Duke Bushido

I would think she woukd have to, just in self-defense.

Hey, Hugh-- and the rest of our friends in Canadia:

Anyone else ever have to start a massive displacement in-line diesel engine when the temperature was well below freezing?

I didn't say they were useless. I even offered source-material accepted means to get the exact same benefits. For all the talk on this board of "you get what you pay for," the defense against giving away bases for free is a bit flummoxing.

Ah!! Finally! Some good news! Niw if we could get that ignorant gibbon worried about the gazpacho police to follow suit....

should what it _wanted_ to type ever make it into the public eye, it's worth a well-deserved @$$ kicking; that I can tell you. I think I learned just a little bit about Korea in that moment....

We may have accidentally figured out why your online game isn't getting a lot of keyboard input from the other players!

Yo, Tjack: I assume by "extras" he meant just that: those few competent NPCs you bring to even the odds: "Extras" as opposed to "expendables."

From what I've seen of the comic books (and once again, on the off chance that anyone doesn't know this: I was never a comic book kid), not at all. We have constant communication with aliens and technology that lets us step through a shadow and arrive in an alternate dimension, and machines that heal people who should have died long before they got the condition that they are in just before being subjected to the miracle healing machine. We have miraculous teleportation devices and cloning technology that can turn one tomato plant into a thousand in just moments. Yet when Captain America's secret ID needs to run to Europe, he gets his passport and climbs on a plane like every single person on the planet. He might travel all the way to Ethiopia, which, in spite of our incredible technology, still suffers from drought and famine, and rather than turning the Sahara into a verdant jungle paradise, we let villains hide their secret missile bases there. So from what I've seen of comics, there is an absolute status quo of "right here; right now" that is not only where the setting _is_, but that must be maintained and returned to between every adventure. You can run your world differently-- I know I do-- but staying true to the comics? Superheroes deal with Supervillains while serial killers still stalk college girls.

