Chris Goodwin

Told ya!
 

 
 

If that's me then I'm the one who helped figure out that working across the Internet was probably not going to be workable.  I still need to grab the files; I've had other things going on.  

It's in the Champions III supplement, which I would argue is perfectly acceptable for 3rd edition!

Got off early!  Home at seven tonight!
 
And there was a _huge_ box waiting for me on the porch rail when I got home, too!
 
Our buddy Spence has sent an extensive selection of 4e books, already de-bound, suitable for scanning.  
 
Spence:  I can save you a bit of trouble on one:   
 
The Western HERO that's in the store right now is my own work, and it looks and prints great (and, for the record, is _huge_, but that's a side-effect of the resolution: lots of information to keep track of.  Unfortunately, I had to work in PNG as I have nothing that will make a proper vector file, so.... )  I have the covers for that book.  I sent them with the book, but Jason put only the book on the site.  Give me a shout and I'll be glad to get them to you.
 
So hey-- that's one down already!   
 
Got an e-mail from Jason today, and he's cool with me sticking as many AC scans onto a flash drive as I can and mailing it to him.  For the foreseeable future, that's what I'll be working on.  Then off to the stuff Spence gave me, I suppose.  Somewhere in the middle of all this I'll try to get my 2e scan to Jason to replace the one that's in the store.  The one in the store isn't bad, but who doesn't want the best version of something they can get?   
 
Anyway, I've only got so many minutes before bedtime, so let me get busy.
 
 
 
 
 
 

I just heard that Jim Holloway has passed away.
 
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1650679758547413/

Okay, Adventurers Club (Man, it really _bugs_ me that there is no apostrophe in there) scanning proceeds slowly; it's a time problem.  Completed are  1-5 and 26.  Many, many more to go.  Have found a #27, meaning I will shortly have a complete set.
 
Stumbling block, though, in sending vials through the net as both Jason and I live in the "e-sticks," resulting in spotty connectivity and low data flow.  I've tried sending them through an intermediary (thanks, Chris!), but Jason is talking now about having them scanned locally.  I had offered to put them all on a drive and just send it, but have heard nothing back from that.
 
In other news, our colleague Spence has offered up an already-debound BBB for that particular project.  I've lined up an artist to help me with the cover restoration (that cover seems to mean a lot to the fans, so I don't trust myself to handle it), and work will proceed (very slowly) on that project as time allows.  I just can't make promises on that one, but if you remember Western HERO, remember that this book is a roughly three times as large, and I have less time.  On the plus side, most of the interior art was essentially "comic style" line drawings as opposed to the etchings, stampings, lithographs, and old photos that were in Western HERO, so there should be considerably less problems with that aspect of things.
 
 
And now I'm going to bed-- like I should have done instead of scanning AC #5.    
 
I keep hoping Jason will take me up on the flash drive, just so we know he has high-rez scans from the get-go.  I wish I had time to do the actual clean-up and restoration, but I don't think I'll live that long.  
 
 
 

It's worked for me for forty years.  I can't find any reason to change it. 
 
 
 
I will have to double-check (still at work), but I think there is one on the 5e GM screen, and there were dozens when the Web Ring of Heroes was still a thing...
 
Jfg17:
 
Doc explained it perfectly:
 
It's just like any other 11 or less skill roll. 
 
To simply further:
 
It is possible to see this as 2 skill rolls:
 
The attacker makes an attack roll; the Defender makes a defend roll. 
 
Both rolls have a base value of 11 of less. 
 
Whoever succeeds by the most wins.  If the attacker rolls a 9 and the Defender rolls a 7, then the Defender has succeeded by 5, while the attacker has succeeded by only 2.  The Defender wins, and the attack misses. 
 
Like any other skill roll, there are modifiers.  Start with how good you are at the skill.  Suppose you have a skill with a base of 11 or less, but you've invested a few extra points to demonstrate a deeper study or better understanding that a lot of folks might have.  Your roll might be 14 or less instead of 11 or less. 
 
Another way to look at that is to consider that you have an 11 less and a +3 bonus to you ability with that skill.  In combat, that bonus is your CV. 
 
So in the above example, let's say the atttacker has an OCV of 8 while the Defender has a DCV of 5.
 
