Hugh Neilson

He learned how to fly and gained his heat vision and many super-senses by 1945. He also withstood two atomic bomb blasts, flew through the molten core of the earth and into the sun by 1946. When did the Golden Age end and silver begin for Supes, who was published with no hiatus? Point being, he evolved to massively powerful pretty quick in the Golden Age.
 

Two points of order.
 
First, throughout the Golden Age, Superman and Batman were not really "part of a team". The Justice Society rule was that all characters featured had to have their own ongoing feature (that's why Hourman was dropped in favour of Starman), but could not have their own monthly book - such characters became honorary members. Superman and Batman were honorary throughout the Golden Age (but did appear in one issue, I believe redrawn to replace two other characters, and also appeared in a Johnny Thunder strip in #7). Wonder Woman was treated similarly as the JSA secretary, and Flash and Green Lantern eventually became honorary members on receiving their own books.
 
Second, the "team" Golden Age books were not really team books. JSA was written as "Opening and closing bookends" with a solo story for each hero in between. Later in its run, the "in betweens" became more than one character (typically only one or two, not sure if it was ever 3) at a time due to declining page counts. Seven Soldiers of Victory followed the same format. Initial JLA followed a similar format of small sub-teams in chapters.
 
Marvel had no formal teams, really. The All-Winners Squad appeared all of twice, in 1946, following the same format.
 
That's a tough format to model into a game - maybe GAC will comment on that?
 
Wildcat also only appeared once in JSA in the Golden Age (as did Mr. Terrific) I believe when the publishers of National and Detective (for which All-Star was a joint book) got into a scrap so one group's characters did not appear.
 
Green Lantern as originally portrayed used his ring to charge his own body with lantern-energy, so he was strong, fast and tough, but new powers rapidly followed (much like Superman). Continuity was a lot looser, so powers tended to come and go. Pretty sure before the end of the JSA run, Atom had super-strength.

In could argue the "behind the tree" either way - the ice suddenly appeared beneath your feet, and is a lot more slippery than the dirt there before, so it is possible you will slip and fall based on where your feet were, how your weight was supported, etc.  But your should also get a bonus for having the tree there for support, even if I do not simply accept that you would not have any risk of slipping before you moved.
 
 
And therein lies the conundrum. 
 
We cannot fully remove judgment - RPG rules cannot possibly envision every possible circumstance, which is why they need GMs (and professional sports need referees/umpires, and the legal system needs judges). The question is one of striking a balance.  At an extreme "GM to determine" end, we could remove to hit and damage rolls.  The GM will rule on whether, in the circumstances, you were accurate enough to hit, and whether your hit was powerful enough to achieve any number of effects, from even noticed to deceased target.  As we don't want to play "I hit you! Fall down!!!"  "No, you missed me.", we set objective parameters to determine whether an attack hits or misses.  But we also allow for modifiers adjudicated, or even determined by, the GM to address the many possibilities the rules cannot perfectly predict.
 
In Monopoly, I don't get to attempt to outrace the "Go To Jail" card because I am using the "car" token and logically the car should have a chance to speed away and escape the police.  In a computer game, my flying snake might slip and fall prone on the ice simply because no one thought to program in an exception (that is, include a rule) that flying creatures and creatures with no legs cannot slip and fall prone on the ice.  Or even to allow creatueres that have no legs and/or can fly to be part of the game!

From what I've seen of the comic books (and once again, on the off chance that anyone doesn't know this: I was never a comic book kid), not at all.  We have constant communication with aliens and technology that lets us step through a shadow and arrive in an alternate dimension, and machines that heal people who should have died long before they got the condition that they are in just before being subjected to the miracle healing machine.  We have miraculous teleportation devices and cloning technology that can turn one tomato plant into a thousand in just moments.
 
Yet when Captain America's secret ID needs to run to Europe, he gets his passport and climbs on a plane like every single person on the planet.  He might travel all the way to Ethiopia, which, in spite of our incredible technology, still suffers from drought and famine, and rather than turning the Sahara into a verdant jungle paradise, we let villains hide their secret missile bases there.
 
 
So from what I've seen of comics, there is an absolute status quo of "right here; right now" that is not only where the setting _is_, but that must be maintained and returned to between every adventure.
 
 
You can run your world differently-- I know I do-- but staying true to the comics?  Superheroes deal with Supervillains while serial killers still stalk college girls.
 
 

Hello, Hugh!  
 
Thanks for joining in!
 
I don't know how much more will be gleaned: I've pretty much said all I have to say on the subject-- well, that's not quite true.  I have re-stated my own opinions related to the exact topics of "what might attract new players."  Several other points have been brought up or alluded to, but I don't know that the time will ever be right (or available) to chase every single one of those down and address them. 
 
You make an interesting point here:
 
 
and I don't think it has ever been addressed in any of these discussions.  On the chance that you are opinion shopping, I will offer mine:
 
We need new players and new GMs willing to pick up and learn this game.  New blood-- new customers.  One to keep the game alive, and one to maybe one day keep the company alive.  Eh-- I am a product of a capitalist environment, I suppose.  I don't _like_ it, but it's where I came from: it's not instinctive to separate the product from the producer.  I'm working on it, but it's still not instinctive. 
 