Hello, Hugh! Thanks for joining in! I don't know how much more will be gleaned: I've pretty much said all I have to say on the subject-- well, that's not quite true. I have re-stated my own opinions related to the exact topics of "what might attract new players." Several other points have been brought up or alluded to, but I don't know that the time will ever be right (or available) to chase every single one of those down and address them. You make an interesting point here: and I don't think it has ever been addressed in any of these discussions. On the chance that you are opinion shopping, I will offer mine: We need new players and new GMs willing to pick up and learn this game. New blood-- new customers. One to keep the game alive, and one to maybe one day keep the company alive. Eh-- I am a product of a capitalist environment, I suppose. I don't _like_ it, but it's where I came from: it's not instinctive to separate the product from the producer. I'm working on it, but it's still not instinctive. At any rate, I don't think a few new players to existing tables is going to help matters. The bulk of current HERO players seem to be long-time players, and all seem to have gravitated more toward the minigames of building every detail of the universe, or every detail of a magic system, or every possible permutation of published characters-- that is, they have fallen in love with the math itself, sometimes to the detriment of the game. They have taken the minutiae of the rules and now occupy themselves by spending long discussions and pages of writing to iron out those tiny details---- Crud. How's the best way to say this? Let me try this: I don't think it is going to be helpful in the long run to have new players attracted to the game system (because we all agree, I think, that there is no actual game here as it is presented) only to have them drink from the very well that poisoned the game. It's counter-productive. I think we need new play groups of new people using complete games extracted from the system. I think those systems should bear simple indications that they were built using a larger, more complicated system, and invite them to check out the entire thing, if they are interested. I _also_ think that those same informative blurbs should clearly point out that (assuming the game is complete) the entire Encyclopedia HEROica is _not_ required to play the game. I honestly think the system itself should be soft-sold. That is, don't put a lot of effort into pulling people straight into the overload that the System has become. Let them play the game; let them enjoy the game. Let them, in their own time, decide "I wonder what I can learn from the whole kit and kaboodle?" on their own, without any push toward it. That's what I want to say: point it out, but don't push towards it. If a game proves popular enough, write supplements _for that game_. NOT for the HERO System, not compatible with Game X, but specifically for Game X itself. If you know the HERO system, then you already _know_ it's compatible with it. If you don't know the HERO System, but you _do_ know Game X, then you don't _care_ if it's compatible with HERO. If you already have the HERO System, you might not even need or want it, but you will know it's compatible because it says "Powered by HERO." Setting _expansions_ as opposed to setting books: I accept that I am the odd man out and that most people today want the first book to include some strong samples of setting. I cut my teeth on games like D and D and Traveller and others of the era that had no setting out of the box. (Champions, for example ) I know: considering what they have grown into, people today have a hard time imagining it, but first edition D and D and first edition Traveller had _zero_ setting. I could be remembering wrong, but I don't recall that first edition The Fantasy Trip has any setting info, either. At any rate, as my formative gaming years occurred when setting just wasn't part of a game, I guess I never really developed that need to have a prepackaged setting right away. No biggie; I can easily accept that this _is_ an important requirement for today's gamers. As noted above, "Tastes change." To get back on track, though: If a game sells reasonably well, then do a setting expansion for that game-- do NOT do a "toolbox" of how to build a setting that will work for this game; do NOT do "here are ten possible settings for this game." I could honestly even accept that one book does _two_ possible settings, so long as they are closely related: here is the "official" setting of this game; here is a darker, broodier, more baroque version of the setting, featuring grey and blue backgrounds and all the street lights have been replaced with 20 watt bulbs and the occasional gas lamp." Or maybe "this is the official setting; this is the setting from the villains' point of view." I am not _big_ on doing two settings, but so long as they are very closely related, it _shouldn't_ be a problem, particularly if one of them is clearly labeled "this is the official one. If you go to a CON, this is what we will be playing. If there is additional support coming, this is the version that will be supported first when it comes to allocating budget." Removing the toolkitting (thanks, Tasha, if you're still following along. I have read a number of the 5e setting books, and even knowing all that optional-optional-optional-optional stuff was in there, at this point I am so stinkin' used to seeing it that it didn't even register anymore. Instead of each book having a setting currently, it's got an expansive set of Colorforms that you plop down onto the pre-painted background to make your own setting. (Am I telling my age? Anyone else remember Colorforms? Just me?) One thing that I think is very important to the success of a setting book, based on those unhappy with the offerings now (Tasha, myself, and people I have tried to convert to HERO who did a little online looking and went "Oh, Hell no!" ) is a solid adventure. No; I don't think the adventure by itself is something that will sell the book, but I think it will be harder to sell without out. Several reasons, the first of which is "perceived value." You get a setting book for the price of a setting book, but you also get this pretty sweet 