Tasha

From what I have seen is that Player's aren't fickle at all. They tend to be very dedicated to their game. To the point where they really won't try new things no matter how their current system annoys them. We can see this time and time again from posts to this board alone. Where people complain about not being able to attract players to a system that isn't a flavor of D&D. I think we are getting to the point where players are more annoyed with D&D and may start to think about different systems. There just has to be a reasonably easy point of entry into that other game system.

Pinnacle does this very well with Savage Worlds. With it's $10 core rulebook and even a free test drive that includes characters and a short adventure. Pinnacle also supports the hell out of it's genre books by including adventures, Player's guides, Printable Figure standups, Soundtracks, even themed Poker Chips and Dice. Not to mention GM screen Inserts, one page adventures and a ton of game supplements. All in more or less bite sized books. They pretty much barf that out and then just go onto the next product.

I don't understand the reason for the question.  Did I mention 4e rules somewhere in this thread?

 

As far as I know, the 30 limit was introduced in the 5e Champions book:

 

This was then formally added to the core rules in 6e:

 

HM

 

5e Champions Characteristics Standards.jpg

6e HERO System Characteristics Standards.jpg

I am pretty sure that those were there to help GM's come up with characteristic averages, not to use as a hard limit in Heroic Level gaming.

A stretched-out release schedule didn't seem to make sense in the 80s and 90s. And there are some here who believe that the player base is as large and robust today as it was back then. Surely WotC can make a 1-campaign-book-per-month (rather than 1-campaign-book-per-quarter-if-they're-lucky) business model work for their flagship product.

The numbers I have seen suggest that the player base is actually quite a bit larger than in the 80's and 90's the problem is that we are divided up into a bajillion systems(Mostly D&D Clones) so the pool of gamers for other systems seems small.

I've never used the Hero System to build another game. It's not really designed for that. It is designed for building your own campaign setting though.

He means that with Hero, you can use it to build a fully realized game using the whole system. You still have the core of Hero for the basis and for play. You build talents, spells, equipment etc with the toolkit. Then players use those built items to make their characters. It's something that is very powerful for Heroic Games, but not really as useful for Superhero games

I use a large hexmat, unless I'm using the rather excellent (IMO) Dramascape maps, printed onto cardstock "tiles" and trimmed** to put together at the game table.  In the case of Dramascape maps or similar, whether the hexes are 1m or 2m in size depends on what scale they specify.

 

On hexmats, I've drawn maps at 1 hex = 2m scale, and at 1 hex = 1m scale, depending on the location.  Strictly indoor fight, you're generally good with 1m hexes.  Outdoors or indoor / outdoor combos tend to be 2m hexes for me. 

 

When using 2m hexes, I just tell people to divide their 6E movement (or AOE, etc.) by 2, rounding up.  Sometimes they forget, but  it's not worth making a stink about most of the time.

 

**  For cardstock maps I intend to use many times, I've put clear packing tape on the four corners of the backside of each tile, and then use a piece of scotch tape (with one end folded over for a non-sticky something to grab onto) across the tile intersections to hold the individual tiles together.  Number (or letter) the tiles on the backsides, and you can lay them out face-down in sequence, tape 'em together, then flip the finished map over.  Voila!

 

When you're done, flip it back over, pull the Scotch tape pieces off (you'll be thankful for the folded-over tab) and slap each onto one of the packing tape corners for later re-use.

 

Works great, IMO.

I don't cut all of the white boarders and use gluestick to put map pieces together

My local bookstore has Fantasy Hero 3rd edition, 4th edition, and both FH Companions.  Rules incompatibilities aside, is there anything in those four older books that the 5th edition or 6th editions of FH don't have?  I have both of the newer eds, so if between those two I have everything in the old books, then it's useless, but if there's a few neat spell colleges or whatever not in the new ones then it might be worth it.

 

If you could, I'd appreciate it if you could be specific: I'd rather not buy all four if I don't have to.    Thanks a ton.

No both 5e and 6e Fantasy Hero Books have a greater depth than FH 1st edition and FH for Hero 4th. Both are designed for a D&D ish fantasy.

I just can't figure out why people insist they are 2m hexes.  Call them 1m hexes, and the problems vanish

Both Tradition and that 2m hexes take up less space esp for Champions game where characters can move very far. ie 50pts of Flight would be 50" or ~4' of space on a table to full move. Turns into 2' of space used on a 1"=2m hex. Also all of the maps in every Hero system product ever sold uses 1"=2m scale. On top of that assuming 2m hexes makes adapting D&D maps easier/possible. Just assume that 5' is close enough to 2m and go from there. That opens up a TON of maps that exist both Preprinted and PDF maps. Also, If you do use a gridded map, it's much easier to tell players that they can move X hexes for a full move or X/2 hexes for a half move.

