smoelf

I just enforce the Normal Characteristic Maxima rules, making Speed above 4 cost double. No one who understands what they're doing will come to the table with a Speed of 2, and on a Standard Heroic point budget, paying 20 points to go from 4 to 5 is too expensive. Thus, you naturally get characters at 3 and 4 Speed. That works fine for me, because my take on the interpretations of the numbers is that Speed 3 is typical for people with combat experience/training, and Speed 4 represents those people who are either highly trained/experienced, or just naturally very fast. My interpretation of Speed values is something like this:
 
1: Below normal; this character is either non-human or has a medical problem
2: Normal but untrained human; someone who isn't used to combat and tends to hesitate or freeze up
3: Trained and competent but unexceptional soldier/warrior/police/etc.
4: Beyond basic competence; a special forces soldier, or someone else who stands out among competent professionals
5: Faster than "normal people" achieve but not superhuman; Jackie Chan in his prime
6: Almost unbelievably fast; the characters that Jackie Chan played on screen
7+: Literally superhuman; NO unmodified human being is this fast.

Thanks, @Killer Shrike, for the encouragement. I’m used to spending so much time on the forums with people who have mastered the rules that I forget that I don’t have to be one of them. I’ve got the ball rolling with some people, and I’m in the process of narrowing down what sort of game they’d like to play. Then I’ll be off and running, for better or worse. I can’t see how we won’t have fun in the end. Thanks for reminding me to just have fun. 

Nonsense. I've always found that the best way to do most things is to do a little research to get broad strokes and then just throw yourself into it, fail, adapt, then try again. Repeat as necessary. We're talking about playing a game, not launching yourself in a rocket over a ravine. The Risk / Reward ratio is in your favor here; just go for it.
 
 
The genre you are most comfortable with generally, and that you are excited to run a game in.
 
 
Yes, definitely do pre-gens. And don't try to be clever or cute with the character builds. Make a list of the most archetypal character types for the setting you intend to run and knock out one of each kind right down the line, no fancy bull$#!%. Make sure each of them has something to offer, something to differentiate them, but are otherwise bread & butter, basic builds.
 
 
Don't teach. Just start a low-risk combat on Phase 12 and call down the DEX order. 
 
 
I highly recommend "in medias res" as an intro. Get people into it right away. 
 
 
Mastery is overrated. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough. The best way to start is simply to start. Keep it simple, and go. Imagine the events of the play session to be a movie. If the movie is boring, you're doing it wrong. Just wing it. Learn as you go. Don't be afraid to get it wrong. If you run into something you don't know, either take a beat to look it up (or have someone else at the table look it up while you keep the plates spinning) or just make a ruling "for now" and keep the tempo going.
 
 
Nothing. That's already a lot of information to slap on the average person. Pick or make a character sheet template that has the info you want on it, and run with just that. 
 
 
You're getting lost in details. 
 
Have players explain what they are trying to do, interpret that into rules or rulings for them on the fly, and apply whatever rules you know off the top of your head or can quickly look up. Anything else, just wing it. Look up anything you were unsure of before the next session and if you got it wrong, admit that to the players next time and present how it should have worked and how that sort of thing will be resolved thereafter. GMing 101. 
 
 
If you intend to use 6e-based rules, then don't muddy the waters. Go forth as you intend to continue.
 
 
The main problem is your own lack of confidence. Worry less about mechanics and more about fun. Be confident in your ability to entertain your players for a handful of hours. The game you choose to do that with is just a tool, but its your own ability to frame an engaging adventure and keep things moving along that will be the difference between a good or bad experience for the group...not your grasp of rules. 
 
Just tell your players up front that you are learning the game too and wont always get it right, and promise to do your best. That's all they can reasonably ask of you.

My personal opinion only.
 
To be nobility of some sort, you would need to purchase Member of the Nobility at whatever level is appropriate for your title and/or family connections.
 
To be a member of nobility who has access to wealth, you would also need to purchase the wealth perk. Many times in the past, being a member of the nobility and "being wealthy" did not necessarily go together. They might have been fantastically wealthy compared to a peasant but other than an ancestral home, some weapons and armor handed down through the ages or won on the battlefield, and some land which they couldn't sell, many of them weren't wealthy in terms of being able to throw money around. You can have quite poor noblemen who have trouble putting food on the table for their household (much less purchasing armor for their sons who are coming of age) or you could have quite wealthy noblemen. And many times both wealthy and poor nobility existed within the same kingdom.
 