The attacker needs to roll his base 11 or less, but he gets his 8 OCV bonus.  He know has to roll a 19 or less to succeed. 
 
The Defender, with his DCV bonus of 5, has to roll a 16 or less to successfully defend. 
 
 
So the attacker rolls a 9, as before, which means he succeeded by 10.  The Defender rolls a 7, as before, and succeeds by 9.  The attacker wins, as he has won by the greatest margin. 
 
And just like any other skill roll, there are other modifiers where appropriate: range, weather, bad footing--whatever might be appropriate. 
 
If you've ever played a game (including HERO, in some cases) where skills are directly opposed like this, you are familiar with the problems, not the least of which is we are now rolling dice twice to resolve one thing.  Another problem is the arguments like "how did he hit me if I successfully defended?  What do you mean, 'succeeded more?'. That makes no sense!" and things like that. 
 
So how do we resolve that?  Make one roll. 
 
They both have a base chance of 11.  We understand that OCV is a positive modifier to that.  We understand that DCV can be considered a negative modifier (from the attacker's point of view) to that same roll.  So we know how to reduce the time wasted rolling dice: make one roll that includes both sets of modifiers. 
 
(11 + OCV) - (Defender's DCV) = target number.  Roll that number or less. 
 
(I don't want to confuse things, but I handle all my opposed roll situations, like Concealment VS Concealment, this exact same way.  It's fast and it's clean). 
Best of all, it eliminates the problem with ties (in terms of how  much you succeeded.  If your wondering, though, ties go to the attacker) and "but I successfully defended!" by not having separate rolls for these two aspects of combat. 
 
There is no _real_ downside, but for some reason, some people are really bothered by the fact that telling a player "you need an eight or less" tells the player something he shouldn't know.  Here's why that's not really true:  the play has no idea what his oppenents skill levels are, how many are allocated, where they are allocated, or what other situational bonuses are in play.  You might need an eight this time, even the next five times, but then you might need a thirteen, followed by a six!  You're not giving away what they claim you are giving away.  Unless, of course, the groups in question use no situational modifiers at all, ever, in which case, yea: your player might figure out his opponent's DCV.  To which I say "so what?"
 
 
I say that, because the "solution" to this "problem" is the roll-high option.  Ultimately, this is touted as hiding all the stuff that you are allegedly giving away with roll low. 
 
The problem is that you are _still_ giving it away.  It's not calculus.  It's math like you picked up in first and second grade:
 
I rolled an eleven. 
You hit! 
I rolled a twelve. 
I'm sorry, you missed. 
 
Egad!  If only there was some way I could use this information to determine what his DCV is! 
 

 
Obviously, in this case, his total DCV (that would be his DCV, plus and skill levels he has allocated to defense plus any Maneuver or situational DCV bonuses he has) exactly equals your total OCV-  which is, as I said, the _total_ of everything in play that's working toward increasing your OCV. 
 
You still don't really know what his precise DCV is any more than he knows your precise OCV.  The best part is that you have that same conundrum with roll-under to hit: you know the total, that one time, after resolution, and have no way of knowing exactly _why_ that is the total, or if it is always that total. 
 
Roll-over is a non-solution to a not problem. 
 
However, it is just as valid as roll-under.  Pick the one you like and stick with it, as changing up or using both is the only _real_ problem you are going to have teaching the attack mechanic. 

No, this helps a ton--
 
What you wrote makes sense. I get your point about comparing Attacks to the Skills Roll....
 
I checked out the original Champions as well:
 
"The basic chance to make an attack role is 11 or less. If the character rolls 11 or less on 3d6, [their] attack has hit the target. If the character rolls 12 or more, [their] attack has missed. This Attack Roll varies according to circumstances. There are a number of modifiers to a character's attack roll...." The character modifies their chance to hit by their attacking skill (OCV) less their target's defending skill (DCV) and other modifiers. Wow. Of course. This is well explained, to my mind.
11 + OCV - DCV = 3d6 or less And the related equation makes sense.
 
Then there's this ...
11 + OCV - 3d6 =  DCV you can hit. Hurts my head.
 