The only pregenned maps that us 1"=1m scale are Early GURPS maps (I don't know if SJG kept that scale in modern products or not).

I have seen Bennies used to prevent characters from dying. So I don't mind using it for some sort of damage soak. I always run Cinematic games, so I don't mind if the PCs shrug off the mega attack once.

With JW2 I find myself even more intrigued by the Criminal Organization that is centered around the Continental Hotels. With the Coins as currency for stuff done by criminals for other criminals.

I like the idea of HAPs but I have not extensively used them. My favorite take on the subject is from Fantasy Flight Game's Force Unleashed wherein there is a limited economy of points. When a player uses one, it becomes a GM use. When the GM uses one, it shifts back over to the player pool.

 

Haven't used that mechanic yet, but I plan to.

That's pretty much how FFG's system works. It begins with a dice roll by the players. Depending on what they roll the point either goes to the GM or the PCs. Every time a point is used by the GM, it becomes a player point and vice versa. I may try to carry that forward into other games.

We actually just had a fundraiser game day Saturday to help a local gamer with some medical bills. (Raised over $10K!) One of the things they did was that you could buy tokens for $1 a piece, that you can use as HAPs/Bennies/whatever else the GM allows. One Pathfinder GM let players use them to buy additional Talents/magic items for their characters. I had one player in my game burn through 10-15 in a 4-hour slot, partly to dodge bad rolls but mostly to make minor plot changes or just have something funny happen. Obviously that's a lot more than I would normally allow, but we all had a lot of fun and it was for a good cause. Even GMs could buy/use them, which was nice - let's be honest, most GMs cheat now and then, but rarely do we raise money by doing so!

PEG Sells Poker Chips that are themed with their various game worlds. They make a great way to give out stuff  like HAPs.

I was reviewing the rules for Heroic Action Points (CC 130; FHC 153) this afternoon. Although CC/FHC are my primary rules references, I've never actually used these rules before. In campaigns I've run in the past I've simply ignored them.

 

I'm writing today to poll the Hero Games community regarding their experiences with Heroic Action Points.

How do you feel about Heroic Action Points?

Have you ever played in campaigns using them?

Have you ever run campaigns using them?

What was their impact on those campaigns?

I Love the idea behind HAP and have used a similar thing in Savage Worlds. Where it works well. Also FFG's StarWars has something like it. What I dislike about the Hero Implementation is that it's complicated. THe players need a cheat sheet to know how many HAPs can be used to what effect. Also, I find that it's easy for the GM to forget to award any HAPs. I prefer a simpler system like SW's Bennies. Where the players get 3 or more Bennies at the start of a session which can be turned in for a number of things. You can even get them back during play for doing something really epic.

I wouldn't use a one-inch hex grid.  I'd use a half-inch triangular dot grid, with a half-inch being 1m.  But if I were going to use a one-inch hex grid, I'd make all of the players buy everything in 2m increments.

You can get Battlemats, Gaming Paper and a bunch of other gaming accessories that have either a 1" Hex or a 1" Square. So it's very much a path of least resistence to use 1" hexes. Also the rules are designed for Hexes which comes up for Shield coverage and attacks from the back (We do still have facing). Also there's a ton of both Metal, Plastic and Cardboard (printed or printable) figures that assume 1" grids.

The reason to sometimes use a 1"=1m scale is to take advantage of GURPS maps, which are usually in the 1"-1m scale (check the accessory to be sure).

Depends on the edition, if your playing Heroic or Superheroic, amongst others.

 

In 6ed, yes. The based damage of the weapon, incresed by maneuver damage and strength bonus. In Heroic campaigns, this damage can't go over twice the base DC of the weapon, but that is out the window in a Superheroic campaign. Earlier editions are different.

In 6e real weapons cannot do more damage than double their base DC. "Real Weapon" is a -1/4 limitation that can be taken on weapons. Including ones in Champions. Check out the section on creating weapons.