So I agree with you up to this point.
 
As for a castle, if the character is going to both own it and the castle is going to function as a base, the player(s) needs to purchase it as a base (then use the base's points to purchase the various people and lands which make a castle a functional living place).
 
Now if some elderly relative is still alive, still actively owns the castle, and remains the person with the highest title within the family line, the castle and the relative would function as plot hooks to get the PC's involved in various adventures rather than a PC's base.
 
But once the PC becomes the guy in charge and the castle is his, it's his responsibility to come up with the points to pay for it. And the PC being responsible to pay character points includes knocking off his elderly relative or allowing someone else to kill the elderly relative so the PC can inherit the place. (I would attempt to make this clear to the PC's during character-building. Inheriting a title and lands is both an advantage and to some extent a drawback because the PC could very well be on the hook for laying out more character points in the future than he might want to be putting into having a title and all the perks that go with it.)
 
====
 
Once a PC commits to being a viscount and having lands and a castle, I would think it would be much cheaper to buy the castle/land as a base then use the base's points (aka "whatever character points the player wants to commit to it" times five) to buy servants, fealty-sworn knights and various men-at-arms as followers than it would be to for the PC to buy all of those followers directly with his own character points.
 
A GM note on castle servants:
 
Servants in a castle were many times considered to be part of the household which gave those servants many rights and privileges which someone who worked only for wages didn't have.
 
1) People who were of the household would "eat from the lord's table". Not literally but the lord made sure they were fed, even during the lean times or in famine.
2) They had the right to take shelter in the castle during times of distress even if their actual living quarters weren't inside the castle.
3) The lord might take special note of the sons or daughters and arrange marriages, apprenticeships, becoming a squire (rarely), etc. which might give the kid an advantage in life which she might not otherwise have.
4) Visitors would know that the lord's household was under his protection and not take liberties as they might with mere hirelings.
5) Members of the household who became disabled or elderly would be assigned lighter duties rather than be fired. Those who became too elderly to be of any use at all were still allowed to eat from the lord's table, which was a real benefit in an era with no governmental social services.
6) In a fantasy setting, a lord might arrange for a priest to heal people of the household who became sick or injured.
 
That's not an exhaustive list but you get the idea. (That's a recounting of an ideal situation and the reality would vary according to the personality of the lord. But some lord who stayed too far from that would gain a negative reputation among both nobility and commoners.)
 
Anyway, the point is that each servant will know whether the lord considers him or her (and their family) to be part of the household or whether they're just working for wages. Someone who is part of the household will show a certain amount of loyalty to the lord because the lord has shown loyalty to her. Someone who is working for wages in an occupation which would normally be filled by someone who is part of the lord's household will be wondering what's going on in the lord's head...they'll be wondering why the lord has no loyalty to them.
 
Now that might not be the lord's mindset at all, he might just be a clueless ( no KS: Responsibilities of Being a Member of the Nobility, so to speak). But those people who would rightly consider themselves to be nothing more than (disgruntled) hirelings would be more open to bribery, being spies for some other noble, to steal items from the castle, embezzle, etc. than someone who knows she's part of the household.
 
So if the PC tries to cheap out (ironically, "cheaping out" by using his wealth perk to pay wages) and not purchase the people who work inside the castle as being followers as well (or doesn't at least explicitly clarify the status of each of the people who work in the castle to them), feel free to use that against him.
 

Another thing to keep in mind -- if your game is all about combat, that's what players will spend their points on.  If you include other things in the game, players will feel like they're getting the most bang for their buck by diversifying.
 