15, 25-page adventure! It's an entire story arc; looks like three or four sessions to get through it! Amazing!" Let's face it: How many of us bought gaming magazines back in the day, even if the entire issue was below average, because it had a pretty cool adventure in it? How many of us bought Different Worlds because it had some of the highest production quality pull-out adventure modules for all sorts of different games we were into at the time? How many of us subscribed to some seriously low-quality xerox-printed fanzines because there was one semi-regular contributor who had a knack for crafting an adventure once or twice a year? While big game companies have "learned" that "adventures don't sell," the fact is that they _do_ sell; they just didn't do so good from the big publishing outfits. Why? Well, going from my original Traveller and D and D group, the GMs didn't buy the brand name adventures very often because the guy running the store knew who was who, and had a business to run: "Hey, Duke. Don't you play in 'Tonio's Traveller group?" "You know I do, Chestnut." "Well he just picked up Adventure Supplement 4 a couple of days ago...." "Cool! So we'll probably have a game next weekend! At the very least, it means we're about to conclude the mission we're on, right?" "Yeah; or.... _You_ could pick up Adventure Supplement 4 and check it out before the game.... You know: find out what's a good thing to do; what's a bad thing to do.... where the goodies are...." (because Chestnut was pretty convinced that all games were D and D). "Yeah.... I don't think so, Chestnut. That's... that's not cool. I might pick it up after we play it, though, if it was pretty good." "Hey, Davien! Davien, don't you play with Duke and 'Tonio?" "Yeah." "Well 'Tonio just bought Adventure Supplement 4 for Traveller, just a couple days ago...." While it's entirely anecdotal, that's the number one reason I always heard from GMs who didn't use brand-name modules. The Judge's Guild stuff, the small-press stuff.... nobody that didn't actually play knew much about it, and the magazines were super-safe, because there was this expectation that a "free" adventure wasn't good, and you were probably just buying the magazine for something else in it. Truth is even if they mag adventure wasn't good, it could be tweaked easier than an adventure could be written... Anyway, the point was, adventures may not by themselves sell, but they do _help_ sell. Why an adventure in a world book? Because more than anything else, it will immediately help the players and GMs understand how the world works and how to interact with it. Moreover, it should be a meaty adventure: an entire story arc (not necessarily a full-on campaign, but something that will take three or four sessions to play would be perfect, I think-- like the campaign book from 3e, only including microfilm madness. This gives both examples of how to interact with the world and gives some solid play experience before the GM is left floundering on his own to make the next adventure. If a short campaign will fit in there, then shoot for that! Most importantly, that adventure should have the possibility for _complete_ resolution and the possibility to lead into the next planned product: a full-on campaign book. No; it doesn't _have_ to be a single book, but can be a series of adventures, published semi-regularly, that all follow a story arc. Perhaps they can be meaty enough to allow for a story arc within each adventure, tying into an overall campaign. Moreover, each adventure book or campaign book should include a _short_ list of additional adventure ideas. If they don't do anything else, they add background and more understanding of the world. When you read an adventure seed like "Princess Moonwalker of the Valley People has been kidnapped while en route to the seaport village of Barzhaven. The NPCs have gotten the news from the local town crier. The King of the Valley People has offered two thousand Zennies and a land grant of eight hectares to anyone who can bring her back safely!" we actually learn a lot about the world: There is a Valley Kingdom and a seaport. There are brigands about. Two thousand Zennies is probably a _lot_ of money. We are measuring land by an archaic european standard. The Valley People name themselves like Elves. Even if you don't use the seeds, they are informative, and an important bit of world building, particularly for a neophyte who doesn't want or perhaps is not ready to do it himself. We can talk about the understanding that adventures don't sell, but we know that they do-- perhaps not high-margin, high-profile sales, but if the world book sells enough units to demonstrate that people want to play the game, and want more of the background, setting, etc, then they will likely want adventures, if only for inspiration. Adventures saved Dungeons and Dragons. We can demonstrate all the old wisdom that they don't sell, but the entire hobby was on the way out prior to Pathfinder, and the entire success of Pathfinder was the Paths. As Pathfinder caught fire, a lot of people moved from there to "the original," and even Wizards understood the value to providing solid content that could keep players occupied for a long time. And more in this vein, but I think we all have the idea: Complete game with some setting and a some sort of adventure and even a few "adventure ideas." HA! I guess I jumped the gun on that, didn't I? To go a bit further, at this point, I wouldn't even begin to worry about offending the old hands. Putting too much emphasis on what they want is kind of what brought HERO to where it is now. Besides, most of us are collectors, at least to the best of our ability. You could stamp out commemorative toilet paper with Hexman printed all over it, and we'd buy it. We're kinda sad like that. Honestly, I'd have forty or more of those HERO dice if they'd picked a size that let me hold more than three or at a time. I agree: experienced gamers tend to not need a sample adventure. However, I think we should have long ago paid attention to the fact that not one single experienced gamer has ever been injured by the inclusion of one. At least, not in any way but his ego, and frankly, we could all use a swift kick to the ego every now and again: it keeps us humble.

