Zephrosyne

Actually, the part I was referring to goes a step further than that. If you read APG (pg. 161, 2nd column) under the heading Decoupling Movement And Speed, it refers to characters moving every segment. It makes changes to the cost of Movement Powers and involves more bookkeeping since movement is every segment in addition to keeping up with what goes on in everyone's phases. While it does address the issue that I have with the Speed table, it is a good bit of extra work that I'm not sure is worth the effort but I might be curious enough to try it.

Yeah, but I think players like that are going to play like that regardless of the game. I think the Hero System just gives you more options so tactical ineptitude and a one dimensional combat style just show up even more so than it does in a game with fewer options. I have had plenty players whose mindset was just attack, attack, hit, hit, attack. I am by no means tactically gifted but I just try to show them how they could fight a little smarter. You would be amazed at how fast people can learn when that character they invested so much time in gets his face planted in the ground because of stupidity. Still, it is not as much an issue for my groups because I tend to have campaigns that are lot more character driven and character interactive than combative. We also have a tendency to be a lot more laid back at the gaming table. Therefore, I am not invested enough in combat that I need it to be all that stimulating. My biggest issue with the Speed table is that it is connected to movement. In spite of how I am not a combat junkie, the results of that coupling just irk me. Of course Steve has provided fine tools for completely separating the two (APG pg. 161) but I am not sure it is worth the work. I may give it a try if and when I run Hero System next.

Well, the last campaign I ran, I did find Hero System combat to be a bit slow. However, it wasn't boring. It was slow in terms of how long it takes to complete a fight scene but I didn't let it get too bogged down by one person's indecision. I did little things to expedite matters. While the amount of time it take to finish a fight scene is longer than nearly all of the other games that I have gmed, it is no slower than Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 or Pathfinder and it seems to move at a faster pace. In fact, I think D&D at high levels is not only slower but a bit harder to keep track of because of so many accumulating modifiers that can be too easy to forget by mistake. While Hero System 6th Edition books are large with a lot of rules, the game doesn't have as many parts to it as D&D 3.5. As far as characters, once you know the Powers, Modifiers, Skills, and Talents, you are set. There are a finite number of different components to a character; it's just that those components can be combined in an infinite number of ways. D&D on the other hand has so many feats, spells, class features and pieces of equipment--all with their own, sometimes very detailed, rules-- that you would be hard pressed to know them all. I found myself looking up stuff in D&D far more than I did Hero System even though I ran D&D more. It gets even more so if you add splat books. With Hero System, new books do add more content and options but rarely are there completely new things to learn. Note, I am in no way denigrating D&D, which I think is a fine system, especially Pathfinder, I am just giving my opinion based on my experience. What I like the most about Hero System combat is that it is cinematic by default but you can tweak it to add a bit more realism. It is also by default rather forgiving in that it is far easier under normal circumstances to knock a player out than to kill him. I also think that while the system it cinematic, it's implementation is somewhat realistic because of using 3d6. Dice results are more predictable and what is on your character sheet seems to matter more. Dice don't seem to decide the outcome as much as they do in a game like D&D. I find it easier to gauge the outcome of a scenario in Hero System than I do in D&D. I just like the balance of the cinematic vs realism that Hero System offers compared to most games. I also like the different combat maneuvers and options in Hero System combat more than I do pretty much any other system that I have played. I think it is very well designed. You certainly have a lot of choices and it is a bit more of a thinking man's game from a tactical sense. That being said, I do have a bit of a love/hate relationship with the Speed table. Lastly, I love all of the details that Steve added to the 6th Edition system. While the books are lengthy, the length is really deceptive. I like having all of those options, rules, and explanations readily available when I need them. It is by far the best version of Hero System.

Good lord, it's one thing to say that Hero System couldn't be used to create this creature, but it's a whole other thing to say to it Steve Long himself. Da blasphemy! Da disrespect!

Then I would ask "what the hell are you doing with Gin Ichimaru's zanpaktuto?"

Have you considered using the Probability Alteration power in Advanced Player's Guide 2? It can directly alter dice rolls as an action that takes no time.

I'm curious about this as well.

If you have the Advanced Player's Guide, what you are looking for might be on page 122. It describes "Puppeteering," and defines it as taking "control of a target's body and making him do things he doesn't want to do." Of course, since that is a limited use of Telekinesis, a Limitation is probably called for.

I never got to play much of it and Rolemaster is a fine game, but man, they love their charts. I remember briefly gming it. Looking up and down charts for several minutes (we were new) just to tell the player "dude, you ain't gone make it; yo face done got burnt off."

