Fox1

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what? Looks like another way of phrasing this is that you want a linear increase in STR/Damage. The concept of exponential increase is rather core to HERO and it was one of the first rpgs to use that idea (the first that I encountered). It made superhero gaming by genre convention (i.e. Captain America and Thor on the same team with both being worthwhile) possible. It may be possible to house rule it back, as long as you're interested in only human level games. On a linear scale it becomes very difficult to manage a system that runs the range of power that HERO does now. I do seem to recall a free rpg that tries... http://jagsgame.dyndns.org/ I think.

Re: House Rules? Do you use the 1d6-1 Stun roll or Hit Locations?

Re: House Rules? Sniff. What's to disagree with? I'm something of a gun freak. I originally did those rules for a Heroic level game I was running after I noticed how many times I needed to shoot an unarmored normal man in the street to take him out of the fight. That game balance effect of increasing handgun damage isn't as bad as it looks however considering the changes I did on the Body damage side. The like the whole Mind Class thing you did. I may steal that for certain campaigns...

Re: House Rules?

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what? Yes it did. Although I'll admit it didn't bother me as much as Thor having something like a 60 STR in HERO, that of a beginning brick character. So I re-wrote the strength chart for my own game. So a Strength of a 100 men comes out to be something like a 63 for 12.5 damage. Even so, that's a damage level that a world class superhero Martial Artist (say Captain America) could reach with the right conditions. Such is the nature of a game designed for comic book superheroes. I think I need to add my HERO website to my signature...

Re: House Rules? This one is very common, so common in fact that I forgot that it was a house rule.

Re: House Rules? I miss the old -1/3" rule in some ways myself. It was actually more representive in its interaction with RMod skill levels of how such things work in real life. The new ones are designed to work well with the Growth/Shrinking powers and the idea of map scaling that appear in their old mecha supplement. Interesting that the map scaling idea disappeared in 5th edition (unless it shows up in Star Hero, I haven't bought that book). I've often toy with the idea of going back to that method but haven't.

Re: House Rules? My own house rules have an extensive section on firearms, although it's not so much a House Rule as a different way of building them then the HERO standard. Nothing on shot placement. I thought the result there would be rather unbalancing and too luck dependent. If your friend is interested he can check it out at for ideas: http://home.comcast.net/~b.gleichman/Hero/ My other major change is in STR lift values. I typically run Marvel inspired games and the standard lift values in HERO are too high for that IMO.

I've found that HERO doesn't require much in the way of house rules. Or rather much compared to most rpgs I've read. The core mechanics are good one and things generally work. There are however a few exceptions and as a result I have a fair number of rules and/or style elements that I keep track of for my players on a website. I was wondering if this is uncommon, or if it's something everyone does. What house rules do you use and what are they?

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule Best reason to drop the rule. Typically I count out the bad guys whenever they drop below zero. It's rarely genre (for the genres I game anyway) except for the 'master villian escape clause' (which is handled in other ways) in any case. So that deals with that as far as I'm concerned. And I want my villians to go up and whack the under zero hero to make sure. Taking x2 stun on knockback would reduce cases of that.

Re: Character growth potential and speed questions I'd like to add a slightly different viewpoint that may not find much favor here... Character advancement in HERO is a pain. Keeping the character in tune with his stats while at the same time making sure he still belongs in the world he was created for while not stepping on other character's niches isn't easy. Or rather, it can be very difficult depending upon the length of the campaign. Depending upon the exact game, I've dealt with this in a number of ways. My three most common: 1. Build the character to concept and don't worry about how many points are used in doing so. As long as a character has a useful niche in the team/game, it really doesn't matter if he's a hundreds of points cheaper than another character. Don't give out XP all. This works great for modeling 'fixed' world sources- like most comics and TV shows (which reset back to the start at the end of each storyline). Problem: some players need XP to give them a reason to play. Option may be best when character are built by GM to player's order (role style more than specifics). I actually have the most fun with this option. 2. Create your starting character. Create your 'final' finished character at the peak of the campaign's power. Make sure both fit in your world and in your group (character niche in their team is still all important). Points may or may not be equal- some concepts just cost more or less. Give out XP. Require that the player spend them in such a way that he moves toward the 'finished character'. This works nicely for growth campaigns. Say the farm lad who's going to become a great hero. Problem: events in the game may result in logical changes in the 'final character' version. You may have to redo it in cases. 3. As GM keep a extremely close eye on everyone's character and how they spend experience. Make sure to maintain niche and place in the world. Be ready to say NO a lot. Problem: All depends upon your players. Some can deal with such heavy GM influence, some can't. As to the idea of too much or too little XP being given out... Option 1 doesn't have this issue. Option 2, easy to adjust. As you know the cost difference between starting and final versions you can determine the number of adventures needed to reach the end and give out XP to suit. Option 3, things could get out hand as you're depending upon your judgement. If it's not solid, you could end up giving too much or too little.

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule I too seem to recall that one's Forcefield remains up until after knockback damage is resolved. If that's the case, I see no reason to take x2 stun In fact, I consider this very important in play because otherwise I'd end up with everyone buying persistent on their forcefield to keep form taking significant body damage on knockout blows (perhaps with a limit- persistent only for 1 segment), an event which just isn't genre So I consider this ruling... odd. I won't be using it in my games.

