Jhamin

It’s the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine. 

I... disagree.  I started with 4e just fine & what I see of 3rd doesn't make me want to go back.  I've introduced players to 5 and to 6, and both are fine.
 
What I do hear a lot of from people trying to get into Hero is that they are super confused by what books they should actually use.  Champions?  Champions Complete?  6e?  (Is that the same as Champions Complete?  Sorta....)
I 100% think its a presentation issue, but I don't think its a rules issue.  In 2022 new players aren't turning away from Hero because of how END is calculated and going to an older formula isn't going to make them all come running back.  I think we need to make it easier to know where to start, know how to start a game, etc. Less toolkit and more "here, do this"
 
"Champions Begins" was a really great place to start.  How did that go?

I... disagree.  I started with 4e just fine & what I see of 3rd doesn't make me want to go back.  I've introduced players to 5 and to 6, and both are fine.
 
What I do hear a lot of from people trying to get into Hero is that they are super confused by what books they should actually use.  Champions?  Champions Complete?  6e?  (Is that the same as Champions Complete?  Sorta....)
I 100% think its a presentation issue, but I don't think its a rules issue.  In 2022 new players aren't turning away from Hero because of how END is calculated and going to an older formula isn't going to make them all come running back.  I think we need to make it easier to know where to start, know how to start a game, etc. Less toolkit and more "here, do this"
 
"Champions Begins" was a really great place to start.  How did that go?

I... disagree.  I started with 4e just fine & what I see of 3rd doesn't make me want to go back.  I've introduced players to 5 and to 6, and both are fine.
 
What I do hear a lot of from people trying to get into Hero is that they are super confused by what books they should actually use.  Champions?  Champions Complete?  6e?  (Is that the same as Champions Complete?  Sorta....)
I 100% think its a presentation issue, but I don't think its a rules issue.  In 2022 new players aren't turning away from Hero because of how END is calculated and going to an older formula isn't going to make them all come running back.  I think we need to make it easier to know where to start, know how to start a game, etc. Less toolkit and more "here, do this"
 
"Champions Begins" was a really great place to start.  How did that go?

I'm trying, Sketchpad! I've been posting a variety of my game support materials for Champions and more recently Fantasy Hero for fans to download for quite some time now. My initial post was expressing personal frustration and the difficulty to recruit new players since the current product reads like a textbook (5th/6th Ed.) and the previous product I want to use that could probably help my efforts (3rd) can't be a print on demand project to a hardcover edition via Lulu.
 
In the meantime, I'm drawing from 3rd Edition while simplifying 5th/6th Edition to hopefully gather new player interest in my part of Omaha, NE. 🙂

I want to do one more retread of 80s stuff (Escape from Stronghold) because in my opinion it is lacking and can be done better, and updated.  But I agree, new stuff is ideal.  I think Hero really ought to update and reprint their older adventures so they match 6th and are packaged in a manner that is more modern, but newer stuff is very desirable as well for older players.
 
But, I agree a lot with both Steriaca and Scott: if you have the ability, do it yourself.  If you want to see something published, and you can do it, then its time to make it happen.

I've been arguing this for a while.  Give me something to *do* with all these tools.  I don't need an Advanced Players Guide 3 or the big book of Talents.  I need some adventures.
Battlegrounds was *great*, but it was also published in 2003.
The Island of Doctor Destroyer was republished a few years ago, but its a retread of something from the 80s.
 
Let do some adventures!

I've been arguing this for a while.  Give me something to *do* with all these tools.  I don't need an Advanced Players Guide 3 or the big book of Talents.  I need some adventures.
Battlegrounds was *great*, but it was also published in 2003.
The Island of Doctor Destroyer was republished a few years ago, but its a retread of something from the 80s.
 
Let do some adventures!

Your friend is correct. Biggest turn off in the 6th edition is it is like a text book. It feels like it sucked all the fun out that say the 4th Ed big blue book had in it. 
 
frankly the game doesn’t need another edition. It really needs SUPPORT. Adventures. Scenarios. Settings. Games like pathfinder have the adventure paths. 5e has adventure campaigns
 
beyond 4th I don’t see much in that same support. I’m restarting a campaign using the BBB because it’s what folks know. But beyond battlegrounds and anarchy there are no senarios to support the game
 
we need more support items to run games. Not a new edition. Each edition is a toolbox. But nothing really to support that toolbox

I think some of this is fallout from Hero being a Universal Tool Kit system that grew out of some specific genres.
 
