What happened to HERO?

[zslane]

10 minutes ago, Sketchpad said:

Look at Pathfinder's Beginner Boxes, or the Essentials Kit for D&D5e as a template on how to make this successful.

 

In terms of productization (i.e., physical quality and what's supplied in the box), I agree. However, where I would depart from those other companies' boxed sets is that I wouldn't put an abridged version of the rules in there. 2nd edition Champions didn't do that, and I don't think a new, modern incarnation of a Champions boxed set should either.

[Spence]

18 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.  If they like Hero, they may climb the ladder themselves. 

A good point, but the method has to apply to self teaching. 

 

Coming into the system with no one in the group having any knowledge of Hero.

 

A lot of people will talk about being introduced by another gamer, and then say they don't game at FLGS and only game with their closely knit group of long term friends.

 

For Hero to expand it needs to be formatted so that Bobby can pick up a copy and actually run the game within 3 calendar days. 

 

 

[Spence]

18 hours ago, sentry0 said:

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.

 

Yes, absolutely.

But the majority of people here scoff at leaving their long term close knit group to actually go into public.

 

The other issue it availability. I wanted to run Champs or Fantasy HERO so I  went to my FLGS to see about ordering books.  They are not in distribution.  None of the FLGS in 75 miles can locate any Hero product via their distributors. 

 

If you occupy tablespace and use the lights, you should buy something there. 

 

I run a lot of horror because we can get the books.

 

 

[Spence]

30 minutes ago, Sketchpad said:

Having something like a Beginner's Box for a new edition would be how I would start marketing it.

They came close with FHC, but all the "you can actually play the game" stuff was downloadable content instead of in the book material.  I didn't even realize it existed until  a couple years later and I  come here.  If a person actually found a copy on the shelf, they'd probably have no idea.

[Scott Ruggels]

2 hours 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. 
 

Going back to 2e serves several purposes. 

 

1.) Nostalgia of the old guys. Having a 40th Anniversary edition publicized would be how money is raised to print it and support Hero. The Strike Force Kickstarter raised a two amount of cash. I think that a publicized Second Edition would as well. Add in stretch goals supporting it would be helpful. 

2.) Second Edition is slim, yet complete. Players  and GM can learn reading from reading the book, leaving the adventure(s) for the GM. 
 

3.) Hero is backwards compatible. Most of what the new players learn carries forth to later editions. Once they know the basics, then they can search out later; newer products if they so choose, or they can stick with it and this will still grow the player base. Character creation has become far more complex, since then, but basic combat is generally the same. Once players have the basics down, then they may be ready for further complexity. 
 

4.). Having a Collector’s Item type physical copy, may get copies, however briefly back into our FLGS. An effort to bring GMs at the same time to those shops to run games would at least expose players to the system. Some people learn by doing rather than the reading. 
 

5.) Second Edition does not need the  electronic help that 4th edition and beyond need for character creation. They may help, but they are not necessary. Leaving a sheet of paper in the box that on one side has web addresses for the support materials for Second Edition supplements available on DriveThru RPG, and on the reverse has information about Hero as it is now, and where to get it. Blank character sheet and sample characters (the original Hero Team?) can and should be included. 
 

6.) Other Genres can be re-introduced if the is successful by re-releasing the 3rd Edition genres, if other players find Superheroes an unattractive genre for them. 
 

Your other points are sound regarding presentation and materials. 
 

I do not think that the current edition can really be unpacked and streamlined enough to not be intimidating to new players and without writing powers as a 3 sentence paragraph, and following that 2nd Edition format. Authors writing new material need to be paid for their time. Sure, it could be prettier, but new art also needs to be paid for. Launching a super slim 6e Superhero Essentials like WOTC is doing, would be exp naive, and do s not have the attraction of nostalgia. Bringing 2e players forward may be easier than SrA ting them fand on 6e to begin with. I also think it would be far less expensive, and a way to generate some good Will. 