I think GURPS is about the most realistic game that I have ever played. In both character creation and game play it seems to be about as realistic as you can get while remaining playable. As a gm, I have a tendency to have realistic and cinematic aspects in my games. I like Hero System because it does default a bit on the cinematic side while allowing you to dial up the realism a bit if you need to. I like that in Hero I don't have to worry as much about pulling punches because it is much easier to incapacitate players than it is to kill them outright. Of course, this can vary depending on the genre and power level of the game. I also prepare encounters to where I have a rough idea of how they are going to play out. Granted players can be unpredictable but I still have a general idea of how things are going to go. The main reason I like 3d6 more than 1d20 is that the dice--and therefore luck--are a lot less of a factor, which to me is more realistic. While I am ok with combat being a bit on the cinematic side, most of my games are fairly realistic when it comes to the actual game world in that actions have real consequences. If superheroes flatten a city during a battle, it is not going to be repaired in 30 days just before the next issue and the general public is not going to be happy with superheroes who just carelessly toss energy blast about and trash real estate just because destruction looks cool like it does in comics. I'm ok with reading four color comics but I absolutely refuse to gm them. I'm not going to tell a player, "No, your character can't kill this guy because this is a Silver Age game," to me that is stupid. I will tell the player the potential consequences that his character may be aware of and then let the cards fall where they may. Like I said, actions have consequences and that is the case for me as a gm regardless of the game or genre. I do think the cinematic versus realism thing is heavily influenced by the game engine that you use. It seems the more rules lite and heavily narrative based games to have a tendency to be a bit cinematic. I think the lack of mechanics almost force a more cinematic approach, at least as far as combat is concerned as well as things like skill use. You almost have to hand wave a lot more in those instances. I've gmed a lot of them, sometimes I just go with the flow, sometimes I add house rules to include things that I feel are necessary. I really just depends on the game, specifically my willingness to suffer the absence of certain elements and if the game is worth going through the trouble to add what I want included. In the worst cases (e.g. Fate Core) I just don't play the game.

Unless the two are fighting on opposite sides of the courtroom, Wonder Woman should win without much trouble. This fight is gonna be one way traffic.

Isn't the OAF a bit generous as a Limitation when he can just summon the hammer, or am I missing something? Granted, it takes a Turn but still that's quite a cost break. The Limitation has been largely negated for just a single point. Then again, I guess needing to know where the hammer is somewhat makes up for it. Still, it seems generous.

Actually, I thought that husband/wife duo Thunder and Lightning--I think that was their names--was more interesting. Of course, I also think they should have kept Bora alive and on Eurostar so what do I know, lol.

I have to be honest, the last time that I ran Hero System, I didn't find combat to be any slower than when I ran Dungeons and Dragons 3.5. In the D&D campaign, the characters were only 8th level when it ended. I think at higher levels, D&D would take even longer. It has a lot more moving parts than Hero System does. Admittedly, in my opinion combat is a bit slow in both systems. I just don't want to reduce the things that make Hero System what it is; otherwise, why am I not playing a different game. Both D&D and Hero System have a lot for the gm to keep up with. What I do is engage the players even when it isn't even their turn. For example, I will have players roll for my NPCs. I don't do it in situations where I don't want to give anything away (like a surprise), but it works great. I was really surprised at how engaging it was when the players where rolling against another player. I would also have players roll for a friendly NPC that was helping the party. This kept everyone involved (and often cursing, lol) even when it wasn't their turn. The only thing I did out of all of the things suggested in this thread was used a flat Stun Multiplier to save that one extra die roll.

As a player I accept the fact that sometimes I am out matched and I lose, especially if I do something stupid on top of that. Honest, strong adversity where the gm is creating a solid story is a good thing. Now if the gm is some insecure idiot who just gets off on pummeling players, it's a different story. Of course, I wouldn't sit at that table long anyway--only a fool would. I expect players to be the same when I gm. If they can't handle that, they should be sitting at a different table. Being captured and losing happens. Get over it. More importantly, learn from it!

Already voted.

Interesting discussion.

Not to mention, according to 6E1 pg. 50, you can set the Normal Characteristic Maxima to a different number (lower or higher) depending on what is suitable for the power level of the campaign in question. I've never experienced a problem with over purchasing Characteristics but in fairness, I have never used Hero System for heroic level campaigns so that may be part of the reason why. That being said, I do use the Normal Characteristic Maxima for Speed no matter what the campaign is. I do think it is the responsibility to the gm to set campaign parameters (in writing) in the beginning of the campaign and see to it that they are adhered to. This usually stops a lot of foolishness before it even begins.

No, the Barrier stays. Technically, once you activate the Barrier, you are not really using the power anymore. The construction in place is the effect of that power in the same way that the damage for a Blast remains behind after you have blasted someone.

Though I have never ran a campaign using the Champions Universe, I really like reading about it as well as other Hero System settings (e.g. Turakian Age). I've got a lot of the supplements that have come out for the system over the years, including some old 1st edition stuff.

Elemental Control was basically a point giveaway. Frankly, I'm not a fan of Unified Power either. I pretty much don't use it.

God, I can't even remember the last time I used a pregenerated setting. I will use a default setting for ideas but that's about it.

Yeah, I like the magic system too. I seems very logical for lack of a better word. I also like the power system in 4th edition. Mixing the two is just problematic in my opinion. The thing I probably like the most about GURPS, probably over any effects based system, is that the cost of a trait is not entirely based on the trait's combat value. I mean scientific skills cost more than easy combat skills because they are harder to learn and can be more useful. You also pay a meaningful price for things like Status and Wealth because the game appreciates how valuable these things can be. Other games just basically say "pay 2 points and your rich" or something like that. I just like Hero a tad more because Hero doesn't seem to have as many moving parts. As someone said earlier, Hero is internally consistent. Once you know it, you know it and few exceptions to the rules are necessary. I also like the scaling in Hero a bit better and combat wise, Hero is a bit more forgiving. Both are incredibly fine games that allow you to make any character you can imagine as long as you have the point budget and with as much detail as you could ever want. We are lucky as gamers to have both resources.

Very nice! It would be even nicer if there was a completed book in my grubby little hands.

My character Ilario would say, "Hey cue ball, you're gross; go back to the other team. I don't want you playing on mine!"