We are all mostly OK with guns costing points in Supers but being equipment you can have as long as you can justify it in most other Genres.  We are OK with powers being a thing you expect most people to have in some Genres, but are wildly inappropriate for others.  We are even OK with spells being made with the powers rules but PCs actually paying 1/5 or 1/2 cost for them for world-specific reasons.
 
I think the issue with some of this is that we try to shoehorn the same skills system, the same END rules, the same cost structures into all these different Genres.  As Christopher R Taylor says above, he ignored as much of the survival skill system as he could in an official product because he didn't need it for the Genre.
 
I've long argued that the difference between "Cop: 12-" and buying 6 different skills to reflect Law Enforcement training was less of a Hero System change and more of a campaign guidelines change.  I'm starting to wonder if that's wrong.  I'm starting to wonder if just like every game decides if equipment costs points or not, if Hero needs a few more "dials" like this.
Does being a scientist cost 3 points for a science skill keyed to your INT or does it require a dozen different skills?  Is End used?  is it 1/20 AP, 1/10AP, 1/5AP, etc.   Can characters buy "super skill" powers like Stealth bought as the invisibility power with mods, or are they limited to the skill rules? etc If Hero were to hypothetically go down this road, I'd love to see a choice between lots of cheap skills, broad ranging cheap skills, or in a world where lots of people can buy SS: Chemistry for 3 points there is also a "Super Science" skill/power that guys like Mr Fantastic and MCU Stark and Banner have.  It would all be campaign choices, because I don't think one size fits all (the current approach) is working well for Western Hero, Justice International and Champions.

I think some of this is fallout from Hero being a Universal Tool Kit system that grew out of some specific genres.
 
We are all mostly OK with guns costing points in Supers but being equipment you can have as long as you can justify it in most other Genres.  We are OK with powers being a thing you expect most people to have in some Genres, but are wildly inappropriate for others.  We are even OK with spells being made with the powers rules but PCs actually paying 1/5 or 1/2 cost for them for world-specific reasons.
 
I think the issue with some of this is that we try to shoehorn the same skills system, the same END rules, the same cost structures into all these different Genres.  As Christopher R Taylor says above, he ignored as much of the survival skill system as he could in an official product because he didn't need it for the Genre.
 
I've long argued that the difference between "Cop: 12-" and buying 6 different skills to reflect Law Enforcement training was less of a Hero System change and more of a campaign guidelines change.  I'm starting to wonder if that's wrong.  I'm starting to wonder if just like every game decides if equipment costs points or not, if Hero needs a few more "dials" like this.
Does being a scientist cost 3 points for a science skill keyed to your INT or does it require a dozen different skills?  Is End used?  is it 1/20 AP, 1/10AP, 1/5AP, etc.   Can characters buy "super skill" powers like Stealth bought as the invisibility power with mods, or are they limited to the skill rules? etc If Hero were to hypothetically go down this road, I'd love to see a choice between lots of cheap skills, broad ranging cheap skills, or in a world where lots of people can buy SS: Chemistry for 3 points there is also a "Super Science" skill/power that guys like Mr Fantastic and MCU Stark and Banner have.  It would all be campaign choices, because I don't think one size fits all (the current approach) is working well for Western Hero, Justice International and Champions.

I think some of this is fallout from Hero being a Universal Tool Kit system that grew out of some specific genres.
 
We are all mostly OK with guns costing points in Supers but being equipment you can have as long as you can justify it in most other Genres.  We are OK with powers being a thing you expect most people to have in some Genres, but are wildly inappropriate for others.  We are even OK with spells being made with the powers rules but PCs actually paying 1/5 or 1/2 cost for them for world-specific reasons.
 
I think the issue with some of this is that we try to shoehorn the same skills system, the same END rules, the same cost structures into all these different Genres.  As Christopher R Taylor says above, he ignored as much of the survival skill system as he could in an official product because he didn't need it for the Genre.
 
I've long argued that the difference between "Cop: 12-" and buying 6 different skills to reflect Law Enforcement training was less of a Hero System change and more of a campaign guidelines change.  I'm starting to wonder if that's wrong.  I'm starting to wonder if just like every game decides if equipment costs points or not, if Hero needs a few more "dials" like this.
Does being a scientist cost 3 points for a science skill keyed to your INT or does it require a dozen different skills?  Is End used?  is it 1/20 AP, 1/10AP, 1/5AP, etc.   Can characters buy "super skill" powers like Stealth bought as the invisibility power with mods, or are they limited to the skill rules? etc If Hero were to hypothetically go down this road, I'd love to see a choice between lots of cheap skills, broad ranging cheap skills, or in a world where lots of people can buy SS: Chemistry for 3 points there is also a "Super Science" skill/power that guys like Mr Fantastic and MCU Stark and Banner have.  It would all be campaign choices, because I don't think one size fits all (the current approach) is working well for Western Hero, Justice International and Champions.