[Sketchpad]

1 hour ago, zslane said:

 

In terms of productization (i.e., physical quality and what's supplied in the box), I agree. However, where I would depart from those other companies' boxed sets is that I wouldn't put an abridged version of the rules in there. 2nd edition Champions didn't do that, and I don't think a new, modern incarnation of a Champions boxed set should either.

 

That's where I would have to respectfully disagree with you @zslane. I think having a basic version of the rules would be the best place to start. Sure, include a few pre-gens (or modifiable archetypes), but also have some brief rules to make your own characters. Give new players and GMs the ability to experience the system, while offering new adventures to older , more experienced players. 

[zslane]

2 hours ago, Sketchpad said:

I think having a basic version of the rules would be the best place to start.

 

Unfortunately, the history (of the Hero System) strongly suggests otherwise. Past attempts to defibrillate the game using paired down, abridged versions of the rules have all failed to accomplish anything of substance. I wouldn't expect it to in the future either.

 

[Ninja-Bear]

3 hours ago, zslane said:

 

Unfortunately, the history (of the Hero System) strongly suggests otherwise. Past attempts to defibrillate the game using paired down, abridged versions of the rules have all failed to accomplish anything of substance. I wouldn't expect it to in the future either.

 

Wait you talk about 2e being complete and then you complain about abridged versions. 6th Basic intentionally has 5 missing powers. However it’s still more complete than 2e So besides bashing newer editions what’s your point?

[zslane]

14 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

However it’s still more complete than 2e

 

2e didn't have five missing powers. It didn't have anything missing. That's because it wasn't a "Basic" version of anything. It was the complete expression of the game/system as it existed at the time of publication. That's the goal any Hero System rulebook should aim for, regardless of how it is being packaged.

 

6e Basic may not be as bad as the D&D Essentials Kit in terms of delivering only a partial game, but it is still technically abridged, something I feel should be avoided at all costs. Moreover, if the only difference is five powers, then I question the need for those five powers in the system in the first place (and if they are really that crucial to the game, then they shouldn't have been removed from the Basic book). Much like the Complete books which removed a few things from the game (compared to 6E1/6E2), the system is probably better off for those omissions.

 

[Spence]

22 hours ago, zslane said:

 

Unfortunately, the history (of the Hero System) strongly suggests otherwise. Past attempts to defibrillate the game using paired down, abridged versions of the rules have all failed to accomplish anything of substance. I wouldn't expect it to in the future either.

 

 

Eh... not really.  They did put together stripped versions of both 5th and 6th.  The Basic books. 

But they were just like CC and FHC, incomplete and designed as if they intended them to fail.

 

Think of it this way. 

 

Lets imagine you have a two game consoles.  

Console one sells games on a disc like the PS4 and XBox.  Buy a disc, load it and play.

Console two has decided that anyone willing to play a game someone else designed is daft.  So they sell the console, the source code and some resources and say "have fun". 

 

Which console sells and which one fails?  Easy to pick.

 

When Fantasy Hero Complete was put out it was also incomplete.  It is even more sad because they actually had partially built the other half in the Val of Stalla which was given out as downloadable content but never mentioned in the book itself.  If the material had been polished up and included in FHC plus the equivalent of a 1st level spell list so the people who wanted to play a mage had a starting point to reference, it might have taken off. 

 

The Basic books were not bad at all........as one part of a complete product.

 

But after 3rd edition, Hero never tried to make "playable" games except for Champions in 4th. 

 

Hero in 5th and 6th stopped being a game played for fun, and became a dry programming language for mathematicians.

 

In my opinion Hero has ceased to be a game, and has become a system reference document.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Scott Ruggels]

21 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Wait you talk about 2e being complete and then you complain about abridged versions. 6th Basic intentionally has 5 missing powers. However it’s still more complete than 2e So besides bashing newer editions what’s your point?

Second Edition is complete.

 it's just not as granular or detailed as 6e. but it was more than adequate back in the 80's

[Scott Ruggels]

55 minutes ago, Spence said:

The Basic books were not bad at all........as one part of a complete product.