I understand how these equations are the same with a bit of algebra. The problem is that written in the altered form, it loses its explainability to me. It's just a formula without any meaning.
 
My new and improved, proposed plan:
 
I explain the Attack Roll exactly as it was explained in Champions v1.
 
Combat flows like this, where OCV = 5, DCV = 7, as an example:
 
I say: What's your OCV, Joe?
Joe: 5 [assume no modifiers applied on his end]
Me: Great. Roll, Joe!
Joe: 9 (with a hopeful tone) ...
Me: You hit her [after doing the math using whatever equation works the best for me]
 
- Versus D&D 5e, this is nearly the same combat experience for the player.
- Versus D&D 5e, the GM needs to do a few seconds of additional work:
Ask Joe his OCV. GM may know what this is without asking in some cases ... GM does a calc that's slightly more complicated than, "Is X greater or equal to Y?" Feasible? A terrible idea? Feedback is welcome.

After reading this I was just going to ignore the thread.
 
 
And then I read this.
 
Also not to be argumentative, but simply wanting to clarify a simple concept.
 
Neither of the above posts even touch on "playable out of the box", they talk about game construction from full rule books.  These are completely different topics.
 
It is almost like talking about the pro's and cons of a bass boat and getting buried with comments about the benefits of owning a helicopter.
 
Basic concepts.
Building an RPG character is not playing an RPG.
Building an adventure and NPC/Creatures is not playing an RPG.
They are preparatory tasks that need to be performed prior to being able to actually play.
This is not a good thing or a bad thing, it just is.
 
D&D 5ed has had two (that I know of) introduction sets that provide everything needed to run a game for the DM and players.  Characters, Adventure, etc.  Plus guidance for the DM to run it.
FFG's Star Wars RPG has one introduction set for each of their three SW theme games (EotE, AoR and FaD).  They contain everything needed to play a game of Star Wars.
Chaosium has a Call of Cthulhu 7th intro box that has pre-generated PC's and an adventure plus guidance for new players and GM's.
Catalyst has a Shadowrun beginner box set that allows new people to play Shadowrun.
Pathfinder has one too
 
All of these are "playable out of the box" with little or no prep. 
Are these "sets" complete rule-sets? No, but they are "playable out of the box".
 
D&D's core three (PHB, MM, DMG) are not "playable out of the box".
PF's main rulebook is not "playable out of the box".
Star Wars RPG core books are not "playable out of the box".
Champions Complete and Hero System 6th are not "playable out of the box".
Call of Cthulhu, Pulp Cthulhu and Down Darker Trails are not "playable out of the box".
 
They are all complete core rule sets designed to allow players to BUILD games.  Some are more flexible than others, but they all perform the task well. 
 
Most games that are "playable out of the box" are designed to allow new players to actually PLAY a game and see if they like it.  Some are designed to play out multiple sessions and some even give the players a taste of limited character advancement.   But all of them have the purpose of "if you liked this and had fun, buy the full game and make your own adventures and characters".
 
There have been a few games that combined the complete core rules with the intro-set to present an actual full RPG that was "playable out of the box".  These are rare though. 
 
There is a difference between "complete rule set" and "playable out of the box".  One is not better than the other, they have different purposes.
 
In my opinion, the Hero System (any version) would have a greater benefit from a "intro playable out of the box" game than most others.  Most other RPG's are more structured and provide completed items (NPC's, Creatures, Equipment, etc.) that allow easier entry.  Hero requires the Players to literally build everything before play, which is a steep entry.  But most of the attempts I have seen founder when too much content is jammed in.  Such as character creation and a such.  But once again that is an opinion.
 
But "playable out of the box" means I open the box and play.  Not, I open the box, figure out how to generate a character and then figure out how to build an adventure and then try to play. 
Some people do not like Intro Boxes that are "playable out of the box" because they do not have all the rules.  But there are a lot of players out there that started playing with those intro boxes.
 

That would be Doug Garret's "Super Battlesuit Palomino", I was in it.  Let's just say there were a lot of Mecha Fans among the original Heroes. Others, Not so much. Not sure of the dates on those.
 But yes Battledoids ran into two problems. One was George Lucas. The other  The bought designs, for the mecha from the LS Model company, without realizing the designs asctually belonged to Tatsanuko Productions, who were the owners of the Super Dimensional Fortress Macross property.  This forced design changes in the units which is why things looked a little "off" after that was resolved.