At any rate, I don't think a few new players to existing tables is going to help matters.  The bulk of current HERO players seem to be long-time players, and all seem to have gravitated more toward the minigames of building every detail of the universe, or every detail of a magic system, or every possible permutation of published characters--
 
that is, they have fallen in love with the math itself, sometimes to the detriment of the game.  They have taken the minutiae of the rules and now occupy themselves by spending long discussions and pages of writing to iron out those tiny details----
 
Crud.  How's the best way to say this?   Let me try this:
 
I don't think it is going to be helpful in the long run to have new players attracted to the game system (because we all agree, I think, that there is no actual game here as it is presented) only to have them drink from the very well that poisoned the game.  It's counter-productive.
 
I think we need new play groups of new people using complete games extracted from the system.  I think those systems should bear simple indications that they were built using a larger, more complicated system, and invite them to check out the entire thing, if they are interested.  I _also_ think that those same informative blurbs should clearly point out that (assuming the game is complete) the entire Encyclopedia HEROica is _not_ required to play the game.  I honestly think the system itself should be soft-sold.  That is, don't put a lot of effort into pulling people straight into the overload that the System has become.  Let them play the game; let them enjoy the game.  Let them, in their own time, decide "I wonder what I can learn from the whole kit and kaboodle?" on their own, without any push toward it.  That's what I want to say: point it out, but don't push towards it.
 
If a game proves popular enough, write supplements _for that game_.  NOT for the HERO System, not compatible with Game X, but specifically for Game X itself.  If you know the HERO system, then you already _know_ it's compatible with it.  If you don't know the HERO System, but you _do_ know Game X, then you don't _care_ if it's compatible with HERO. If you already have the HERO System, you might not even need or want it, but you will know it's compatible because it says "Powered by HERO."  Setting _expansions_ as opposed to setting books: I accept that I am the odd man out and that most people today want the first book to include some strong samples of setting.  I cut my teeth on games like D and D and Traveller and others of the era that had no setting out of the box.  (Champions, for example  )   I know: considering what they have grown into, people today have a hard time imagining it, but first edition D and D and first edition Traveller had _zero_ setting.  I could be remembering wrong, but I don't recall that first edition The Fantasy Trip has any setting info, either.  At any rate, as my formative gaming years occurred when setting just wasn't part of a game, I guess I never really developed that need to have a prepackaged setting right away.  No biggie; I can easily accept that this _is_ an important requirement for today's gamers.  As noted above, "Tastes change." 
 
To get back on track, though:
 
If a game sells reasonably well, then do a setting expansion for that game-- do NOT do a "toolbox" of how to build a setting that will work for this game; do NOT do "here are ten possible settings for this game."  I could honestly even accept that one book does _two_ possible settings, so long as they are closely related:  here is the "official" setting of this game; here is a darker, broodier, more baroque version of the setting, featuring grey and blue backgrounds and all the street lights have been replaced with 20 watt bulbs and the occasional gas lamp."   Or maybe "this is the official setting; this is the setting from the villains' point of view."    I am not _big_ on doing two settings, but so long as they are very closely related, it _shouldn't_ be a problem, particularly if one of them is clearly labeled "this is the official one.  If you go to a CON, this is what we will be playing.  If there is additional support coming, this is the version that will be supported first when it comes to allocating budget."
 
Removing the toolkitting (thanks, Tasha, if you're still following along.  I have read a number of the 5e setting books, and even knowing all that optional-optional-optional-optional stuff was in there, at this point I am so stinkin' used to seeing it that it didn't even register anymore.  Instead of each book having a setting currently, it's got an expansive set of Colorforms that you plop down onto the pre-painted background to make your own setting.  (Am I telling my age?  Anyone else remember Colorforms?  Just me?)
 
One thing that I think is very important to the success of a setting book, based on those unhappy with the offerings now (Tasha, myself, and people I have tried to convert to HERO who did a little online looking and went "Oh, Hell no!" ) is a solid adventure.  No; I don't think the adventure by itself is something that will sell the book, but I think it will be harder to sell without out.  Several reasons, the first of which is "perceived value."  You get a setting book for the price of a setting book, but you also get this pretty sweet 15, 25-page adventure!  It's an entire story arc; looks like three or four sessions to get through it!  Amazing!"
 
Let's face it:
 
How many of us bought gaming magazines back in the day, even if the entire issue was below average, because it had a pretty cool adventure in it?  How many of us bought Different Worlds because it had some of the highest production quality pull-out adventure modules for all sorts of different games we were into at the time?  How many of us subscribed to some seriously low-quality xerox-printed fanzines because there was one semi-regular contributor who had a knack for crafting an adventure once or twice a year?  While big game companies have "learned" that "adventures don't sell," the fact is that they _do_ sell; they just didn't do so good from the big publishing outfits.  Why?  Well, going from my original Traveller and D and D group, the  GMs didn't buy the brand name adventures very often because the guy running the store knew who was who, and had a business to run:  "Hey, Duke.  Don't you play in 'Tonio's Traveller group?"
"You know I do, Chestnut."
"Well he just picked up Adventure Supplement 4 a couple of days ago...."
"Cool!  So we'll probably have a game next weekend!  At the very least, it means we're about to conclude the mission we're on, right?"
"Yeah; or....  _You_ could pick up Adventure Supplement 4 and check it out before the game.... You know: find out what's a good thing to do; what's a bad thing to do.... where the goodies are...."  (because Chestnut was pretty convinced that all games were D and D).
"Yeah....   I don't think so, Chestnut.  That's...  that's not cool.  I might pick it up after we play it, though, if it was pretty good."
"Hey, Davien!  Davien, don't you play with Duke and 'Tonio?"
"Yeah."
"Well 'Tonio just bought Adventure Supplement 4 for Traveller, just a couple days ago...."
 