I do not think I will ever be able to thank you enough for the dozen or so hilarious vignettes that leapt to mind upon reading that. You have said several things here I would like to hear more about, I really have to get a few errands run. You folks have fun!

Thanks, Joe! In my downward spiral toward sleep, I had forgotten PS238. I will have to edit that back into the list above immediately! I think we should stress "_could_ work well." DC Heroes (and to a lesser extent, Batman, both by Mayfair, if I recall) were wildly successful, and certain editions of DC Heroes are still sought after today. TSR's Marvel Superheroes caught fire immediately solely because of the licensed properties, but even a revision couldn't save it for long-term popularity. You are correct, of course: there was precious little in any of these games with regard to building a campaign or a world. I did note, however, that these games were all at least as 'complete' as the first two editions of Champions (and possibly the third edition: the "Campaign Book" in 3e was a single extended adventure with little in it not related to the scenarios it contained). When we all bought those books, we may have wished for more, but we never doubted that they were completely playable as-is. I don't know who said it, but some years ago I stumbled across a Traveller blog discussing a similar topic that is quite dear to me: the growth of Traveller-- what it has become versus what Mark Miller conceived and prefers, and what the fans demanded it become. I won't bore anyone with more details about an entirely different game, but the blogger offered a quote that summed up the entire thing quite nicely: "The standards have changed. People don't have the time, or perhaps the desire, to imagine anymore." Certainly, some genres _need_ more setting info than do others. Science Fiction is something of an example of this: whereas supers are 'right here; right now,' and we are all as familiar with the here and now as we are likely to ever be, supers needs very little outside of an example of a normal person and a couple of supers so that players and GMs may scale their earliest builds, Sci-Fi is playing in a world yet-to-come. Are there millions of planets? Hundreds? Two? Do we move amongst the stars quickly, or in generational ships? What's the upper limit of technology-- communications, weapons, defenses, terraforming. What is the government like at the place the game starts? Different people will want different amounts of this, just as some people will need or want none of it. Fantasy, though-- in Fantasy, you are playing in a land that never, ever was (unless you consider Arthurian to be fantasy more than >ahem< "historical" or "period." (I suppose that depends on where you stand on Merlin and 'strange women in lakes handing out swords' .) That takes a bit more: which fantasy standards are you using, for one. Are there races other than human? It goes on and on. Still, as a genre, it is perhaps the most explored in fiction (right after Adam Sandler movies, I think), and I expect that anyone interested in picking up a book such as FHC will already have some wonderful ideas of his own from which to draw, and a glut of outside inspiration he has already consumed. Because of this, with the admission that there should have been-- just like with Champions-- a couple of "normal people" and a couple of powerful adventurers and a few pre-made spells would have helped new players to scale their first few characters until they settled on the level they preferred. Even at that, though, I find, compared to the original Champions books that we did not doubt were complete games, that FHC was just as complete as Champions was. The original FHC was just as complete as well: swap out "magic" for "powers" and they were nearly the same book, reskinned and renaming several major elements (the SFX / mechanics separation demonstrated in real life! ) "The standards have changed...", I think. There are lots and lots of potential reasons why, but ultimately, people demand more of a game than they ever did before. To be fair, they _always_ demanded more. That's why D and D currently has more books that I have a hope of reading before I die even if I were to stop here mid-sentence and start reading. It's why Traveller expanded beyond a generic system for space adventures of any kind and into the Third Imperium and beyond (man, that beyond was a mistake, but again: just my opinion. Or, more succinctly: MegaTraveller sssstttaaaaaannnnkkkkk!!!! ). Agreed, but I will need a bit of help (no; I am not teasing you: while I did enjoy CNM, and played it for three or four years before moving back to 2e, I honestly don't remember the answer to this question): was that campaign part of the initial rules book, or did you have to buy the two additional books? I remember needing those books to get more of the rules (which at the time I thought was a marketing blunder of epic proportions, particularly when even after having them all, we still had to crib stuff from BGC to make it fluid), and I have stated above that I really liked the Bay City setting (so much so that even today, Bay City is part of my universe, situated forty-four miles west of Campaign City, on the shores of Lake Campaign. ). To date, it remains the _only_ published setting book I have ever used. Sorry: without extraneous distraction: was the campaign contained in the original book? I genuinely don't remember with any degree of certainty. I know there were a couple of villains in there (did anyone _ever_ figure out just where Grond's extra arms actually attached to his body? ), which again: an example of a normal character (which, in Hero, sort of defaults to the blank character sheet-- or rather, it _did_. 