 

But after 3rd edition, Hero never tried to make "playable" games except for Champions in 4th. 

 

Hero in 5th and 6th stopped being a game played for fun, and became a dry programming language for mathematicians.

 

In my opinion Hero has ceased to be a game, and has become a system reference document

 

 

 I could not give you a Like or a thank you as I am not grateful or like it, but I cannot argue with the truth. This just strengthens my argument for a 2E or 3e re-issue.

 

[Duke Bushido]

1 hour ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Second Edition is complete.

 it's just not as granular or detailed as 6e. but it was more than adequate back in the 80's

 

It's been more than adequate all the way up to December of 2019, and I expect however long I am able to game beyond that. 

 

I don't blame the complexity of modern editions on the needs of the players;  I blame it on the wants of the mathematicians.  As you noted, there has for years and years been a push to take out "play a game" in favor of "write some code" and "balance some math." 

 

 

[Spence]

2 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

It's been more than adequate all the way up to December of 2019, and I expect however long I am able to game beyond that. 

 

I don't blame the complexity of modern editions on the needs of the players;  I blame it on the wants of the mathematicians.  As you noted, there has for years and years been a push to take out "play a game" in favor of "write some code" and "balance some math." 

 

 

 

Yep...

[steriaca]

One way to cut down on "math freaking" is to eliminate the 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 in favor of .25, .5, and .75. The match is the same, but there is no fractions to freak over.

 

Another way might be cross negation.  A +1 advantage is negated by say two 1/4 limitations  and an 1/2 limitation. I know that is not math, but... (note: Do This Only At Your Own Risk [/stopsign])

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

As somebody whose experience is entirely constrained to FRED and 6e, what was the complexity added? 

 

1 minute ago, steriaca said:

One way to cut down on "math freaking" is to eliminate the 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 in favor of .25, .5, and .75. The match is the same, but there is no fractions to freak over.

 

Another way might be cross negation.  A +1 advantage is negated by say two 1/4 limitations  and an 1/2 limitation. I know that is not math, but... (note: Do This Only At Your Own Risk [/stopsign])

Unfortunately, I'd expect that to clear up approximately nothing.  My experience is that the biggest source of confusion RE Limitations is "Wait, a +1/2 Advantage increases cost by half the base value but a -1/2 Limitation reduces cost by one-third?  Whaaaa?". 

Maybe there'd be less confusion if the book would clearly enumerate that you start out multiplying by 1/1, then Advantages increase the numerator and Limitations increase the denominator. 

[Scott Ruggels]

20 minutes ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

As somebody whose experience is entirely constrained to FRED and 6e, what was the complexity added? 

 

It started in in 4th edition,  Second Edition Champions was 72 pages total.Third Edition Fantasy Hero was a 110pg book. Fantasy Hero 4th edition was a 256 page book.  The fourth edition Big blue Book was 214 pages plus a 58 page source book, and a 60 page Champions Campaign. So 332 pages total. fifth edition was 360 pages, plus an Index(a first for Hero at the time), rounding out to a total of 372 pages. 

 

Quote

 

Unfortunately, I'd expect that to clear up approximately nothing.  My experience is that the biggest source of confusion RE Limitations is "Wait, a +1/2 Advantage increases cost by half the base value but a -1/2 Limitation reduces cost by one-third?  Whaaaa?". 

Maybe there'd be less confusion if the book would clearly enumerate that you start out multiplying by 1/1, then Advantages increase the numerator and Limitations increase the denominator. 

 

I never figured that out. still havent, which is why I used Heromakr,exe until i lost the disk.  Hero Designer I still can't figure out.

Total Math-tard. here.

[dmjalund]

Start with 4/4 so a +1/4 advantage is +1 n(umerator) and a 1/2 disadvantage is a +2 d(enominator)

 

[Spence]

28 minutes ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

As somebody whose experience is entirely constrained to FRED and 6e, what was the complexity added? 

 

Unfortunately, I'd expect that to clear up approximately nothing.  My experience is that the biggest source of confusion RE Limitations is "Wait, a +1/2 Advantage increases cost by half the base value but a -1/2 Limitation reduces cost by one-third?  Whaaaa?". 