Actually, he said
 
 
Not "my GM requires gestures or incantations be taken even on all spells" or even "I assume gestures and incantations are required", but "if I just hold an action using gestures or incantations as the trigger, am I good to go?"
 
So the first question is "what are the terms of the magic system in use in your game?"  I guess he does not "lose the spell", since, unlike D&D, he does not have limited uses of each spell.  Unless, of course, the magic system in use requires him to have limited charges.  "I'll attack anyone who makes gestures or starts incanting"?  What stops my Warrior from muttering "Iggitty Aggitty Ook - AK AK" in an attempt to draw fire away from the spellcaster?

I speak typo:  "interfering"  😷

FHC pretty much just needs an adventure.  It's got monsters, spells, magic items, pregenerated characters, a sample setting.  More than the D&D starter kit, to be sure.  

In some ways you’re comparing apples to mangos. The Players Handbook isn’t playable out of the box either. It’s devoted to just introducing character creation and basic gameplay. Even with the Dungeon Master’s Guide and the Monster Manual, you still don’t have a game to play “right out of the box.”
 
On the other hand, if you allow FHC to include the HS Grimoire and the HS Bestiary, then you’ve got an equivalent trilogy to D&D . . . but still no adventure to play, just like (D&D). Of course the production value is not nearly the same, but for less than half the cost you have a complete game to play. 
 
So in a lot of ways when it comes to reading one book and jumping into a game, D&D is less well equipped to do that than FHC. What D&D does so well, though, is make their books make people want to play, and they’ve set up the support network to play it. Any beginner can go find a gameshop on Wednesday night anywhere in the country and find a D&D Encounters game. That’s really the biggest difference, and that’s the benefit of having Hasbro prop your business up until it can get traction. 

FHC pretty much just needs an adventure.  It's got monsters, spells, magic items, pregenerated characters, a sample setting.  More than the D&D starter kit, to be sure.  

In our DI and FH games they often represented a character's own organization keeping tabs on them.  Or an enemy organization, or an allied one -- like how a CIA agent might be watched by the FBI when in the US.

I think watch was an evolution of “Monitored” from Espionage!  It was supposed to represent non hostile organizations that could turn hostile, if the character crossed a line or broke a rule. I will have to check the character binder to seenho nInhandles it with the old, pre-Champions III characters. 

Like Chris said:
 
Watched came latrr-  one of the Champions-named supplements, but I don't remember if it was 2 or 3.
 
I will look it up for you if you'd like, but not tonight.  Just got in thirty minutes ago, putting today at fifteen hours of work and I've got to solve an upload problem before I collapse in the shower. 
 
You'd think I'd know it cold, since I play the old stuff, but the fact is we never used Watched more than two or three times in what-- nearly half a century?  It's no less stupid in an RPG than it was in the Highlander TV series:
 
I'm a watcher. 
What do you do? 
I watch. 
So you collect data and make records? 
Yeah; sure.  I guess that makes sense.  Mostly, though, I watch 
And when you see that one of us is prepared to make our move....? 
I'll watch. 
Watch what? 
Watch you make your move. 
You'll _watch_? 
Yep.  I'm a watcher. 
You won't try to stop me? 
Oh, heavens no!  I'm a watcher.  You'd need a stopper for that kind of thing. 
So...  You'll get a stopper? 
What?  No.  That's a go-get-a-stopper's job.  I'm a watcher. 
So what would you do? 
Watch.  I told you that.  I'm a watcher, and I'm very good at it. 
So when I behead the noble count of so-and-such, you're just going to _watch_? 
That's what I do. 
And that's _all_?  Nothing else? 
Well that writing stuff down thing you mentioned-- that seems cool.  I guess I could try that.  You know, unless it interferes with my watching.  Can't put watching on the back burner.  Always something to watch, you immortals.  Always, always, always...   Say?  Why are you shaving your legs?  Your a guy. 
We'll I've got a bicycle race tomorrow. 
Oh yeah, that's right!  I've got to watch it..
Seriously? 
What? 
You're going to watch me race a bicycle.?
Of course.  I'm a watcher, and a damned good one!
Why?
Why what? 
Why are you watching?  Why are there watchers?! 
Everyone needs a job, watching doesn't require three years experience, and everything else involves actually having to _do_ something...  Did you know that when you killed that guy over in that alley last summer I could see everyrhing from my air-conditioned booth in that diner across the street?  Man, that's the way to work, right there.  Big ol' root beer float, air conditioning, and more watching than you can fit in two eyes.... 
 