6e took that way from us, too, since a blank sheet is now straight zeroes), a powerful character, and a relatively "normal adventurer or adversary" are, at least to me, very important. I don't need many, but one of each helps establish a scale. I would like to step back and make an observation. I prefer, out of courtesy, to ask "if you will permit," but as this board is a 'say your thing and run' format, I will instead ask that you bear in mind that I mean no derision and, as is well-documented all over this board-- I _do not_ sarcasm: I am detecting a common sentiment in many of your replies. For clarification, so that we can better understand each other's position, I would like to ask "do you feel that a fleshed-out world or setting is important to qualify a game as 'complete?' If you do not feel a fleshed-out world is necessary to make a complete game, please disregard the follow up question. If you do find it critical, what level of detail do you prefer, what is acceptable, and what is your 'absolute lowest acceptable' threshold to meet the requirements? Secondly, do you feel a pre-packaged adventure is necessary to make a game complete? If so, do you require or prefer a full-on multi-arc campaign, a multi-session story arc (presumably start to finish, but not necessarily), a meaty scenario, or a handful of "seeds?" Feel free to prefer more than one; this is an exercise in understanding your preferences on the subject. In the interest of sharing positions, I will happily answer the questions for myself: I _prefer_ a small amount of setting, at least in fantasy and in what I will call "niche" genres such as cyberpunk, steampunk, dieselpunk, or urban fantasy. I do not call them 'niche' to deride them, but because they are subsets of larger genres with a lot of leeway in definition, and so I would prefer to have some sort of hint as to how to build for the themes presented. In all likelihood, we will wander into our own groove within three or four adventures anyway. I don't need information on government or nobility or such unless one of the prime themes of the game is staying right here, where we are, forever. If crime and punishment is different from the norms, give me a paragraph on that. Other than that, give me one or two examples of "normals," "typical adventurer class characters / foes," and "powerful, end-of-campaign" level adversaries. I can fill in from there, while tailoring for the group at hand. I only need to know about currency and exchange rates if things cost money, in which case a short list of things and prices is quite helpful. Thinking about it, I am probably going to make up exchange rates on the fly rather than stop and math up regional lists, so just a list of things and prices. A sample or two of player races (again: a normal, a PC-level character, and a powerful one, though the powerful one is not as important as a normal and a PC-level one) and some suggestions on who and what the race is, in case someone wants to play one or I need to use one as an NPC. Even then: I don't need this if the race is a well-known stereotype (elves! Elves _everywhere_! And Scottish Dwarves! When and where and why did that happen?! ) Adventures is a bit.... well, that varies from genre to genre. Fantasy and Sci-Fi have tropes, but given the niches and ranges of power levels even with the genre, a two short scenarios covering two radically different situations or one meaty scenario covering both seems ideal, but.... well, I just admited that I owned Viper's Nest for twenty years or so before I ever actually read it--- which opens another can of worms: I hated it. I mean I really did not like it. My first thought was "a dungeon crawl?! In spandex?" Sure, it was a bit more than that, but the main goal seemed to be going through the Nest and clearing it, etc. I do like a short list of ideas ("seeds," as the cool kids call them), but here is the thing about all of this: I am almost certainly not going to use them. No; I don't mean that in any negative way. I like to _see_ them, and sometimes to read them, simply because it gives some clue as to what the author(s) saw as typical interaction with the world in their mind. They give hints toward motivations, society, and even locations sometimes, and power levels (any adventure that suggests a handful of PCs take out an entire battalion gives you a really good idea of what PCs should be capable of, right?), but I don't typically run them, ever. You will never hear me disagree with this, even though on this board, it tends to be a very unpopular opinion. I am not going to scold you for saying it, because I say it _a lot_; I simply want to warn you that you will end up having to defend this almost every time you say it out loud. (Believe me; I've been there _a lot_. ) I have to concur. This has been a rather pleasant way to enjoy a cup of coffee the last couple of days. I see Hugh has replied while I was typing. I am quite anxious to hear his thoughts on this. have fun, Tasha!