Maybe there'd be less confusion if the book would clearly enumerate that you start out multiplying by 1/1, then Advantages increase the numerator and Limitations increase the denominator. 

 

13 minutes ago, Scott Ruggels said:

I never figured that out. still havent, which is why I used Heromakr,exe until i lost the disk.  Hero Designer I still can't figure out.

Total Math-tard. here.

 

I never cared. 

I just did the calculation and took the resulting value. 

 

None of the math was inherently hard.

 

A reality that the mathematicians can not grasp is that perfection does not exist and anything is balanced for play if everyone has the same options.  Yes yes I know, heads are exploding everywhere. 

 

But I know this.

1st and 2nd Edition were FUN!

3rd Edition was FUN.

4th Edition was FUN.

5th Edition was fun...ish

6th Edition was....well after we bought it we never really got a game going past the odd single session.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

1 hour ago, Scott Ruggels said:

It started in in 4th edition,  Second Edition Champions was 72 pages total.Third Edition Fantasy Hero was a 110pg book. Fantasy Hero 4th edition was a 256 page book.  The fourth edition Big blue Book was 214 pages plus a 58 page source book, and a 60 page Champions Campaign. So 332 pages total. fifth edition was 360 pages, plus an Index(a first for Hero at the time), rounding out to a total of 372 pages.

Is that complexity or just long-windedness though?  There's a bunch in 6th that gets more space (for example, Clinging goes from half a page to a whole page) but doesn't meaningfully change, it's just wordier. 

[Scott Ruggels]

27 minutes ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

Is that complexity or just long-windedness though?  There's a bunch in 6th that gets more space (for example, Clinging goes from half a page to a whole page) but doesn't meaningfully change, it's just wordier. 

 

Both.  Long winded-ness and the incorporation of rules in previous supplements into the next book (Martial Arts is a major culprit). The size, Lond winded-ness, and the greater granularity of powers all served to make 6e a tax manual.

[Duke Bushido]

On 12/20/2019 at 3:18 PM, Spence said:

They came close with FHC, but all the "you can actually play the game" stuff was downloadable content instead of in the book material.  I didn't even realize it existed until  a couple years later and I  come here.

 

 

And I didn't realize it even existed until I read that post.  Thank you; is it still available; and does anyone have a link? 

23 hours ago, zslane said:

 

2e didn't have five missing powers. It didn't have anything missing. That's because it wasn't a "Basic" version of anything. It was the complete expression of the game/system as it existed at the time of publication.

 

It is the complete expression of the game as it has existed at the time of _any_ publication, with the single exception that it takes a wonky build to replicate Damage Reduction (ie, custom limitations, as suggested and praised in all editions of the rules books and heavily spat upon by those looking to write code I stayed of playing a game).  Damage Negation takes a wonky build as well,  but can still be done in 2e- not well, mind you, as it's the only thing ever added that I can't find a build that doesn't require at least a tiny bit of handwaving, but I feel that I will get there, and that there are likely other old edition players outside the board who probably already have; I am creative, but I don't pretend to be "especially" creative. 

 

 

 

23 hours ago, zslane said:

Moreover, if the only difference is five powers, then I question the need for those five powers in the system in the first place (and if they are really that crucial to the game, then they shouldn't have been removed from the Basic book).

 

Dude, I'm going to go ahead and admit, straight-up and publicly, that I find a general trend of not usually agreeing with you (but not _dismissive_ of you in any way: I am not a youthful internet politico who has an inborn ability to pretend all other points of view are inherently wrong or don't exist), but that parenthetical comment you made?  It's like you are reading my mind! 

 

Honesty, I have questioned the need for pretty much every new power since (and starting with) Gadget Pool in.... Was it Champs III?.... 