While it's entirely anecdotal, that's the number one reason I always heard from GMs who didn't use brand-name modules.  The Judge's Guild stuff, the small-press stuff....  nobody that didn't actually play knew much about it, and the magazines were super-safe, because there was this expectation that a "free" adventure wasn't good, and you were probably just buying the magazine for something else in it.  Truth is even if they mag adventure wasn't good, it could be tweaked easier than an adventure could be written...
 
Anyway, the point was, adventures may not by themselves sell, but they do _help_ sell.
 
Why an adventure in a world book? Because more than anything else, it will immediately help the players and GMs understand how the world works and how to interact with it.  Moreover, it should be a meaty adventure: an entire story arc (not necessarily a full-on campaign, but something that will take three or four sessions to play would be perfect, I think-- like the campaign book from 3e, only including microfilm madness.  This gives both examples of how to interact with the world and gives some solid play experience before the GM is left floundering on his own to make the next adventure.  If a short campaign will fit in there, then shoot for that!   Most importantly, that adventure should have the possibility for _complete_ resolution and the possibility to lead into the next planned product: a full-on campaign book.  No; it doesn't _have_ to be a single book, but can be a series of adventures, published semi-regularly, that all follow a story arc.  Perhaps they can be meaty enough to allow for a story arc within each adventure, tying into an overall campaign.  Moreover, each adventure book or campaign book should include a _short_ list of additional adventure ideas.  If they don't do anything else, they add background and more understanding of the world.  When you read an adventure seed like "Princess Moonwalker of the Valley People has been kidnapped while en route to the seaport village of Barzhaven.  The NPCs have gotten the news from the local town crier.  The King of the Valley People has offered two thousand Zennies and a land grant of eight hectares to anyone who can bring her back safely!"  we actually learn a lot about the world: 
 
There is a Valley Kingdom and a seaport.  There are brigands about.  Two thousand Zennies is probably a _lot_ of money.  We are measuring land by an archaic european standard.  The Valley People name themselves like Elves.  Even if you don't use the seeds, they are informative, and an important bit of world building, particularly for a neophyte who doesn't want or perhaps is not ready to do it himself.
 
We can talk about the understanding that adventures don't sell, but we know that they do-- perhaps not high-margin, high-profile sales, but if the world book sells enough units to demonstrate that people want to play the game, and want more of the background, setting, etc, then they will likely want adventures, if only for inspiration.
 
Adventures saved Dungeons and Dragons.
 
We can demonstrate all the old wisdom that they don't sell, but the entire hobby was on the way out prior to Pathfinder, and the entire success of Pathfinder was the Paths.  As Pathfinder caught fire, a lot of people moved from there to "the original," and even Wizards understood the value to providing solid content that could keep players occupied for a long time.
 
And more in this vein, but I think we all have the idea:  Complete game with some setting and a some sort of adventure and even a few "adventure ideas."
 
 
 
HA!  I guess I jumped the gun on that, didn't I?   
 
To go a bit further, at this point, I wouldn't even begin to worry about offending the old hands.  Putting too much emphasis on what they want is kind of what brought HERO to where it is now.     Besides, most of us are collectors, at least to the best of our ability.  You could stamp out commemorative toilet paper with Hexman printed   all over it, and we'd buy it.  We're kinda sad like that.      Honestly, I'd have forty or more of those HERO dice if they'd picked a size that let me hold more than three or at a time.
 
 
 
 
 
I agree: experienced gamers tend to not need a sample adventure.  However, I think we should have long ago paid attention to the fact that not one single experienced gamer has ever been injured by the inclusion of one.     At least, not in any way but his ego, and frankly, we could all use a swift kick to the ego every now and again: it keeps us humble.   
 
 
 
 

The perception was that "roll low" is counter intuitive, deterring new players.

The power as defined to me is an AoE Line which, under 6e, is +1/4 for a line that is 2 meters x 2 meters x [Maximum length].  For +1/4, the line is up to 16m long.  The length can be doubled for an extra +1/4 (or either of the other dimensions can be doubled.
 
This is a significant change from earlier editions, where the base power determined the base length of the line.  Looking at the rules, there is no restriction on the direction the line travels.  The target point is the center of one end of the line (so the point on the ground that the pillar of flame would rise from).  Given yours can only be vertical, I'd be open to a limitation on the incremental cost of the AoE advantage itself for that reduced flexibility.
 
A limitation on the whole power for the requirement there be ground below the target would also be reasonable. Many GMs would bundle the two together as one limitation. 
 
 
1 hex is gone in 6e (a 1 meter or 2 meter radius would only cost +1/4 anyway). "Accurate" is an additional +1/4 advantage allowing the attack to hit only a single target within a Radius AoE.  I see no reason I would not allow it on other AoE shapes, but the book says only radius.
 
 
Looking at 6e Indirect, one example of +1/4 is a source point of "the sky above the target's head", for a lightning bolt.  Altering the path of the power changes how it travels from its source point to its target, so that has not changed. Indirect would allow the character to target a point for the fire to shoot up from if there is a barrier  between him and the desired point of the flame burst.  It may not be needed for the AoE build.
 