My favorite bit of Peanuts trivia involved an interview in which Schultz was asked "Wow; you must really love children....?" To which he replied "I don't think I even like them...."

Is that Line? I thought that was Trail.

Remind me to come back and rep you when I've refilled. In my entire history here, I have used the ignore function only twice. I won't name names (I _proudly_ will not name names; opting to choose the Ignore feature seems the most responsible, adult option available), though there is a third I have waffled on for several years. Fortunately, that one only seems to come about when that one is particularly bored in 3d-land, so it hasn't happened. Why only twice? Well, I have found that most people-- even when you disagree with them _vehemently_-- really _do_ have valid points, and reading them (and deciding to ignore them "manually," if you will) can inspire some interesting thoughts about your own beliefs. The only two people I have ever ignored have in common a gratingly haughty "holier than thou" type attitude and no issue resorting to insult and derision _immediately_ at any sign of disagreement. (Can I say one person? I think the first person got banned or something; I have not see that person here in at least a couple of years now....) I don't do much in NGD beyond a couple of the games, the joke thread, and the funny pictures thread myself. I go out of my way to not even _open_ the politics thread unless I have found an amusing image that is more suited for it than for the images threads. Even then, I make a hard effort to read _nothing_, even the post above the little box I am working in. After all, I like you folks. Why do I want to go out of my way to get angry with you? That's just silly, and entirely my fault for looking, right? Clarification: I said that I pushed 5 and 6e at people who asked me about the game we were playing. This was a different point in the conversation. I did _not_ suggest that either of those things was a complete game in and of themselves. I will go so far as to say that even the 4e "HERO System" was not a complete game. BBB was, since it had a book at the end to add some flavor and give character examples, a couple of plots, etc. I _did_ state that CC and FHC were complete games, but allow me a moment to explain why: while they are extremely dense (a necessity to reduce page and word count, but it does make them a bit of a slog to read through if you're brand-new to HERO), they are every bit as complete as were both the original Champions first edition and (arguably) the second edition Champions. (I say "arguably," because the case can be made the the Viper's Nest module made 2e somehow "more complete." (fun fact I don't think I have ever shared: I have never played Viper's Nest. Hell, I didn't even _read_ it until I had realized that I had never read it-- twenty-some years after having purchased my first 2e ! ) Do I feel they could have been more complete? Certainly. Well, at leaset FHC could have been. It could have been a one-book game by simply eliminating build data (the "powers" section, essentially), picking one or possibly two magic systems-- maybe even three (let's say "druidic," "Holy," and "Shamanistic" just for fun), describing the differences between them (akin to the 4e "spell colleges." I never liked the 4e colleges, but that's a different discussion, I think) and then laying out-- let's say fifty actual completely-built spells, costed in "units" (another fun fact: I have always, and will always, refer to dice of effect and steps up or down a chart as "Levels" everywhere but on this board. For example: "But you get nine extra PD because you have three levels of Density Increase"). As players advanced, they could spend their XP on more "levels" of each spell, or buy new spells. The build for the spells / potions / whatever didn't even need to be included to make it a complete "one book" game. This would have left some room for a couple of sample characters and possibly even some very light exposition to suggest a world. Certainly a half-page for each of perhaps five, six races. Granted, this would have tied it into a set of assumptions, but that seems to be comforting to a lot of folks (witness what happened with Traveller, one of the most successful games of all time), and reduces the amount of time and confusion lost to building a simple spell. However---- let's look at CC: CC _almost_ needs all the powers build stuff. Certainly one could have instead put in "Blast" and a the list of powers, two sentence descriptions of how they work, the cost, and let it ride. The game would have still been complete and more easily picked up. Champions is completely playable without Advantages, Limitations, and Frameworks. Power levels are lower for the costs, but it _is_ completely playable. I think what happened here is that there was a desire to give Champions a great shot-- create something like its original roots-- at being a single thin book that gives a nice deep dive into the workings of the HERO System, and of course, Champions is-- at least once was, if the magazine reviews were to be believed-- the greatest superhero game ever designed because of the unique ability to create precisely the hero you want. Skipping back a moment: I think FHC took a similar "here's the whole system, even if the game would be easier to play if we had just ticked a lot of these boxes for you" approach because-- well, Fantasy has always been the largest sector of the RPG fandom. FHC had the potential to expose to the entire system people who would never dream of picking up a superhero game. That's just my thoughts, and be aware that they are based on nothing at all beyond what seems the most logical path that leads to what we ended up with. Now back to CC: Champions is totally playable without Power Modifiers of any kind. I _know_ it is, because my first two characters had none at all! It wasn't that I didn't grasp them (there were a couple that did take a bit of thinking on), but because I was in a hurry to throw together a character and get playing! I have met two brand-new GMs over they years who weren't using the modifiers because they hadn't really gotten it all sussed out, but wanted to go ahead and play, so they did. I assume as they played and gained experience with the system, they added the complexity; I don't know. The most important thing with CC is that of the two, superheroes have the least amount of need for a setting. The vast majority of superhero adventures are set in "today." They are set in "right now" and, for whatever reason, New York. Okay, I _halfway_ kid about that, but New York seems to have _more_ supers per square