mean I don't miss it or that it hasn't bugged me.

[Solitude]

19 hours ago, Solitude said:

 

Hmm. 

 Takes money out of Hero Games pockets as my app is free

 

 

I think I see the problem. 

 

Hero needs one they make money on.

And some sort of something to sell.

 

I played City Of Heroes from late Beta through the first year.  I  had two accounts for a while to hold all of my Alternate characters after I filled up every server.  Still, one of the biggest chunks of money NC Soft got from me came from micropayments to the costume shop.

[Joe Walsh]

13 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

That mechanic that you're wanting to remove?  That was the hook for me

 

It is a pretty great mechanic. Like I said, I'd remove it to make the game more welcoming to those who aren't fond of math if I could do it "without losing the way that formula elegantly handles (for mathophiles, anyway) the question of how to make something harder to hit. So many games just ignore the issue, and I appreciate very much that HERO addresses it without requiring a defensive 'avoid being hit' roll for every attack, like some games do." [Emphasis in original.]

 

For better or worse, I've been unable to come up a satisfactory solution so far.

 

 

[sentry0]

8 minutes ago, Solitude said:

 

Hero needs one they make money on.

And some sort of something to sell.

 

I played City Of Heroes from late Beta through the first year.  I  had two accounts for a while to hold all of my Alternate characters after I filled up every server.  Still, one of the biggest chunks of money NC Soft got from me came from micropayments to the costume shop.

 

There's not enough users on my free app to come even close to recouping the costs of development.  A paid app would have even less users depending on how much you charge for it.

[zslane]

23 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

If you recall, though, it wasn't all.

 

At the time of publication, it contained the entire game. It was not some abridged version aimed at newbies, i.e., it was not a "Starter Kit" in the modern sense. Champions II and III were optional expansions to the system that came later. But when 2nd edition came out, you got the complete game in that box, along with materials to help you start playing right away without a lot of DIY effort.

 

And it is in the spirit of the 2nd edition boxed set that I believe the Hero System could be returned to "simpler times" in terms of presentation and product design. There could easily be a new edition of the game in boxed set form that is not abridged like the starter kits of other games. It could contain all the rules along with a starting adventure, some pre-gen characters, the skeleton of a campaign setting, and even a playing map or two. The two most important parts to all this, in my view, is that none of the rules or mechanics are hidden from readers/players and that there is enough in the box to get started playing right away without a lot of up-front work on the part of the GM or the players.

 

[Solitude]

1 hour ago, zslane said:

 

At the time of publication, it contained the entire game. It was not some abridged version aimed at newbies, i.e., it was not a "Starter Kit" in the modern sense. Champions II and III were optional expansions to the system that came later. But when 2nd edition came out, you got the complete game in that box, along with materials to help you start playing right away without a lot of DIY effort.

 

And it is in the spirit of the 2nd edition boxed set that I believe the Hero System could be returned to "simpler times" in terms of presentation and product design. There could easily be a new edition of the game in boxed set form that is not abridged like the starter kits of other games. It could contain all the rules along with a starting adventure, some pre-gen characters, the skeleton of a campaign setting, and even a playing map or two. The two most important parts to all this, in my view, is that none of the rules or mechanics are hidden from readers/players and that there is enough in the box to get started playing right away without a lot of up-front work on the part of the GM or the players.

 

 

Throw in some cardboard Standees.  I always had my players buy a miniature or use one of the ones I had and then the villains were all carboard standees or flat figures made with Shrinky Dinks.

 

Three dimensional heroes should fight two dimensional villains. 

 

I could look at the play area and instantly separate the heroes from the villains (black standed standees) and non villainous NPCs (red standed standees.) Which made things easier on me.

[Duke Bushido]

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

I'm going to have to disagree. 

 

My group consists of two types of people. 

Half the group will take the shortest and most direct route in chargen.  So when the GM said "Campaign standard is a CV of 7", they responded by putting their DEX at 20 since that's the simplest way to get CV 7. 

The other half pokes at numbers and thinks about things.  So when the GM said "Campaign standard is a CV of 7", they responded by saying "Well I can get +1 CV via 3 DEX costing 9 points but -3 for the SPD rebate so +1 CV for 6 points.  Or I could buy CSLs for how much?  No thanks!" and put their DEX at 20. 

So in our first fight, we had one hero above 20, the mooks and a villain in the teens, and a six-way initiative tie at DEX 20. 

 

So my experience is that CV keying off DEX makes variation in DEX mostly go away.  Every other characteristic, my group has wonderful spreads going up and down the range.  But DEX is mostly a pile of 20s.  And I don't like that. 

 

 

You're not disagreeing.

 

You are missing what I am saying entirely.

 

And to make it more poignant, you're doing it with math.

[Scott Ruggels]

6 hours ago, zslane said:

And it is in the spirit of the 2nd edition boxed set that I believe the Hero System could be returned to "simpler times" in terms of presentation and product design. There could easily be a new edition of the game in boxed set form that is not abridged like the starter kits of other games. It could contain all the rules along with a starting adventure, some pre-gen characters, the skeleton of a campaign setting, and even a playing map or two. The two most important parts to all this, in my view, is that none of the rules or mechanics are hidden from readers/players and that there is enough in the box to get started playing right away without a lot of up-front work on the part of the GM or the players.