Well, if it is a narrow jet of flame, it might be stopped by the first target it hits...

I think this highlights an issue with the Board trying to figure out how to attract "new players".  Do we mean "new players willing to try out Hero with an existing group" or "new players and GMs who learn the game on their own"?  In my view, we need the latter, and attracting the former is an added benefit.  A brand-new playing group needs that starting adventure, ready to play. Ideally, it has been designed to demonstrate various rules, perhaps with different encounters or steps in the adventure focusing on a very few rules at a time to create a staged learning environment.
 
Experienced gamers tend not to need a sample adventure to run from whole cloth (although, with other constraints on one's time, they are still very valuable to many experienced gamers too).  The newbies need an adventure to run, which also hopefully teaches some practical lessons in adventure design for the GM as it goes along, especially if designed for new GMs and gaming groups.

It has been far more civil and friendly than such discussions in the past; there is no doubt.
 
The thing is- and the reason that I don't get mad at people for thinking this is a possible solution for garnering players-- is that I completely understand the desire to see more HERO gamers, and to see the company thrive-- I would like that myself; what fan wouldn't?
 
Problematically, HERO shot itself in the foot so far as attracting new players with the _massive_ core rules and their general aversion to creating one-book complete games.
 
Lucha Hero was great, but very niche.  Western HERO was also excellent.  Fantasy HERO Complete and Champions Complete were one-book games, but the requirement for both genres to include the full build rules (ie, Powers) made them, in the words of a friend, "impenetrably dense" to the casual gamer or light reader.  Well done; don't doubt that for a second, but very dense and dry.  MHI could have been a massive hit, but then the IP owner screwed his own popularity, and anyone who bought a license ended up holding the bag (please: let's not discuss that here.  Like "this will get them off their tractors-- uh, away from D and D," it has been rehashed until there is nothing left but hard feelings.  I do feel really bad for the investment HERO made into it, though).
 
Do I think one-book games would bring more people to the fold?  Not in droves; certainly not.  But I tend to think that they are, by their nature, less off-putting than is "read these twelve hundred pages, get familiar with the mechanics, and then we will go over the genre-specific stuff from Splatbook X, and then build a world, some,locations, an economy, and finally some characters; see you in two weeks!" has done so far.
 
As always, though, these are just the opinions of one old guy who watched his favorite version of the game die thirty years ago.

Yes, most of Hero System's complexity is in character generation.  I don't find the actual play that complex.
 
And building a first-level D&D character is fairly simple in terms of choices for the player to make, compared to a Hero System character.  Then again, most Hero System characters are not "first-level", this is (IMHO) both a draw for experienced players and a barrier to new players.  Even a higher-level D&D character is still simpler in choices (okay, next level... spend skill points here, roll for hit points, new feat, stat improvement).  I know players that take great enjoyment in planning their character's path all the way to level 20 when the character is first created.  I get that enjoyment.
 
 
I think that would be an *excellent* way to bring in more new players, including D&D players.  👍
 
There are (again, IMHO) Hero books that are closer to that ideal than Champions Complete and Fantasy Hero Complete.  Narosia.  Widening Gyre.  Western Hero.  Not at that ideal, but closer.  Single books that can be used to run a campaign, with the setting and appropriate power levels.
 
Although for a supers RPG that is more D&D-like, Mighty Protectors (V&V 3.0) is closer than Hero System will ever be.
 
The more I think about it, the more I think you nailed it with this:  "Basically an On Rails version of character generation."  That's a basic difference between D&D and Hero System.  Players will, in general, prefer either a more constrained or more open character generation method (IMHO).
 

1st off the Hero Boards have always been fairly civil and friendly, but it really became my favorite place for discussions when I discovered the ignore function.  There are not very many toxic individuals here and they are eliminated easily.  For me anyone that feels the need to inject snide political comments in their
non-NGD posts goes straight to toxic land.  I don't really spend any time on the NGD so I rally don't care about that.  But taking a dump in the RPG forums is out.
 
2nd.  While I do agree in general with most of your comments here.  There is one major concept I completely disagree with.
Hero System 6th Edition, Champions Complete, Fantasy Hero Complete, Hero System 5th Edition Revised and so on are NOT role playing games. 
 
Spence: Yes Igor, please raise the drawbridge and bar the gates....
Igor: But we should flee!
Spence: It is too late Igor, I can already see the torches and pitchforks...
 
Then what are they, you may ask?
 
It is simple, they are a system that a gamer can use to build a role playing game. 
 
A role playing game can be picked up and played.  Hero, in pretty much all its incarnations cannot.  Instead it can be used by a gamer to put together something that then can be used to be played. 
 
I am currently in the middle of prepping a Fantasy Hero game. 
 
I am STILL in the middle of prepping a Fantasy Hero game.
 
But I was able to discover, buy, read, design scenarios and run them for actual playable RPG's in just a few days. 
 
Even most Hero supplements are not actually RPG's.  The Champions universe has a lots of stuff, but lacks a coherent playable setting of campaign. 
I fully understand that the primary overwhelming ideology was the belief that potential customers would suffer massive catastrophic death if anyone even hinted at a pre-designed campaign or anything that could even distantly be construed as establishing a concise character creation guide.  
 
So while Hero is my favorite RPG related system hands down.  
It is not an actual RPG that can actually be played "out of the box". 
 