inch than any other place in the universe. Don't know New York? Well, neither do your players! Just think "craploads of stupid-tall buildings" and run with it. Of the two "complete" books, CC suffered far less for not having any sort of background or setting. But even then, it _was_ every bit as complete as the very first Champions game, and I don't think acknowledging that is misleading. FHC? Well, it's playable, but yes: the aspiring GM will have far more work ahead of him than will the aspiring CC GM. Still, that book, too, is every bit as complete as the original Champions book. Not what I would have liked to have seen, but with solid determination, playable as-is with only what is presented in the book. You are preaching to the choir, Sir. And frankly, I think _this_-- more than any mechanic or similarity or difference between HERO and not-HERO-- is the crux of the problem with recruiting new-to-HERO players and GMS. it is not complexity; it is not which way you read the dice; it is not the lack of cards or d4 or or critical successes or exploding dice or anything else. It is the complete lack of a game! There is no game in there! Remember what the books cost? Seems like the two big books were in the fifty bucks each range; then Skills, MA, Tech, APG (1 and 2) and I am probably forgetting a few--- what did they go for? Yes; detractors from this will say "you only need the first two," but I will counter that with the well-documented fact that Duke is the only person in the entire fandom who does _not_ think MA is a vital, necessary, un-get-by-without-it-able book, making it, at least to the fandom, the third absolute core rule book. So what did you spend on those three? Paperback? A hundred and thirty bucks? Hardback? Two-something? And you DID NOT GET AN ACTUAL GAME, did you?! THIS-- _THIS ONE THING_-- more than any other possible change that could be made to mechanics-- is the hands-down absolute largest barrier to getting new people interested. The argument can be made that a world can be found with a splatbook. You still need to shell out that hundred and fifty to use that book, don't you? And once you have that worldbook, you can populate with.... what? Pick up one of the bestiaries! Can it be argued that at least the blue one becomes "core rules" when a GM would like to build a fantasy campaign? Want a dragon? There is a separate bestiary specifically for dragons, available only in softcover (it's very pretty) and I paid FIFTY BUCKS for it (gift for my daughter a few years back; she digs dragons). At least with FHC, I can squeeze something out by skipping Core 1 and Core 2, but now I need FHC, MA, Bestiary, and possibly Dragons. Still no game, though, because I don't have a world! So FHC, MA, Bestiary (I've decided to skip dragons for this world), and-- Crap. I really wanted to say Tuala Morn, but that's 5e. Yes; perfectly compatible, but I'm going somewhere here. How about Atlantean Age? Was that 6e? Let me run to the Store real quick. BRB! Okay, let's say we pick up Christopher's Jolrhos Field Guide (the PDF is fifteen bucks. I hope there's a paper copy, because I missed the release news, and I really, really prefer paper). Even then, we have to sort of _hope_ it's an actual setting book and not some sort of accessory (remember: I am a new guy, and haven't been following Christopher's notes ). Now If I take the advice of FHC and decide I can get more flavor out of Fantasy HERO, then choke on the sixty-dollar price tag on the only paper copy on e-Bay..... Okay, we'll pick that up later. Right now we have FHC, MA, Bestiary, a world book ( we hope), and.... races? How do we do races? Well, maybe there's something in the Bestiary. Maybe there's something in the world book. Maybe. Maybe i need... Crap! What do I need? (Fantasy HERO and a couple of NPC books, actually, but we don't know that yet). And _now_-- and only now-- do we have what most players today would call a complete game. It is positively ridiculous to think that this is going to pull in waves and waves of new customers. One Book Games. I have said it for years now: One Book Games. They don't have to be big or complex, just playable out of the box. I say the following with nothing-- and I mean _nothing_!-- but love and respect for everyone on this board (except the two d&*ks I have on ignore): In my own experience-- and I confess that my access to real-world gaming culture is very limited because of my geographical location-- is that only the people on this board feel that way, and I will reiterate how much I think HERO shot itself in the throat by assuming that these folks-- the most hardcore of HERO fandom-- were somehow the most representative of potential HERO customers. It makes me very depressed. Not that it isn't important to provide something for the long-time fans, but not at the expense of attracting new blood. I don't have an opinion on that, honestly, simply because the mechanics currently _are_ kind of grouped: Damage Dice, mental Powers, Skill Checks, Movement (with EDM being something of an odd-man-out there). There are corner-cases, probably, that I can't think of right now, as it's getting on toward bedtime here, but I think that's something you find in any game. I agree. One Book Games. Champions. Espionage Justice, Inc Fantasy HERO Robot Warriors Danger, International Star HEROPS238 Lucha HERO MHI It _seems_ to work. But in all these years (the newest game in that list is a 3e publication), we have added only four more tiles: Lucha HERO (which was going-in not expected to be a huge hit, and was a labor of love by the author. I loved it, but I understand that it is a niche sort of thing ). The next one was tanked by the creator of the licensed IP. PS 238 was a great showing of an all-in-one superhero universe (though I thought the property was a bit weak). Christopher's all-in-one Western HERO is wonderful, but at this point, the HERO fandom has shrunk to a point that I don't see it becoming a huge hit across the market, and of course: young folks aren't into westerns the way they once where..... And that's essentially what the one-book games do: nail down the variables, and give you just the stuff relevant to that particular setting. The full HERO System can certainly handle that, and there is considerable discussion in the current rules sets about doing just that to create a game. However, it refuses to actually do it; it requires that you do it so that it can maintain its appeal as the ultimate universal toolkit. In its desire to maintain the highest possible appeal to everyone, they have created a situation where there isn't enough flavor to appeal to anyone (outside of us diehards, that is).