I am still wondering why this isn't simply, Regeneration, only while asleep -1 but I guess i believe too strongly in KISS.

Until I started playing in a regular 6th edition Champions game, 3rd edition was my jam.  I played in a couple of sessions run by @lemming at GameStorm in 2018, which is where I realized that he was using writeups from 5th and 6th editions without alteration, and the transitions were seamless.  That's where I started thinking that editions don't matter.  
 
When I started playing 6th edition regularly it started growing on me, and I realized I was having as much fun with it as in the old days, and the experience of play was the same.  Counting out hexes of movement, rolling out damage and Knockback... all of that felt exactly the same.  
 
I'll admit that tactics might differ, and I've gone into a lot of detail about how the experience of building characters and taking them into play differs, but to be honest I have a hard time seeing it in actual play.  The END thing... if in 4th-6th you're spending 2-4 END a phase on movement and 6 END per attack... at SPD 5 that's 40-50 END per Turn, so you're going to start running into issues almost as much as in first gen.  
 
For Fantasy Hero I'd almost have to play the original.  I've only played a little bit of FH post-3rd, and it never felt right to me, feeling like Champions in armor and swords.  I'd have to give it a good try in a campaign.  
 
I ran a short campaign of Robot Warriors using 6th edition for characters and the original book for robots, plus my conversion document, and it played identically to the original.  From that I'd expect that a Danger International game using 6th edition but otherwise the same assumptions as the original (no Powers, no points charged for equipment) would play the same as the original as well.  I didn't play a lot of Justice Inc. and no Star Hero (lots of SF-nal DI though), so I can't really speak to those, but I'd have to expect again that with the right initial assumptions it should play close enough.  
 
As far as editions, I don't think I really gave 4th a fair shake.  I played lots of 4th edition Champions, but I never really got over the rules changes that seemed unnecessary to me.  Point cost changes in powers I could deal with, but the big ones were the changes to END cost, Range Modifiers, and Disadvantage cost structure... and those don't bother me now for some reason.  I'm not sure why.  I played a total of one session of 5th (Fantasy Hero), and it just reinforced my feeling of it being Champions with horses and swords and shields.  

Yes, we are on the same wavelength here.

This.  Absolutely this.
 
 
Definitely NOT this.  Hero does not need a 7e in any way, shape or form. NOT THIS!!!
 
 
THIS!  100% THIS!!!  1 MILLION% THIS!!!!!!!!!
 
We don't need a rework of the tools in the toolkit.  We need ACTUAL GAMES that people can ACTUALLY PLAY built using the toolkit.  The toolkit doesn't need to be at the forefront of these games.  They don't even need to include the builds defined in toolkit terms - put that online for interested folks. Build a game Powered by HERO without pulling back the curtain to show the crunchy Hero System build mechanics. Sell people a GAME, not a huge set of tiny parts they can use to build a game. 
 
A game where you CAN'T build whatever you imagine - you build what the choices made by the user of the toolkit already made for you.  Now play, and see how well the game plays.  And if, after that, you want to look under the hood, and maybe even do your own tinkering, you can always buy the Hero System and do so.

A few years ago I was working at a basketball camp with the high school basketball coach and we had young kids (4th graders, 5th graders etc).  
Coach was explaining shooting form to the kids and he said for them to picture like they were "in a phone booth".
 
I interrupted him and I asked the kids, "Who knows what a phone booth is?"  No one raised their hands.  
 
We changed it to an elevator shaft.

I have my issues with the presentation.  I do think that 4e was the height of accessibility for Hero, but the big blue book was *very* focused on Superheroes.  I agree that the 2 volume version of 6e is probably not the way to get new players and that Champions Complete was a much better entry product.
 
When it gets down to how every rules change since 1982, 1984, or 1990 has been a step backwards, along with other threads on this board about how a bunch of super dated setting stuff like Eurostar is still relevant in the 2020s or discussions about how you basically can't have investigations in the age of cell-phones I keep coming back to my growing feeling that a lot of the people who are still posting here are mostly nostalgic for their high school & college games from 30-40 years ago.