 

 

So rather than a re-issue of the First Edition for the 40th Anniversary,  you would suggest a re-issue of the Second Edition Boxed set, with the Viper adventures, Dice, Map sheet, and such?  Seems eminently plausible as 2nd Edition as I remember, wasn't that different from First Edition... was it? 

But I think a possible solution to the whole complexity issue is to have new players come up into Hero the way it was done in the past.  introduce the complexity in stages, rather than dropping 6e on them.  If they like Hero, they may climb the ladder themselves. 

 

But in all seriousness, the way to get more players is to get more players into F2F situations and play. I don't see a lot advocacy for  itinerant GMs  putting up flyers in FLGS or other venues, offering to run. Almost all RPG players started as visitors to someone else's table.

 

[sentry0]

1 minute ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 

So rather than a re-issue of the First Edition for the 40th Anniversary,  you would suggest a re-issue of the Second Edition Boxed set, with the Viper adventures, Dice, Map sheet, and such?  Seems eminently plausible as 2nd Edition as I remember, wasn't that different from First Edition... was it? 

But I think a possible solution to the whole complexity issue is to have new players come up into Hero the way it was done in the past.  introduce the complexity in stages, rather than dropping 6e on them.  If they like Hero, they may climb the ladder themselves. 

 

But in all seriousness, the way to get more players is to get more players into F2F situations and play. I don't see a lot advocacy for  itinerant GMs  putting up flyers in FLGS or other venues, offering to run. Almost all RPG players started as visitors to someone else's table.

 

 

This is true, that's how I got into HERO

 

[Scott Ruggels]

2 minutes ago, sentry0 said:

 

This is true, that's how I got into HERO

 

 As was I, though my introduction was with Steve Petersen, and Bruce Harlick running it at Pacific origins in the late summer of 1981.  My General RPG introduction was at a friends Dinner Table learning D&D from some 7th Graders.

 

[sentry0]

9 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 As was I, though my introduction was with Steve Petersen, and Bruce Harlick running it at Pacific origins in the late summer of 1981.  My General RPG introduction was at a friends Dinner Table learning D&D from some 7th Graders.

 

 

My first RPG was Darksword with my friends in their basement - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28273.Darksword_Adventures

 

D&D followed of course, and so much more... good times.

[zslane]

16 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

So rather than a re-issue of the First Edition for the 40th Anniversary,  you would suggest a re-issue of the Second Edition Boxed set, with the Viper adventures, Dice, Map sheet, and such?  Seems eminently plausible as 2nd Edition as I remember, wasn't that different from First Edition... was it?

 

Er, I don't think rolling all the way back to ("re-issuing") the rules of 2nd edition is the way to go. Rather, merely look back to 2nd edition in terms of presentation and packaging, but set the rules themselves at something along the lines of 4e + selected good bits from 5e. I only mention the viability of a boxed set as a response to those who bemoan the lack of usable starting adventures (and, I guess, pre-gen characters) to help get newcomers into the system. Hero Games did it once before, and I see no reason the system couldn't have such a product again (hypothetically speaking, in a world where Hero System products are once again published by, well, the publisher).

 

16 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

But I think a possible solution to the whole complexity issue is to have new players come up into Hero the way it was done in the past.  introduce the complexity in stages, rather than dropping 6e on them.

 

Yeah, I think we agree on this. I see this primarily as a rules organization and presentation issue rather than a system mechanics issue. 6e, in my view, tried to encode too many corner/edge cases into the main rules, something that editions prior to 5e would have left largely in the hands of GMs and players to extrapolate from the core concepts and mechanics for themselves. There was too much pandering to the types of players who only trust the official word of the publisher, and so insist that every contingency be addressed explicitly by holy writ in the rules text. The Hero System needs to be described with less overreaching detail, and with more of an eye towards empowering players to answer questions of detailed system application for themselves.

[Sketchpad]

1 hour ago, zslane said:

 

Er, I don't think rolling all the way back to ("re-issuing") the rules of 2nd edition is the way to go. Rather, merely look back to 2nd edition in terms of presentation and packaging, but set the rules themselves at something along the lines of 4e + selected good bits from 5e. I only mention the viability of a boxed set as a response to those who bemoan the lack of usable starting adventures (and, I guess, pre-gen characters) to help get newcomers into the system. Hero Games did it once before, and I see no reason the system couldn't have such a product again (hypothetically speaking, in a world where Hero System products are once again published by, well, the publisher).

 

Couldn't agree more. Having something like a Beginner's Box for a new edition would be how I would start marketing it. Look at Pathfinder's Beginner Boxes, or the Essentials Kit for D&D5e as a template on how to make this successful. Have two books, one with character info, one with GM info (and a few adventures), some cardboard pawns, a flip-map, around 10 d6s, some blank sheets, and some info on the next books coming out. Gives folks a chance to try the game, and promotes what's coming.