 
For instance, let's take Aragorn from LOTR (movies, since I haven't read the books in about 30 years).  He starts off and he's a combat character, and he has a handful of wilderness survival skills as well.  Then when he's off doing some ranger stuff, the hobbits' players all blow their Int rolls.  They start a fire and are cooking food, until Frodo's player comes back from the bathroom.  When he finds out what they're doing, he says that he wouldn't let them do that, but the GM is all "no, you were asleep, you wake up and they're cooking bacon".  Then the Nazgul attack.  Aragorn comes in to save the day, driving off the ring wraiths, but Frodo gets dropped to negative Body in the process.  The GM starts rethinking how many combat levels he let Aragorn buy.  The Nazgul were supposed to be really tough opponents, and he just solo'd them.  Maybe Aragorn needs some other stuff to spend points on.
 
So Aragorn carries Frodo and they try to head for Rivendell, with Frodo's player bitching and moaning the whole time that it's not fair that he got stabbed when it was these other guys' fault.  Aragorn asks if he happens to know any sort of ranger healing techniques, maybe with his wilderness skills he knows of a healing plant or something.  The GM asks if he has either Paramedics or KS: Herbalism.  Aragorn says no.  The GM lets him make a roll anyway, but tells him that his next XP points have to go into that skill.  Aragon is like "I got this", then he rolls a 17 and totally fails to help Frodo.  Frodo's player starts complaining again, the GM sighs, and then he introduces Aragorn's elf girlfriend.  "After you buy Paramedic, you'll need to buy Contact: Elf Girlfriend" the GM says.  She's cool and has neat powers, so Aragon says okay.
 
As the story progresses, the GM drops the hint that maybe he's got some royal lineage or something.  Wouldn't it be cool to be a king?  That's something to spend points on later.  Oh and here's a magic sword that belongs to the king.  It's broken right now, so you will have to have it reforged before you can use it.  Be sure to save your points for that.  Aragorn thinks that sounds cool, and he's on board with it.  The GM decides that to be king of Gondor, Aragorn is going to have to buy a lot of stuff.  He can't just spend 10 points for Perk: Head of State.  He will have to buy that, but he'll need other stuff too.  Along the way, he's going to have to buy Contact: Elrond.  He's also going to have to buy up his Tracking roll when he goes and chases after those orcs who kidnap the hobbits.  He will encounter Eomer and Theoden, and he'll have to buy KS: Rohan (with the excuse "yeah, I've always known this stuff"), as well as Persuasion and High Society.  Of course his Presence will have to go up as well.  Then he'll have to lead an army at Helm's Deep, and so he has to buy Tactics.
 
The whole time, Aragorn keeps talking about how he wants to increase his damage, and get some more combat skill levels.  He didn't like having to run from that Balrog, and when he almost lost to that one badass orc that killed Boromir he got pissed off.  But the GM always puts him in a position where there are new skills and abilities that he needs as the game goes on.  Aragorn complains because the hobbits have started spending points on combat abilities, and he's not super head and shoulders above them anymore.  "Hey, you're working on being a king, remember?" the GM says.  Aragorn reluctantly accepts that he needs to spend points on other things.  But then Legolas will do something awesome and Aragorn gets mad again.  The GM finally says that Aragorn gets to command a ghost army for a while, and then he's happy.
 
Ultimately, he's spending 10 points on Head of State, then he's got to spend 15 on Wealth (all the riches of Gondor), several D6 of Reputation, he's got to buy up his Ego to use the Palantir, he has to pick up a bunch of skills, and then he's got the magic sword (and the GM doesn't really mention that it only has Affects Desolid and a couple D6 of Rep, without doing much more damage than a normal sword).  Being king ends up costing Aragorn at least 70-80 points, once all is said and done, but combat-wise he's not really any more effective than he was when he started.

Hey, I was wondering if I can get some tips and tricks on how to be a GM for heroes. They aren't any games being run where I am, and I've never actually played the game before, but since there's isn't any games around me I wanted to run a game myself. I have some hero's books and I have a general idea on how to make characters, still figuring some things out. 
 
My Idea for a campaign would be like My Hero Academia the anime, but I'm not sure how to go about it.

I would use damage over time as a framework as well.  In my opinion it should be called "effect over time" and allow anything with a die roll effect to be used (healing, aid, damage, etc).  However, I wouldn't use simplified effect, just use a smaller effect with the two effects at once (its much more efficient). 