Re: Got the Metal in the Meat That would seem to be completely dependent upon the economics of the campaign setting. Have you played any other cyberpunk games? It's rather typical in those for money to come quickly, and to be spent just as quickly. Such settings do work. Shadowrun doesn't make you pay points for cyberware (assuming you have 'room' to implant it), and that game is all about making next month's rent. I've played a Shadowrun campaign this way for a couple years now using HERO System rules, oddly enough there is no one who is very wealthy, indeed far from it. There are however some people with rather nice cyberware. In HERO specifically it's also suggested that wealth perks be done away with if gaining money is to be a major campaign element. That may be the case. I think you're looking at a game where money is a character trait. You buy the perk and spend your character points. If you're not rich, you are only allowed to buy second hand or low grade cyberware depending. Actual money flow during the campaign itself isn't important- it's only a characteristic point. This approach comes with a problem as in general HERO does not assume that the wealth perk determines what abilities a character can or cannot buy. In addition you're putting a surcharge on the cost of cyberware (i.e. the buying of the perk). Depending upon the exact details (how much cyberware, with what limits, etc) this may or may not be important, I'm speaking of a different approach. Here money is road to cyber ware, it's earned and spent in game- it cannot be brought with character points. Earn enough and you can buy bleeding edge gear, don't earn enough and you buy used ware with serious side-effects or no ware at all. This approach has the advantage of making the fight to crawl out of the dregs real and in the character's face. It's a very street level type of play. Assuming the players equally split incoming money, it's also balanced if the ware cost is set correctly. It does comes with the disadvantage that everyone is going to cyber up as best they can if there isn't anything preventing it. This may of course be the whole idea. Edit: I should also note that like most things, a choice between these two options depend upon the campaign. If one is planning a long term game with many adventures over a significant span of time where living and improving is a major element of the game- I'd go for the money approach I suggest. If one is planning a short series of cyberpunk adventures that is about style and story- I'd go with a pure point method as money isn't important except as style element. One thing I wouldn't do is based what type and style of cyberware a character can buy on the wealth perk- no mattter the game. I like the idea of a cyber'd to the max agent for a corp turning rogue and hitting the street with no wealth at all. Something a perk=cyber method would deny.

Re: Got the Metal in the Meat

Re: Meta-game activities Any of the above would result in a exchange of ideas about the concept of playing a character in a rpg and what type of out of game information is suitable for the campaign I'm running or running in. If the exchange didn't result in a change of behavior, someone would be looking for a new game. Point 3 has to be rather extreme for it to be problem as I don't run my in-game actions in real time. Rather simple. I don't consider this a problem in the least. The primary reason is that my players are normally running highly skilled combatants- professional warriors and adventures. In actual fact they are doctors, lawyers, engineers and the like- they are in no way professional warriors. Thus extra time and OOC discussions used to determine combat actions are to my mind a completely fair way of making up for a lack of instintive and trained player knowledge. The final results are also far more suited towards the heroic adventure styles my games seek to model. So for the most part- let it rock. Two exceptions: If there is something on the map that I'm of the opinion they wouldn't be aware of yet- I don't place it on the map. If there is something on the map that only some of the team members can see and others can't (and there is no communication method between team members) - I may ask for proper in-game behavior reflecting that fact. I have never had a player refuse, not one that remained in the game.

Re: How do you track END? The players just use erasable pens on the sheet protectors that we keep the character sheets in. For NPCs, I typically don't even bother except for major power villains. I figure the grunts of the adventure (i.e. NPCs all with the same character write up, thinkl Viper Agents) won't end up spending significant END. Major villains are treated the same players as they have a individual full character write up in their own protector anyway.

Re: Linked or Multiple Power Attack? Go with Linked unless he can hit the target with the fire without punching them. It's also more bang for the buck given that the Multiple Power Attack option rightfully forces you to remove both the target's PD and ED from the damage, you need to the limit break on points to make up for that disadvantage.

Re: The Ultimate Mystic: Good, Bad, or what? Well... Ultimate Martial Artist and Brick are IMO the best supplements Hero Games have put out. Both were nice extensions of the core rules. You want to know what the life is for odd number STR values? It's here. You want to know how much body a hex of dirt is? It's here. You want to know what maneuvers various martial art styles should have? It's here. Ultimate Mystic on the other hand is more of a genre advice book. Little to no rule extensions. It's basically designed for people who don't know how to approach Mystic campaigns. For me, it wasn't worth the buy.

Re: Got the Metal in the Meat I'd base my decision upon what I wanted out the campaign. If the setting supports a money = power concept, then by all means base the cost of cyberware completely upon cash. You'll likely have ditch the Money perk and replace it with some other way of handling income, but after that you'll have what you need. If you're interested in game balance where a character doesn't have to cyber up in order to be powerful, you're likely better off charging both money and points as some people here have suggested. The only thing to worry about is providing a use for the money the non-cyber people earn. That could be an issue. I know for example that I didn't need money, I'd be giving it to our cyber monster so he could afford the best gear and be all the more useful for protecting my un-chromed behind. I took a more... extreme path with my own campaign. Since it was based upon the Shadowrun setting it required both wired and unwired characters- and of course I wanted money to be highly important as it should be in such a setting. So gear and cyberware were to be totally money based. I ended up providing a matrix of starting points/money that not only defined how many points and how much cyberware you could have- it also determined how quickly you gained experience points and what your total point cap was. So I player could go all natural with magic talents (it is a shadowrun setting) and start with 125 points and no money to speak of- and no ability to add cyberware later. He'd also gain experience quickly and has a high total cap. - or start with 50 points, tons of money for cyberware and the ability to upgrade and max out that cyberware later. Experience comes slow, and he has a low cap. That handled balance not only at the start of the campaign, but throughout. Seems to be working great so far (it's been going on for a couple years now).