No I do not have a solution, but I do not have to have one to see the problem. Just like I do not have to be a Chef to identify the cause of food poisoning.
 
 
 
 
 

Remind me to come back and rep you when I've refilled. 
 
 
 
In my entire history here, I have used the ignore function only twice.  I won't name names (I _proudly_ will not name names; opting to choose the Ignore feature seems the most responsible, adult option available), though there is a third I have waffled on for several years.  Fortunately, that one only seems to come about when that one is particularly bored in 3d-land, so it hasn't happened.
 
Why only twice?  Well, I have found that most people-- even when you disagree with them _vehemently_-- really _do_ have valid points, and reading them (and deciding to ignore them "manually," if you will) can inspire some interesting thoughts about your own beliefs. The only two people I have ever ignored have in common a gratingly haughty "holier than thou" type attitude and no issue resorting to insult and derision _immediately_ at any sign of disagreement.  (Can I say one person?  I think the first person got banned or something; I have not see that person here in at least a couple of years now....)
 
I don't do much in NGD beyond a couple of the games, the joke thread, and the funny pictures thread myself.  I go out of my way to not even _open_ the politics thread unless I have found an amusing image that is more suited for it than for the images threads.  Even then, I make a hard effort to read _nothing_, even the post above the little box I am working in.  After all, I like you folks.  Why do I want to go out of my way to get angry with you?  That's just silly, and entirely my fault for looking, right? 
 
 
 
 
Clarification:
 
I said that I pushed 5 and 6e at people who asked me about the game we were playing.  This was a different point in the conversation.  I did _not_ suggest that either of those things was a complete game in and of themselves.  I will go so far as to say that even the 4e "HERO System" was not a complete game.  BBB was, since it had a book at the end to add some flavor and give character examples, a couple of plots, etc.
 
I _did_ state that CC and FHC were complete games, but allow me a moment to explain why:
 
while they are extremely dense (a necessity to reduce page and word count, but it does make them a bit of a slog to read through if you're brand-new to HERO), they are every bit as complete as were both the original Champions first edition and (arguably) the second edition Champions.  (I say "arguably," because the case can be made the the Viper's Nest module made 2e somehow "more complete."  (fun fact I don't think I have ever shared:  I have never played Viper's Nest.  Hell, I didn't even _read_ it until I had realized that I had never read it-- twenty-some years after having purchased my first 2e !    )
 
Do I feel they could have been more complete?
 
Certainly.  Well, at leaset FHC could have been.  It could have been a one-book game by simply eliminating build data (the "powers" section, essentially), picking one or possibly two magic systems-- maybe even three (let's say "druidic," "Holy," and "Shamanistic" just for fun), describing the differences between them (akin to the 4e "spell colleges."  I never liked the 4e colleges, but that's a different discussion, I think) and then laying out-- let's say fifty actual completely-built spells, costed in "units" (another fun fact: I have always, and will always, refer to dice of effect and steps up or down a chart as "Levels" everywhere but on this board.  For example: "But you get nine extra PD because you have three levels of Density Increase").  As players advanced, they could spend their XP on more "levels" of each spell, or buy new spells.  The build for the spells / potions / whatever didn't even need to be included to make it a complete "one book" game.  This would have left some room for a couple of sample characters and possibly even some very light exposition to suggest a world. Certainly a half-page for each of perhaps five, six races.
 
Granted, this would have tied it into a set of assumptions, but that seems to be comforting to a lot of folks (witness what happened with Traveller, one of the most successful games of all time), and reduces the amount of time and confusion lost to building a simple spell.     
 
 
However----
 
let's look at CC:
 
CC _almost_ needs all the powers build stuff.  Certainly one could have instead put in "Blast" and a the list of powers, two sentence descriptions of how they work, the cost, and let it ride.  The game would have still been complete and more easily picked up.  Champions is completely playable without Advantages, Limitations, and Frameworks.  Power levels are lower for the costs, but it _is_ completely playable.
 
I think what happened here is that there was a desire to give Champions a great shot-- create something like its original roots-- at being a single thin book that gives a nice deep dive into the workings of the HERO System, and of course, Champions is-- at least once was, if the magazine reviews were to be believed-- the greatest superhero game ever designed because of the unique ability to create precisely the hero you want.
 
Skipping back a moment:
 
I think FHC took a similar "here's the whole system, even if the game would be easier to play if we had just ticked a lot of these boxes for you" approach because-- well, Fantasy has always been the largest sector of the RPG fandom.  FHC had the potential to expose to the entire system people who would never dream of picking up a superhero game.  That's just my thoughts, and be aware that they are based on nothing at all beyond what seems the most logical path that leads to what we ended up with.
 
Now back to CC:
 
Champions is totally playable without Power Modifiers of any kind.  I _know_ it is, because my first two characters had none at all!  It wasn't that I didn't grasp them (there were a couple that did take a bit of thinking on), but because I was in a hurry to throw together a character and get playing!      I have met two brand-new GMs over they years who weren't using the modifiers because they hadn't really gotten it all sussed out, but wanted to go ahead and play, so they did.  I assume as they played and gained experience with the system, they added the complexity; I don't know.
 