I have my issues with the presentation.  I do think that 4e was the height of accessibility for Hero, but the big blue book was *very* focused on Superheroes.  I agree that the 2 volume version of 6e is probably not the way to get new players and that Champions Complete was a much better entry product.
 
When it gets down to how every rules change since 1982, 1984, or 1990 has been a step backwards, along with other threads on this board about how a bunch of super dated setting stuff like Eurostar is still relevant in the 2020s or discussions about how you basically can't have investigations in the age of cell-phones I keep coming back to my growing feeling that a lot of the people who are still posting here are mostly nostalgic for their high school & college games from 30-40 years ago.

Movement is exactly the same as it was.  A normal human being moves 12 meters in a combat move in a phase, no matter what edition you use.  It was called "inches" but the distance was always exactly the same.  If you want you can still call it that, or consider each hex to be 2m.  You roll to hit the same.  You resolve damage the same.  You use the same maneuvers.  You have the same stats for damage.  You have the same powers that act the same way (entangle, KA, drain, etc).  You use the same defenses. 
 
I mean, people bring up stuff like Comeliness being gone (didn't affect game play, that's RP stuff), Complication points (character creation) and other ideas, but when it comes down to sitting at the table, someone who only played 3rd edition traveling through time could play 6th edition without any confusion or shock very easily.  There are a few new powers to get used to but aside from that?  Its the same game.  
 
I cannot for the life of me comprehend how someone would suddenly have no fun with Champions because of the new editions, its not like D&D which changed so much between recent editions.  Its just Champions with some new bells and whistles added.  What about the new edition makes it less fun?  The color of the books?
 
I have some problems with 6th, but I mean, this whole "it ruined the game" thing is baffling to me. You can even add Comeliness back into the game if you want, the rules even say so.

He may have made it clear, but it is presented with every other rule for character creation in 6E1. 

It is presented as an Optional Rule, which like Christopher says above is no differnt than starting points. Is there a rule requiring a GM to start all players with the same amount of points?

A house rule is specifically a term for an unofficial rule made up by players independent of the rules.

When people have questions about other Optional rules do you just dismiss the question because it is an option you do not like or use? If someone asked about stop signs or difficulty modifiers to skills would you tell them to ignore them. Those are only there for GM guidelines?

I think it is inconsistant to treat a concept like Active Point limits in the same way as a House Rule. They are a optional rule presented in 6E1&2 with ranges, guidelinbes and  even a suggested doubling of cost for points spent above those limites. 

I mean come on. If they are just made up house rules why would Hero Designer need to support active point limits in the first place?

To be clear, to me the "house rule" arguments are dismissive and dishonest/inconsistant with how they are presented in the system. 

To answer the question directly, the last time Champions was fun for me was 6E. Do I think 6E is perfect? Of course not. Do I approve all the changes that 6E brought? No. Do I believe it's a bloody good game. Hell yeah!
 
What is my favorite edition? Probably a blend of 4, 5 and 6. Given a choice between all editions, which one would I choose? 6E.
 
But if I could, I would play 7E

Long ago on another board I remember someone reviewing the 2nd edition of a board game.  They were a superfan of the first edition and claimed to have played it over a hundred times.  The review was full of stuff like "I can remember every rule of the old edition, but have to look up how do do things in the new edition" or "the old version had simple line art and this has full color illustrations and I have to re-learn which picture goes with what card".
 
I gotta say, it was frustrating to read.  The entire review was "they changed it now it sucks" but he never had any actual critiques of the changes.  The reviewer was just mad it wasn't the same.
 
I'm not saying that is what people are doing here.  Just a couple posts up I lodged some complaints about presentation, but I really agree with Christopher.  Hero 6 is 85%-95% the same as Hero 3.  Rules are better explained and quantified, but back back in the day that is what we wanted.  If you don't like Hero 6 I"m not sure what changed from Hero 3 that made 3 good and 6 bad.
 
To try to bring this back in a more useful direction:  What about 3e does 6e not do?  What do people miss that a hypothetical 7e could get back too? 
 
Other than include the group you played with in High School?  Hero probably can't help you there

I'm still rocking my Middle Man sig here on the Boards.  You are in for a treat.

That is a house rule.  Its probably not one that breaks the game, but it *is* a house rule. You can't expect the official rules of a power framework to conform to a house rule without some hand-waving.