I'm not interested in the 6e rationales, I'm interested in 5e and earlier RAW support for your assertion that 'ECs exist to balance out the deep discounts on secondary stats that Melee characters get with Figured Characteristics'. You have stated it was 'their reason for being' as if it is a fact, so I'm simply asking for you to show me where in 5e and earlier RAW this fact is actually stated.  (Without something in RAW to support that assertion, we have only an assertion/opinion ... not a verifiable fact.)

I have been playing for decades at this point. I have played with a variety of players including some of the original players of the game and their friends. This system has consumed the majority of my gaming since at least '85. I have been participating with Hero online since the days of the Hero Discussion Group on AOL.

I don't know where I read that or heard that. I am pretty sure that it came up during the question phase of 6e. When people wanted to know why EC's disappeared along with Figured Characteristics.

So I know that you want to sealion my assertions to death. That's fine, at this point I don't give a fig about what you believe or how you want to run your game. Both Chris and Netzilla gave you other reasons that it was removed from the game. To my knowledge none of Hero's designers have talked about why they designed things in a particular way at least not until Steve asked our opinions about the changes he was bringing to the system. Oh, and Removing Figured Characteristics was non-negotiable. It was going to happen whether we liked it or not. I wish the Archive had those posts so I could refer you to the 1000 pages of rules discussion about 6e and you can see how the design evolved. The SETAC folk (including Netzilla and Chris Goodwin) were a subgroup that helped Steve closer in designing and redesigning stuff that went into 6e.

IMHO Unified Power is a much more elegant solution and in many cases saves as much if not more points than ECs did. It's way more flexible as well. YMMV, I am sick of arguing with you.

I wish I could point you at the Archives where all of the 6e stuff was discussed before Steve wrote it. Steve doesn't talk about design stuff anymore, so don't think he would be able to enlighten you. I guess you could ask why Elemental Controls were replaced in 6e.

XP less games in D20 or other level based games work because the PCs are getting advancement. They just get their XP rewards when the GM thinks they need to advance a level. D&D/D20 is the only system that I have seen that has that different system. None of the point based systems work that way mostly because PCs can buy so many things with their points and Advancement isn't set and linear. You could set up such a system, but it would take a lot of work to come up with an alternate advancement system. IMHO too much work for too little gain. The D&D/D20 system without XP actually reduces GM and PLayer work. People don't have to keep track of XP or figure the XP out for every encounter.

Another reason to use 2m hexes is the size of your maps can be smaller. They can cover more area in a smaller Real World space. 1m Hexes are great for getting extra defination for inside spaces, but outside 2m/hex is better. Also with 2m hexes are VERY close to 5' squares so using maps for D&D and other d20 games becomes MUCH easier.

Because so many people keep missing this point I will make it bold. ECs exist to balance out the deep discounts on secondary stats that Melee characters get with Figured Characteristics. If you aren't using Figured characteristics (which have their own major issues IMHO), then you are giving all non-melee a huge discount on their powers that isn't counterbalanced by melee getting a discount on their abilities. So by keeping them around in 6e you are making it disadvantageous to write up melee characters. I can point out that ECs were so advantageous that many of the melee characters would take them as well, which circumvented their reason for being.

You can see that Philosophy in the costing of a lot of things in 5e and 6e. ie Cha losing the rounding benefit in 5e, Dex being 2pts per pip (instead of the 1:1 other primary stats cost. Growth is more expensive in 6e expensive because it includes stats and bunch of other benefits, Skill levels are more expensive in 6e,

I like unified power because it's easier to use IMHO. If I decide that I want my PC to have all of their powers to be drained by a single adjustment power, I take the limitation. If I don't I leave it off. It works the same as any other limitation now. No getting a pile of free points for. Yes, there are plenty of things with the reminder that the GM can make a different ruling. Removing one of those is a nice thing. It means that it's one less thing I have to negotiate with the GM (or Players if I am GM). ECs are kind of an annoying

Skill enhancers weren't built by Steve. Also, I make a point about that concept being about powers. I can also point out that giving a player an incentive to buy something they wouldn't normally buy is VERY different from giving players a cost discount for taking powers they would already be taking. As a GM I REALLY want my players to have a bunch of KSs, PSs, SS, CK, AKs etc. They are pretty darned expensive to buy more than one. esp since many will never be used by a PC. Skill enhancers are built on the same philosophy as Package Bonuses were. Which was to reward players for taking limits and skills they wouldn't normally take by giving them a discount for taking them. Steve's philosophy is different, so I don't know why he left the Skill enchancers alone ex that perhaps he thought that it was a good mechanic for getting players to take skills they wouldn't take otherwise. YMMV.