I would use Damage Over Time as a basis in addition to the potion you already have as a template. I would not let the value go below 0, as healing is not a detriment even when it takes longer. So something like:
 
2d6 Simplified Healing, Delayed Effect (may have available a number of potions equal to character’s INT; +½), Heal Over Time (6 increments occurring every 6 hours, +0) 30 Active Points, (apply limitations here)
 
You would always get 12 Body back, over something between 6 and 36 hours. You could apply another limitation that says the healing are always the minimum on the dice if you want it to take the longer value. You can also add limitations that the character not exert or be in bed, have appropriate food and drink, etc.
 
- E

There is also an actual play podcast from Drink Spin Run. It might be helpful. It also has a link to a video in the comment section there.

A classic for an adventuring group is working as agents of an organisation.
Knightly order; temple (3 in one: clerics, monk, and paladins), thieves' guild, mages' guild, ordinary craft guild (why not?) These also have built in quest givers. Quest givers is easier for new players who will, probably, have trouble working out what they want to do, or even knowing what they can do.
 
There's escaped prisoners. Naked and on the run is always good for a laugh.
 
The game I'm about to kick off has the PCs as survivors of a destroyed army.
 
As for character design. Keep it simple. Limit the player choices. Try and have a bunch of templates ready to use. One thing I found when I first started with HERO, and everyone else I know who plays HERO had the same initial feeling, is that the freedom of choice is so great that one doesn't know where to start. Templates give players a springboard for their own ideas.
 
But also inspire player choices. Give them a little world background. Cloud castles and dragon dogfights. Or an ancient city that has long been the centre of a world wide trade network whose basements and catacombs stretch down into the depths of the earth. Something to get the creative juices flowing.
 
Or, if you  haven't gotten as far as that, throw out a bunch of classic game types (thieves in the big city, knights on errantry, junior wizards at wizard school.)
 
Keep throwing out ideas and getting feedback until you have something that has the whole group excited. Obviously choosing a game style/setting also has the effect of limiting character choice, until it doesn't. Wizard school will have a lot of people playing wizards. Until someone wants to play a unionising house elf, or a groundskeeper who is a high school drop out. You get where I'm going.
 
For magic - I'm going to suggest that whatever you choose for a magic system, have the list of available magic spells already drawn up. If the choice of character archetype is daunting, the choice of what magic to choose is just overawing. (Actually this is an advantage of magic school - the players have a very limited set of spells to choose from at the start and you decide what new spells they get and when. Should let you  spread out the work over time.)
 
I like the idea of a magic END reserve with limited REC. For a high magic game it's a good way to put a limit on mages and thus allow non-mages to compete.
 
High fantasy magic is hard to do in HERO if you use the published grimoires. The spells are just too expensive. For a low fantasy feel they work fine.
 
General advice.
Everyone tells me that tracking END is hard. I don't see why. People have no trouble tracking hit points in DnD. This aint much different. To speed up play I suggest you get the players to do all the END tracking AFTER their turn.
 
eg:
GM: Character X is up.
Player X: I kick in the door with 15 STR, throw a fireball, and make a PRE attack. That's, erm, lemme see how much END...
GM: Worry about that later. Roll your STR damage to get the door open then make an attack roll. <things are resolved>
GM: Cool! Do your END now. Next character is Y.
 
I'd shy away from Multipowers and especially VPPs. The latter because they are literally power designing at the game table. MPS are conceptually  confusing to new players.
 
Fantasy Hero Basic.pdf
I can't help it, I'm going to upload my own fantasy hero homebrew. It's 6th ed. It's geared toward low fantasy. The most relevant parts for you are at the front in the character design section which has a bunch of mix and match templates for simple characters. The magic section could also be worth a read. None of it is yet play tested. I suspect that any spell that uses an adjustment power is too powerful as written and will probably need to be toned down a couple of Damage Classes. I also include some basic weapons and armour lists you might find useful. Otherwise it's a simplification of the main HERO rules.
 
 
 

Latest elf report on the human army moving through the holy forest:
 
Day 19:
 
Their weapons deafen everyone, friend or foe, but when attacked by an army of silent elves at night taking positions of cover, they take heavy losses before even realizing the attack has begun, and have no capacity to find the more mobile elf warriors. They also falsely believe dogs will warn them of elves. They are apparently marching without significant magical support, or any, and are completely blind in the dark. We have done heavy damage on them, and they are only able to set camp on clear, moonlit nights. Recommend cloud summoning.
 