The most important thing with CC is that of the two, superheroes have the least amount of need for a setting.  The vast majority of superhero adventures are set in "today."  They are set in "right now" and, for whatever reason, New York.     Okay, I _halfway_ kid about that, but New York seems to have _more_ supers per square inch than any other place in the universe.  Don't know New York?  Well, neither do your players!  Just think "craploads of stupid-tall buildings" and run with it.  Of the two "complete" books, CC suffered far less for not having any sort of background or setting.
 
But even then, it _was_ every bit as complete as the very first Champions game, and I don't think acknowledging that is misleading.  FHC?  Well, it's playable, but yes: the aspiring GM will have far more work ahead of him than will the aspiring CC GM.  Still, that book, too, is every bit as complete as the original Champions book.  Not what I would have liked to have seen, but with solid determination, playable as-is with only what is presented in the book.
 
 
 
 
You are preaching to the choir, Sir.  And frankly, I think _this_-- more than any mechanic or similarity or difference between HERO and not-HERO-- is the crux of the problem with recruiting new-to-HERO players and GMS.  it is not complexity; it is not which way you read the dice; it is not the lack of cards or d4 or or critical successes or exploding dice or anything else.  It is the complete lack of a game!  There is no game in there!
 
Remember what the books cost?  Seems like the two big books were in the fifty bucks each range; then Skills, MA, Tech, APG (1 and 2) and I am probably forgetting a few---  what did they go for?   Yes; detractors from this will say "you only need the first two," but I will counter that with the well-documented fact that Duke is the only person in the entire fandom who does _not_ think MA is a vital, necessary, un-get-by-without-it-able book, making it, at least to the fandom, the third absolute core rule book.
 
So what did you spend on those three?  Paperback?  A hundred and thirty bucks?  Hardback?  Two-something?
 
And you DID NOT GET AN ACTUAL GAME, did you?!
 
THIS-- _THIS ONE THING_-- more than any other possible change that could be made to mechanics-- is the hands-down absolute largest barrier to getting new people interested.  The argument can be made that a world can be found with a splatbook.
 
You still need to shell out that hundred and fifty to use that book, don't you?   And once you have that worldbook, you can populate with.... what?  Pick up one of the bestiaries!  Can it be argued that at least the blue one becomes "core rules" when a GM would like to build a fantasy campaign?  Want a dragon?  There is a separate bestiary specifically for dragons, available only in softcover (it's very pretty) and I paid FIFTY BUCKS for it (gift for my daughter a few years back; she digs dragons).  At least with FHC, I can squeeze something out by skipping Core 1 and Core 2, but now I need FHC, MA, Bestiary, and possibly Dragons.  Still no game, though, because I don't have a world!
 
So FHC, MA, Bestiary (I've decided to skip dragons for this world), and-- Crap.  I really wanted to say Tuala Morn, but that's 5e.  Yes; perfectly compatible, but I'm going somewhere here.    How about Atlantean Age?  Was that 6e?  Let me run to the Store real quick. BRB!  Okay, let's say we pick up Christopher's Jolrhos Field Guide (the PDF is fifteen bucks.  I hope there's a paper copy, because I missed the release news, and I really, really prefer paper).  Even then, we have to sort of _hope_ it's an actual setting book and not some sort of accessory (remember: I am a new guy, and haven't been following Christopher's notes ).  Now If I take the advice of FHC and decide I can get more flavor out of Fantasy HERO, then choke on the sixty-dollar price tag on the only paper copy on e-Bay.....  Okay, we'll pick that up later.
 
Right now we have FHC, MA, Bestiary, a world book ( we hope), and....   races?  How do we do races?  Well, maybe there's something in the Bestiary.  Maybe there's something in the world book.  Maybe.  Maybe i need...  Crap!  What do I need?  (Fantasy HERO and a couple of NPC books, actually, but we don't know that yet).
 
 
And _now_-- and only now-- do we have what most players today would call a complete game.
 
 
It is positively ridiculous to think that this is going to pull in waves and waves of new customers.
 
One Book Games.  I have said it for years now: One Book Games.   They don't have to be big or complex, just playable out of the box.
 
 
 
 
 
 
I say the following with nothing-- and I mean _nothing_!-- but love and respect for everyone on this board (except the two d&*ks I have on ignore):
 
In my own experience-- and I confess that my access to real-world gaming culture is very limited because of my geographical location-- is that only the people on this board feel that way, and I will reiterate how much I think HERO shot itself in the throat by assuming that these folks-- the most hardcore of HERO fandom-- were somehow the most representative of potential HERO customers.  It makes me very depressed.     Not that it isn't important to provide something for the long-time fans, but not at the expense of attracting new blood.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I don't have an opinion on that, honestly, simply because the mechanics currently _are_ kind of grouped:  Damage Dice, mental Powers, Skill Checks, Movement (with EDM being something of an odd-man-out there).   There are corner-cases, probably, that I can't think of right now, as it's getting on toward bedtime here, but I think that's something you find in any game.
 
 
 
 
I agree.  One Book Games.
 
Champions.
Espionage
Justice, Inc
Fantasy HERO
Robot Warriors
Danger, International
Star HEROPS238
Lucha HERO
MHI
 
 
It _seems_ to work.  But in all these years (the newest game in that list is a 3e publication), we have added only four more tiles:  Lucha HERO (which was going-in not expected to be a huge hit, and was a labor of love by the author.  I loved it, but I understand that it is a niche sort of thing  ).   The next one was tanked by the creator of the licensed IP.  PS 238 was a great showing of an all-in-one superhero universe (though I thought the property was a bit weak).  Christopher's all-in-one Western HERO is wonderful, but at this point, the HERO fandom has shrunk to a point that I don't see it becoming a huge hit across the market, and of course: young folks aren't into westerns the way they once where.....
 