Fixed; thanks. Posting from a (_*(#$%^&&* touch screen, and while for years I have suspected that my autocorrect doesn't speak english, a suggestion earlier this evening has me absolutely terrified of it. Anybody know how to train a droid spell check? (I promise you, I have _never_ typed or voiced what it wanted to say, and I don't want that to slip out because I didn't catch the correction!)

Well well well..... We've done a lot of magazine and pulp adventure images, and suddenly I stumble across this thingy... http://thrilling-tales.webomator.com/derange-o-lab/pulp-o-mizer/pulp-o-mizer.html It's lots of fun!

There are rules for building them, to be sure. I have ignored them for years, and will continue to do so until some time after I am dead (I intend to haunt my books a bit before moving on). As other have noted, if it is a normal everyday sort of thing, then you dont pay points for it. So lets get to your "hacking computer." I would start (and get lambasted for not following the letter of the rules, and then counter with I am following the spirit of the rules! ) with skill levels as powers, buying levels only the skill bonuses I think puts it ahead of a "normal, everyday computer." All comouters have eidetic memory and lightning calculator, for example. so... Security Systems plus 5 (or whatever seems right) computer programing plus 5 Concealment (to cover your tracks; this one I would probably buy the whole skill, since any Concealment the character already has is likely not specifically Cyber-concealment. If it is, then just buy some bonuses.) Perhaps- and while it could be justified by a GM, I wouod be hard pressed to require it) some kind of computer-to-computer telepathy to represent forcibly removing data. Again, I wouldn't, but there are GMs who believe that "if you can shoehorn it into the concept, then you absolutely must buy it." In this case, however, I think programming (to break into systems and files) and concealment (to know where to look for the hidden gold) would cover it all quite nicely. Take the total costs, add an appropriate focus limitation (if you can be deprived of the computer) and call it a day. I might go so far as to borrow from the actual computer rules and divide by whatever the current discount is (one for five? One for ten?) Before applying the Focus Limitation. Done. Computer. Essentially, the light-up box is special effects for the skilks it facilitates.

Ah; allow me,to elaborate: "I have taken a hostage to ensure the removal of the offending material!"

That made my spine hurt. And I think I have cancer now.

i dont know, Amigo. Those look like pretty good ol' boys right there. Holy crap! Hiw do you edit autocorrect on droid? I just typed good ol' boys- and it did it again!- And I had to fight with it a couole of times because it wanted to correct it to the most racist thing I have heard in quite some time. As I live surrounded by Trump supporters, you can imagine how bad that is.

It has been far more civil and friendly than such discussions in the past; there is no doubt. The thing is- and the reason that I don't get mad at people for thinking this is a possible solution for garnering players-- is that I completely understand the desire to see more HERO gamers, and to see the company thrive-- I would like that myself; what fan wouldn't? Problematically, HERO shot itself in the foot so far as attracting new players with the _massive_ core rules and their general aversion to creating one-book complete games. Lucha Hero was great, but very niche. Western HERO was also excellent. Fantasy HERO Complete and Champions Complete were one-book games, but the requirement for both genres to include the full build rules (ie, Powers) made them, in the words of a friend, "impenetrably dense" to the casual gamer or light reader. Well done; don't doubt that for a second, but very dense and dry. MHI could have been a massive hit, but then the IP owner screwed his own popularity, and anyone who bought a license ended up holding the bag (please: let's not discuss that here. Like "this will get them off their tractors-- uh, away from D and D," it has been rehashed until there is nothing left but hard feelings. I do feel really bad for the investment HERO made into it, though). Do I think one-book games would bring more people to the fold? Not in droves; certainly not. But I tend to think that they are, by their nature, less off-putting than is "read these twelve hundred pages, get familiar with the mechanics, and then we will go over the genre-specific stuff from Splatbook X, and then build a world, some,locations, an economy, and finally some characters; see you in two weeks!" has done so far. As always, though, these are just the opinions of one old guy who watched his favorite version of the game die thirty years ago.

Their training means they probably get by on far fewer snacks, too!

Does anyone know how to get hold of these two? https://i.imgur.com/NrErzo4.mp4