. "Watched" just doesn't pan out to be anything remotely interesting.  "harassed by" works better.  That's what we use as a half-value Hunted. 
 
Watched (and by extension, Watchers) is (are) stupid. 
 
 

Back in the day, Watched and Hunted were separate disads.  I'm not Duke, but I don't remember us using Watched all that often with Champions; if we did, we probably doubled the FH/DI values and rounded up to the nearest 5 Points.  I'll have to check those books again to see how that matches up to 3rd edition numbers.

Used books in the hundreds don't exist.
 
I mean, they _do_, but what you're seeing there are "book pirates."
 
No; I'm serious.  These guys run bots and crawlers and interesting algorithms; most of them have no actual stock-- seriously-- _none_.   Their bots key on searches for books, then perform their own searches, find the books, and return a pre-generated add / website entry to include a pic from where they found (if applicable) and a copy of text (usually a vague bit of descriptive text.  The better ones will have this text end on a complete sentence instead of after X amount of characters.   ).
 
The price is (P)x1.M, where M is the percentage of markup programmed into the bot.  If you order the book, the bot orders the book from where it found it, etc, etc, etc.
 
The guy "Operating" the site (I say that in quotes because most of these are fire-and-forget) not only never touches the book, he won't even know you ever ordered anything.  He just gets his money and keeps sipping margaritas.    I've been collecting books since you had to track down specialists to find them from all over the world.  I watched the pirates grow until they became their own problem     
 
 
Seriously; they have become their own problem!  There are so many of them now that it's possible to find two hundred listings for the same single book-- single as in "only one copy exists and only one person owns it."  The bots are getting their info from other bots, who got it from other bots, who got it from other bots, and on and on.  It's at the point were you can spend three hundred bucks on a book, that money ends up going to eighty different people, and the only extant copy of the book in the whole chain sells for ten bucks to the first bot and ships to you!  
 
 
There are signs, but honestly, there are so many people trying to stop this practice that you can find entire websites dedicated to how you can get a better idea of what's a pirate site and what isn't.  (A good hint is an RPG book with a dying audience going for hundreds of dollars.  )
 

Awesome job Duke!

Woo-hoo! 
 
Okay, folks, Jason has AC issues 1 & 2 now.  I'm just scanning them; I'm not doing any of the clean up or restoration, nor do I know who is.  I am scanning in 1200 DPI and sending them as PNG (my current set up doesn't do vector files.     ) to make sure they get the best head start I can give them.  I would love to do it from start to finish, but there is a serious time problem. 
 
 
On the plus side, I have been given carte blanche to make better copies of anything currently available in the HERO Store!   It's going to take a lot of time, as I'm working without my good system, and with way less time than I had when I was working my old job, but I'm excited!
 
I mean, I can't be the only one tired of looking at that weirdly-cleaned up Enemies book or that partially-counterfeit 1e rules book with the 2e character sheets, can I? 
 
There is nothing on the near horizon (save perhaps my personal 2e PDF, which is ahhh "vahra anahs....", but the one in the store is pretty good as-is (though mine prints better ;).  For the moment, scanning AC is my priority, so don't look for anything any time soon unless it's something I have already done and remembered to submit. 
 
I just got excited and wanted to share. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I don't think a "complete" game necessarily has to include the full rules, but it has to be enough for you to be able to sit down and run a game.  
 
The various D&D 5e starter kits (the Starter Set, Stranger Things, Rick & Morty, Essentials) to me constitute a "complete game", because with any of those (all of which I believe include sample adventures) you could sit down and run a game.  I might also call them "minimally complete" because without other materials you can't do much more than that, but with the Players Handbook and all the free downloads (SRD, basic rules, etc.) you've got enough for years of play.  
 