 
 
 
 
And that's essentially what the one-book games do: nail down the variables, and give you just the stuff relevant to that particular setting.  The full HERO System can certainly handle that, and there is considerable discussion in the current rules sets about doing just that to create a game.
 
However, it refuses to actually do it; it requires that you do it so that it can maintain its appeal as the ultimate universal toolkit.   In its desire to maintain the highest possible appeal to everyone, they have created a situation where there isn't enough flavor to appeal to anyone (outside of us diehards, that is).
 
 

FH Complete and Champions complete are efforts to make those one game books. No edition of Hero System Champions has ever been a complete game. Fantasy Hero 1e was not a full game. They were/are a toolbox to create fantasy games. Even games that are more complete like DI/Espionage don't really come with campaigns. You are given options and tools to create your own genre game, but nothing else. The ONLY game that that has included a full campaign is the much maligned Champions New Millennia. You had a strong city background. Strong well developed NPC/Villains. There are great orgs, that are integrated INTO the overall campaign world.

THIS is where IMHO the fandom has shot the game in the foot. Longstanding Hero System fans demand that every game have the full toolkit available. Which means that every book gives you a bigger toolbox. Even the Fantasy World supplements are toolboxes.

PS everyone is really nice. In the past I have gotten into epic arguments with folk. It never got to the point of name calling etc. The few people who couldn't handle that were ejected by Dan.

The "selfishness" aspect is one I look to a lot. 
 
As a Good person, I might step aside and recommend a colleague for a promotion because they are better suited for the role, so it will be better for everyone, even if it is worse for me.  I might do so just because we are equally qualified, but my colleague really needs that raise to put her kids through college.  
 
As a Neutral person, I will compete for the promotion to the best of my ability, even to the point of embellishing my skills relevant to the role and disparaging other candidates.
 
As an Evil person, I might sabotage the organization to make my competition look bad, get compromising pictures to blackmail the decision maker or even have other candidates removed from the equation (cut brake lines, for example).
 
However, in many larger than life gaming milieus, "true Evil" might be absolute and unselfish devotion to an evil cause, organization, deity, etc. 

This what I don't understand. 
Most of the gamers I know don't play D&D anyway.
 
We mostly play:
Call of Cthulhu (roll high)
Trail of Cthulhu (roll high)
Nights Black Agents (roll high)
Fear Itself (roll high)
Star Trek Adventures (roll low)
Conan (roll low)
Actung! Cthulhu (roll low)
 
As yet no one seems to fall apart from any mind boggling confusion.
The actual issue we get from D&D retreads is their tendency to be murderhobo's and want to resolve everything by killing it and wanting loot. 
 
Most of the Champions superHero games get derailed because everyone wants to be a murderhobo (Deadpool) or the grim dark vigilante (Dark Knight/Batman, the killer version) instead of playing a superhero.
 
But grade school math has never be an issue.
 
 

How do we deal with the hit location chart?  😵
 
Sure, we can swap the head and the feet, but those vitals are still in the middle!!

In could argue the "behind the tree" either way - the ice suddenly appeared beneath your feet, and is a lot more slippery than the dirt there before, so it is possible you will slip and fall based on where your feet were, how your weight was supported, etc.  But your should also get a bonus for having the tree there for support, even if I do not simply accept that you would not have any risk of slipping before you moved.
 
 
And therein lies the conundrum. 
 
We cannot fully remove judgment - RPG rules cannot possibly envision every possible circumstance, which is why they need GMs (and professional sports need referees/umpires, and the legal system needs judges). The question is one of striking a balance.  At an extreme "GM to determine" end, we could remove to hit and damage rolls.  The GM will rule on whether, in the circumstances, you were accurate enough to hit, and whether your hit was powerful enough to achieve any number of effects, from even noticed to deceased target.  As we don't want to play "I hit you! Fall down!!!"  "No, you missed me.", we set objective parameters to determine whether an attack hits or misses.  But we also allow for modifiers adjudicated, or even determined by, the GM to address the many possibilities the rules cannot perfectly predict.
 
In Monopoly, I don't get to attempt to outrace the "Go To Jail" card because I am using the "car" token and logically the car should have a chance to speed away and escape the police.  In a computer game, my flying snake might slip and fall prone on the ice simply because no one thought to program in an exception (that is, include a rule) that flying creatures and creatures with no legs cannot slip and fall prone on the ice.  Or even to allow creatueres that have no legs and/or can fly to be part of the game!

There it is.
 
Every time this comes around, it goes back to making it easier on coverting D and D players.  If that's the case, it is not too difficult to map the odds of various 3d6 results and paste them to rough D20 equivalents.  That would make it even easier for them, should they be inclined to switch games.
 
 
The reality that I see when I manage to trek to some place with gaming tables is that there arent D and D players looking for alternative games.  The null od them dont even seem really excited about roleplaying games in general, and are playing D and D because "it is D and D," and that's vogue right now, at least for certain sets of humanity.
 