 

I did not question the validity of the _idea behind them_, mind you: I just sat down to see if it could be done in 2e.  In every case but Damage Negation, it can.  Further, very few need custom limitations to do it.   And as I noted, even damage negation _can_ be done, if you're willing to do a tiny bit of handwa--  you know, it's not even handwaving: it's the same sort of metagaming that is the "mechanic" of Damage Negation to begin with.  If you can accept that, then 2e remains as complete as anything that's been rolled out today.  1e probably does as well, but it was so.... Disjointed...  Particularly in Frameworks. 

 

23 hours ago, zslane said:

Much like the Complete books which removed a few things from the game (compared to 6E1/6E2), the system is probably better off for those omissions.

 

 

We agree here as well, but likely for different reasons.  Again, I am totally in favor of the new ideas behind the powers, and I keep a list tucked into my "GMs copy" of the 2e rulebook of all the new Advantages and Limitations that get published in each new rulebook (some have been struck through as thematic repeats: even the Advantages and Limitations can be little more than unnecessary subdivisions of previous entries on the list).  Unsurprisingly, some of these newer Ads and Lims make it _easier_ to use a 2e construct to replicate a "new and necessary Power.". They went ahead and made the new Power anyway.... 

 

16 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Second Edition is complete.

 it's just not as granular or detailed as 6e. but it was more than adequate back in the 80's

 

As I said before, it's still complete, but I wanted to address that granularity:  the newer editions are no more granular; that would be a _good_ thing, I think, as it would make power scaling to the genre much easier and still allow characters to show the kinds of variation that makes them unique and interesting. 

 

What the new editions are is more.... Well, "binary" isn't quite what I'm looking for; for lack of a better word, I am going to say "stifling."  More and more, words like "must" and "cannot" creep into the rules.  Every single time you say "must" you are also saying "NO!" to all of a thousand other approaches.   Every time you say "can't," the same thing happens.  Everytime you say "should", you are casting all other alternatives in a negative "best to be avoided" light. 

 

13 hours ago, steriaca said:

One way to cut down on "math freaking" is to eliminate the 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 in favor of .25, .5, and .75. The match is the same, but there is no fractions to freak over.

 

Thats not a bad idea. 

 

 

13 hours ago, steriaca said:

 

Another way might be cross negation.  A +1 advantage is negated by say two 1/4 limitations  and an 1/2 limitation. I know that is not math, but... (note: Do This Only At Your Own Risk [/stopsign])

 

 

Don't worry about the risk.  We played 1e that way, and played 2e that way for over a year before we noticed that we were doing it "wrong." 

 

See, our 1e GM had misunderstood something and then taught us that mistake.  When we upgraded to 2e (I bought it and brought it to the table the next day), Jim had skimmed through looking to see what was new, etc., and off we went!  He hadn't bothered rereading it in its entirety, so we were making the same "cross canceling" mistake.  It wasn't until I wanted to run a sci-fi game on the Champions engine that I read the book myself (while it was mine, it lived at Jim's house) that we caught the mistake. 

 

I am fairly certain, given that the majority of Americans aren't into recreational math any more than I am, that this idea was unknowingly the most "playtested" alternative in the history of the game!   :rolf:  

 

The upshot of this playtesting?  It hurts _nothing_.  Yes, I can hear the screams of "math!" and "balance!" and all that other crap, but as someone has already wisely noted: if everyone has equal access, it's balanced enough. 

 

Besides:  when one buys one of the new powers as-is in a later edition, he is usually getting quite a bargain, ad building it in an earlier edition where it did not exist is usually _much_ more costly.  If Damage Reduction costs 50 points and doing it in 2e costs 76 points, yet Energy Blast is the same price in _both_ editions, why the FU-- are we even _pretending_ there is balance?! 

 

It's "balanced enough," and the thinkers and mathamagicans of this board notwithstanding, that's good enough for the majority of players.  HERO is dying- or completely dead- because of an expensive habit of pandering to a much more vocal minority. 

13 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 

It started in in 4th edition

 

I don't disagree that 4e was a leap in complexity, and that this complexity was a necessary evil side effect of attempting to pull every detail from every game using the Champions engine into a sort of One Ring to rule them all thing, but I'm going to back it up further:

 

I'm going to say the introduction of the gadget pool did it. 