Day 20:
 
Ate lembas. Settled heated camp argument over which member of the camp has the most ethereal demeanor.
 
Day 21:
 
Enjoyed more lembas while smuggly thinking about what fools the numenoreans were and blaming them for current conditions while conveniently ignoring shenanigans of a fair number of elves in the Silmarillian. Spent a portion of march discussing the very real possibility that giant eagles are a plot device of Eru.
 
Don't feel a day older for the millionth day running.
 
Day 723:
 
Came to the conclusion that Peter Jackson is stretching out this entire business far past it's intended narrative. Cannot discern reality from platform console game at this point. Entire party now has dwarven love interests and racist parents like some strange melange of Death at a Funeral meets All in the Family.
 
Day 729:
 
Can no longer trust my senses. Saw Radagast on sled jumping over a shark. Saruman making token appearances for no apparent reason, and hobbits now appearing solely in choppy video sequences while orcs have entirely converted to CGI.

Something a little different this time.
 
In studying tailoring, cloth, and historical techniques for the Jolrhos Field Guide, I came across silk armor. I knew that the silk that the mongols wore would help protect from arrows, and further would not tear off into wounds and increase chances of infection: you could twist the arrow back out with the silk.
 
But I didn't know that the first functioning bulletproof vest was made of silk. And it works. Silk's resilient stretchy material is actually very effective against projectiles, which is making me add a few concepts to my fantasy hero armor options.
 
Because you can wear one of these things under a suit of armor.
 

 
This article goes into the first bulletproof vest, invented in the late 1800s by a Polish scientist and how it might have changed history.  WWI was inevitable: too many forces in motion, too much animosity, etc.  But it might have been a little later in starting.

How did you come up with your 'handle' (forum name)?
Well to tell the truth, I have no idee, it was created when I wanted to.pla an online game and evry single.name that I chose was taken and so I just constructed.a.random name and this is what I came up with, I must say though that my favourite number is the number 25.

What was the first tabletop RPG you played?
The first and only tabletop RPG I ever played was D&D, me and a couple of friends started playing it about a year ago and it went on for about a year after which the gang broke up because no one wanted to GM and we did not completely understand everything.

What was the first tabletop RPG you GMed?
I have not yet Gmed a tabletop RPG, but that is why I am here, I want to learn more about the hero system to be able to gm my own game with some friends.

What are you currently playing/GMing
Unfortunately not.

Threads like these make me realize how long I've been lurking, and I still haven't played HERO yet But it's nice to get a chance chance to introduce myself properly, so here goes.
 
How did you come up with your 'handle' (forum name)?
Smoelf is an anglicized spelling of the Danish word for a smurf. Yes, I am a short person. Got the nickname sometime in middle school, and have used it as a username ever since for almost anything.
 
What was the first tabletop RPG you played?
Technically a Danish system I can't remember the name of, that I tried in 10. grade, but my first real experience was with D&D 3.5 (later moved on to Pathfinder), which a friend of mine introduced me to in (the Danish equivalent of) high school. We ran a couple of campaigns over the next five or so years, before our GM had to go abroad for an exchange stay.
 
What was the first tabletop RPG you GMed?
I tried running a campaign a while back with Pathfinder, although it ceded after only a few sessions. Mostly because some people stopped responding to Doodles' for arranging a new session, but probably also because I wan't a particularly good GM. That stuff takes practice
 
What are you currently playing/GMing?
Nothing at the moment, due to a combination of our GM being abroad, and myself finishing up a one year-long exchange stay in the US. I do hope to get something up and running when I get back.
 
When did you start to play Hero?
As I mentioned, I haven't played HERO yet. For some reason I can't remember, I was made aware of HERO years back, and got the 6th edition core books, and some other material, but I think it was after our GM left, and I didn't know the system well enough to start GM'ing it, especially after my past experience. I still return to the books occasionally when I get a cool idea for a character that seems impossible to create with the D&D/Pathfinder system, so I'm still hoping for a chance to try it out

Glad to hear it! I'm working hard to get it out into the light of day, and one way or another I'm going to succeed.