The bulk of people I see switching games are switching from Pathfider _to_ D and D, and that seems to have more to do with wanting to play "the original."  Even the very few people I see leave D and D that dont leave gaming all together tend to be drawn to tactical battle games with lots of miniatures and terrain (looking at you, Warhammer), and they get done with that once they figure out how much money and work goes into a gloriously-detailed and colorful army and a map.
 
We have thread after thread of doing this-
 
And again, I don't care.  I heartily endorse doing whatever you want to make your game more enjoyable for you and your players: always have; always will.  It is a game, and you are supposed to enjoy it.
 
I just find the excuse of "this is what I want to do because I like it" to be far more palatable than "we need to work on wooing in hordes of people who don't seem to exist."  Moreover, I say that as a person who did not like D and D and ended up playing Champions!  In my own observation, I am the only guy I know who played D and D, did not like it, and continued to stay in the RPG hobby seriously.  I know a lot of people who played D and D,did not like it, but can still be talked into a game every year or two, so long as it is D and D, because they already kind of know it, and because that is what their friends are playing.  They don't like enough to want to learn a different game.  I humbly suggest that twenty-one pounds of HERO System rulebooks is not going to be overcome as easily as pointing out that the system can be changed to allow rolling high. 
 
I know way more disenfranchised players who got into war gaming after leaving D and D-- Starfleet Battles, War Hammer,and that more recent Star Wars one with the cool looking models.
 
There is some potential there: like many legacy games, HERO still shows its wargame roots quite clearly, but the rest of it is just unwanted filler for the average wargamer.
 
The majority of "gamers" I have seen leaving D and D got heavily into Magic and other card games.  They did not enjoy RP the way they thought they would,  but they liked pretending to do battle with their friends.  Most CCG games are simple and relatively quick, particularly compared to a campaign in any RPG.  Again, the HSR books are not going to overcome attraction to quick and simple.
 
But if we acknowledge that there is such a thing- a hidden horde of shadow gamers, trapped in or running from D and D, waiting and looking for something they will  enjoy a whole lot more, I do not find it credible that taking extra measures to ensure the experience is as much like the one they did not enjoy is going to lure them to a Champions table.
 
I would go so far as to suggest that asking them directly what sort of game, group, characters, lore, and adventures would most promote their engagement would go far, far further to attract their attention than any change to any mechanic.
 
But this is just one person's opinion, of course.  If it helps, it is supported by the number of years this conversation has been floated, the number of people who have made the roll-high change, and the number of D and D players who still aren't coming.
 
  

Could be as easy as Variable Special Effect, Focus of Opportunity.

In could argue the "behind the tree" either way - the ice suddenly appeared beneath your feet, and is a lot more slippery than the dirt there before, so it is possible you will slip and fall based on where your feet were, how your weight was supported, etc.  But your should also get a bonus for having the tree there for support, even if I do not simply accept that you would not have any risk of slipping before you moved.
 
 
And therein lies the conundrum. 
 
We cannot fully remove judgment - RPG rules cannot possibly envision every possible circumstance, which is why they need GMs (and professional sports need referees/umpires, and the legal system needs judges). The question is one of striking a balance.  At an extreme "GM to determine" end, we could remove to hit and damage rolls.  The GM will rule on whether, in the circumstances, you were accurate enough to hit, and whether your hit was powerful enough to achieve any number of effects, from even noticed to deceased target.  As we don't want to play "I hit you! Fall down!!!"  "No, you missed me.", we set objective parameters to determine whether an attack hits or misses.  But we also allow for modifiers adjudicated, or even determined by, the GM to address the many possibilities the rules cannot perfectly predict.
 
In Monopoly, I don't get to attempt to outrace the "Go To Jail" card because I am using the "car" token and logically the car should have a chance to speed away and escape the police.  In a computer game, my flying snake might slip and fall prone on the ice simply because no one thought to program in an exception (that is, include a rule) that flying creatures and creatures with no legs cannot slip and fall prone on the ice.  Or even to allow creatueres that have no legs and/or can fly to be part of the game!

For me it boils down to two dimensions. One, motivation from arrogance, hatred and fear, versus humility, compassion and hope. Two, priority in all things is always to the self rather than to others.

For me, I have no reason to change it.  If, however, "rolling high is always best" is the way to attract new players, then a roll of 15 on the Hit Location chart should be better than a roll of 8.
 
I think that someone who just flat out doesn't want to change from d20 to Hero is not going to be persuaded by a "roll high" mechanic. I empathize with this to some extent - my free time is precious enough that spending a significant chunk to learn a new game system is a tough sell when I can play game systems I am already familiar with.

How do we deal with the hit location chart?  😵
 
Sure, we can swap the head and the feet, but those vitals are still in the middle!!

Perhaps:
 
"Yes, I can't grasp the concept that bigger is not always better"
 
"No, if people can figure out high is better in bowling and low is better in golf, they canl manage this too"

I will state only that it was hand-written...
 
 
Now we are back to what I recall, and it has not changed since, IIRC. However, until it was added to CE, there was no practical way to have a character envelop a target's head in a bubble of water, or an invisible force sphere, etc. to inflict "suffocation" on a target.
 
 
Show me the slippery ice slide build and we can talk.  Or don't, if you prefer  
 
I will confess that am the one who pushed for non-martial combat maneuvers like Trip in 6e, though, to provide "normal people can do this" maneuvers.

How do we deal with the hit location chart?  😵
 
Sure, we can swap the head and the feet, but those vitals are still in the middle!!