 

Once you create a special new power that could have been created using already-existing rules, you've opened the floodgates to stop using the rules creatively and start hammering in blocks of pre-made "what I want.". Suddenly there are 2 ways to do it, and now the new player has to wonder why and which is right and when does he do which? 

 

Complexity. 

 

Sure: special rules for vehicles, special rules for special circumstances-- everything added up, and it did really explode in 4e; I agree there. 

 

 

13 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 

Total Math-tard. here.

 

I won't bore you with the details again here, but I thought I was, once.  I'm not, but I the years-long experience has left me math-phobic enough that I will not be solving equations for fun and profit any time soon.... 

 

 

12 hours ago, dmjalund said:

Start with 4/4 so a +1/4 advantage is +1 n(umerator) and a 1/2 disadvantage is a +2 d(enominator)

 

 

You, Sir, may be an absolute genius.  I want to make time after the holidays ( because math lowers my general mood) to play with this at length.  If it holds up-- or even demonstrates itself as "close enough," I am going to steal this as a new teaching tool!   

Thank you! 

 

12 hours ago, Spence said:

I never cared. 

I just did the calculation and took the resulting value. 

 

Ditto.   Honestly, those periods when I regularly visit the board are the periods when I start becoming more and more dickish about the math, which makes me question why I follow the number-crunching thread.  I mean: my players are all having a great time, whether we are doing it math-corexr or not.  Why do I give a rolly red rat scat if they can solve differential equations or even multiply fractions correctly? 

 

 

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

Is that complexity or just long-windedness though?

 

 

The two have a close relationship, and in spite of Occam' Razor, extreme simplicity will always be open to interpretation.  For example, I have found that the open simplicity of the older editions let's me handily replicate nearly everything from the later editions.  Mostly, I think, because the lack of verbosity means it says "no" a lot less. 

 

I understand the verbosity: as the author is not having an actual, interruptible conversations with each individual reader, he strives to cover every question which he himself can forsee.  The goal is, of course, clarity for a larger number of readers.  The drawback is that there is more to juggle in the mind- references, antecedents, etc, such that attempts to improve clarity often result in more confusion.  I can't remember which entry it was-  I referenced here in a conversation a few weeks back--but one of the powers in 6e includes a three-colum discussion, an entire column of which is the same two paragraphs repeated in slightly-different phrasing - three times_.. 

[Chris Goodwin]

58 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Honesty, I have questioned the need for pretty much every new power since (and starting with) Gadget Pool in.... Was it Champs III?.... 

 

Gadget Pool in II, VPP in III.  Gadget Pool had a slightly different cost structure from VPP.  Gadgeteering Skill was given more to do than the default VPP skill; it was more like Power Skill is now.  

 

(Did you do that on purpose? )

 

[Scott Ruggels]

The more and look and think about this, a commemorative 40th anniversary re-issue of 2e with Viper's nest, maps Dice, and a catalog would work.

 

 

[Spence]

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

The upshot of this playtesting?  It hurts _nothing_.  Yes, I can hear the screams of "math!" and "balance!" and all that other crap, but as someone has already wisely noted: if everyone has equal access, it's balanced enough. 

 

Besides:  when one buys one of the new powers as-is in a later edition, he is usually getting quite a bargain, ad building it in an earlier edition where it did not exist is usually _much_ more costly.  If Damage Reduction costs 50 points and doing it in 2e costs 76 points, yet Energy Blast is the same price in _both_ editions, why the FU-- are we even _pretending_ there is balance?! 

 

It's "balanced enough," and the thinkers and mathamagicans of this board notwithstanding, that's good enough for the majority of players.  HERO is dying- or completely dead- because of an expensive habit of pandering to a much more vocal minority. 

 

Ahhhhhhhh!!!!   Heads exploding everywhere!!!   The HUMANITY!!!!!!    Aaaaaahhhahahhahhahhah!!!!!