Fantasy Hero Complete, with the additional electronic downloads including pregen player characters, spells, monsters, setting, and adventure, is almost a complete game.  I say almost because the Val of Stalla sample adventure isn't quite a fully fleshed out adventure, but it's pretty close.  It would need a plot of some kind and/or a number of NPCs with their own wants, needs, and conflicts brewing that the PCs can get involved in.  (Elsewhere I've said that it is complete, but I'm partially retracting that statement.)
 
I'm okay with, e.g., rulebook X plus additional material book Y equals a complete game.  

By this time tomorrow night, Jason should have scans of issue one-- and hopefully issue two-- in his hands.
 
Guys:  I am not doing the cleanup on these scans; I don't know who is.  I can't vouch for the final results of the project, but I will be sending 1200dpi scans to allow the best possible start to this project!  
 
 

Fear is all in your mind anyway.
 
 
Seriously, though:
 
Here's the thing with HERO:
 
There is no rule for fear.  None.  Absolutely _none_.  Even Presence Attacks are about cowing others with-- well, the force of your presence, your personality, your sure and certain confidence.  Over the years, a F*k ton of people have decided to interpret that as fear and being scary, especially since the charts are relatable to fear and being scary.  They are also relatable to being inspirational, but we didn't move that way, in spite of this being a game ostensibly modeling _heroes_.
 
There are also some rules for fear.  That is to say, there are rules for using PRE as part of your fear mechanism from the old 4e Horror HERO supplement, as well as rules (more of them there than anywhere else) for "Custom characteristics," custom mechanics, etc, and rules that say any rule you come up with is a completely valid rule.
 
There is also the relatively poor definition of a couple of different characteristics, but the one I like to focus on is EGO (unless I'm using a custom characteristic for a particular game).  I like this because while it is poorly-defined with regard to the other characteristics, most people agree that EGO represents your will power and strength / presence of mind.
 
Frankly, I think that's the best definition for fear and being scared / cowed through fear:  you can be scared, yet have enough will power, enough presence of mind, to keep going, to set it aside.  Right up until the scanners come and the heads start bursting.  Or whatever.
 
Look at it this way:  you can use a Presence Attack and declare that it's based entirely on your ability to inspire a desire to be better, a desire to tackle a challenge, a desire to act with discipline...   Absolute same game-effects, but _no one_ you are using it on is being swayed by fear.  No one.  You're Captain Mother America Theresa or something, but are in no way terrifying anyone.   (Remember the idea that mechanics and special effects are _separate_, and the way your Presence Attacks are made- the source of their influence-- that's a SPECIAL EFFECT.  You get to pick those.  Somewhere along the way, the vocal majority decided it meant "scariness," but let's be completely honest here:  you can't defend from someone else's scariness with your own scariness.  You just end up scaring each other, realistically.  Yes, you can pick it as your special effect because the rules let you, but realistically, scariness is the _least_ logical definition of the Presence Characteristic.
 
 
So consider fear as being a special _type_ of Presence attack, but target EGO instead.  Target the thing that actually _does_ decide if you can muster the courage and fortitude to continue on.  Perhaps model a continuing barrage of horrific elements as a Drain versus EGO, sapping your resistance, making it so much more likely that you'll succumb to your fears.  Use an EGO roll to muster courage and continue.
 
The Commander has a Presence Attack based on his air of command and his forceful personality and his iron-will and his strict attention to fairness and discipline and his ability to inspire those same things in other people.  He's _not_ terrifying you into rallying and making that final charge.  That doesn't make sense.  In fact, using the Versus EGO model, he can _still_ inspire you in that very same way, make you rally, take up arms, and that terrifying thing from the shadows of oblivion strikes enough fear into your heart that in spite of your inspired courage, you drop your weapon and scream, because there is something so horrifying, so _primal_ and disturbing in that onerous palpable evil that your own force of personality is not just insufficient, but utterly useless against it.
 
At any rate, it's how I prefer to model fear-based attacks against the psyche.  There's no reason you can't model it with a straight-up EGO attack, really.  None what-so-ever.  Find something that works for you from all angles, or tweak something that's close, or create something new whole-cloth.
 
 
Just have fun with it.