Hmm.

 

At the end of the day all it really comes down to is that some folks don't like ECs (and probably never did), and some folks do (like me). They probably don't see any value in incentivising players to build characters that are tightly themed (by whatever definition makes sense to them). Like I mentioned earlier, my solution is to simply re-instate ECs into my own campaigns. It's easy to do. It's just a pain to have to pull the rules from an earlier edition to do so. It's also one more reason why I am inclined to stick with 4e, with a smattering of things cherry-picked from 5e, and just pretend 6e never happened.

I liked Elemental Controls well enough. I abused them as much as any other Hero System Player. They were annoying to use and forced particular powerlevels on powers. I LOVE Unified Power and how I can apply it to any and all powers that I deem to be close enough in special effect that they belong together and would all be effected at the same time if Drained or dispelled. Adding it back into 6e gives away a lot of points to PCs that ECs fit for and penalized melee PCs that don't often if ever have a powerset that can fit into an EC.

Again Elemental Controls were added to make things a bit more fair for non melee characters who couldn't take advantage of the HUGE discounts on Secondary Stats. Until 5th edition they did nothing else mechanically. Also they were a nightmare for GMs because some powers were disallowed "unless the GM says it's ok". Removing EC's makes it easier for both Players and GMs because they don't have to worry about what powers are and are not allowable in an EC. Also, there's less pushback on what is an allowable type. Is Mutant Powers a good enough EC? How about Magical Powers? Alien Species? etc. With Unified power you could allow Mutant Power Unified Powers because you could come up with abilities that drain/dispel etc Mutant powers as a single thing.

Another reason for the change is a change of philosophy for buying powers. Steve took the whole "If something doesn't limit a power it isn't worth points" to heart. The whole system was rebuilt with that philosophy, which IMHO is another reason that Secondary Characteristics were decoupled from the primaries. In 6e you get the stuff you pay for nothing else. Your limitations limit the power's usefulness. Advantages are advanageous

Skill Enhancers exist to give players an incentive to actually buy multiple "Background Skills". Players don't need incentives to buy powers they are generally useful. Background skills tend to be very dependent on circumstance as to whether they are useful. So in Early editions it would be a miracle if a PC had even a single PS and that tended to be on an 11- roll at best. 

In either case pretty much anything you do at home for yourself is covered under fair use.

 

You do not start breaking the law until you begin distributing the material.

 

As for cutting and pasting small portions of the rules, that can be done in limited extent for reviews and discussions. The law is vague about quantity but I imagine a few lines would be fair. However copying whole paragraphs, sections or even potions of pages as some have done is definitely out.

 

www.copyright.gov is a really good place to start if curious about details.

 

As an aside Steven S Long was a lawyer before transcending to full time writer so I am certain the good folks at Hero know when to stop us.

Can't have coherent discussions of the Rules without C&Ping paragraphs. I am certain that what we copy into these discussion are also covered under Fair Use. Just don't copy the whole writeup of a power out of 6e1 and you should be pretty safe.

Elemental Control was just free stuff for a plausibly tight concept, it kind of violated the spirit of the rules.  I know it was in part to offset stat-based characters being easy to build very powerful, but it always just felt like cheating.  Unified power works better, I agree.

EC's were there to balance how OP Figured characteristics were to Str/Con Based and Dex/Spd characters (AKA Bricks, Martial Artists and Speedsters). WIthout EC's in 5e and earlier, Melee characters would become way more point efficient than Energy Projectors/Mentalists. Which is why Steve was able to remove the framework in 6e.

Nearly impossible to enforce. Taken literally you couldn't even transmit the Character sheet to PCs or many other things. Copy/pasting passages out of the rulebook which happens constantly on these boards would be actionable. Also I don't think that copying a chart by hand into a spreadsheet would be an issue. I guess you COULD just download the GM's screen inserts available in Downloads.

I choose to believe that the Copyright notice in the front of the book really means don't pirate this book by any means. Including Scanning, photographing, etc.  You could go ask Steve or Jason, but I am pretty certain they would say that printing out that chart or making a doc that includes that chart is OK as long as you don't sell it. The latter MAY be relaxed if you license the System.

Glad I am so loved. Yes, it can be a special effect, as long as the high defence brick don't start expecting to hurt others with the bouncing bullets.

If it's collateral damage then it's just a Side Effect on the Resistant Defenses. If he's actively reflecting (ie like Hyper Man talked about), then he's got Deflection/Reflection.