Christopher R Taylor

Pretty sure Haymaker is exclusive - that is, it cannot be combined with any other maneuver.

Definitions are sliding a bit. We're not talking "smart" we're talking "top of their field genius." We're not talking "fit and healthy" we're talking "toughest guy on the battlefield that soaks up damage and laughs." That front line warrior with the plate armor who can take the big hits isn't just fit. The thief type is fit. The Ranger is fit. The mage can be fit. He's a brick.

Android would be enough. I know a lot of people use Iphones but I'm not confident any but a tiny minority are gamers, and Apple appears to be on the wane in terms of technology and market share.

OK we need to decide what adventure we're going to give to the GM to run as an introduction to Champions. So, here's a poll. I can't figure out how to add one into a comment so I'll just do it manually: WHAT ADVENTURE SCENARIO DO YOU PREFER 1) Viper's Nest 2) Deathstroke 3) Some other conversion from Champions past (please specify) 4) A conversion of some other product (please specify and explain) 5) A totally new adventure my vote is 2, then 1 as an alternate.

The point isn't whether this is great for you or terrifically functional in all situations, but rather whether it would be welcome to others, perceived as modern and up to date, and help Hero's business life.

I vote for a reboot of Viper's Nest or Deathstroke over something completely new just for the sake of making things a lot easier.

I agree someone needs to build a couple of great Hero apps for the company: a dice roller/damage calculator, a character builder, a combat hit list manager, etc. Those would all be quite welcome. An official module for systems like Fantasy Grounds would also be good. But, who's gonna pay for all this?

I think presenting the system as a basic super stripped down core rules to players, then adding in options and choices for the game is the best approach. Some obviously have a package (classic Champions: no hit locations, no bleeding, no disabling/impairing, uses knockback, etc) but if you start on that basis, you have a very simple, easy to learn game. That's the approach we're trying with the Champions Begins project, start players out with absolute minimum info, then add bits in as each adventure session takes place, resulting in a sort of tutorial approach.

I'm fine with Diamond Spear being the one that keeps people on track and focused, organizing who does what, etc. I can be the editor and do some writing and art. If need be, I can do layouts and publishing work as well, I have quite a bit of experience with that and have a little business that does publishing.

No attack is useless in a fight, but some of them are not going to serve you very well against any sort of skilled combatant. The problem with combat simulation and movies etc is that things go wrong. Your foot slips. You get a catch in your side. You get an eyelash in your eye. Your opponent surprises you by doing something you were completely unready for. Someone gets distracted. Your clothing binds up and restricts your movement. Real life us messy and ugly, and the best fighter in the world can lose against a complete amateur just because of something stupid.

Yeah but d4 hps, and +4 per level isn't going to make up for that. And you couldn't wear heavy armor (for the AC), so you weren't a bruiser that could take a heavy hit and keep going. And that THACO was terrible.

Well, there's a difference between worldbuilding and the overwhelming compulsion to find a scientific answer for how everything works. Its one thing to say "Dragons were once rulers of the land and all died out, but are coming back to life because the king dragon, banished in time, has returned" *COUGHskyrimCOUGH* Its another to say "dragons were evolved from smaller lizards and experimented on by aliens so they have a gland which produces flammable gas allowing them to fly yadda yadda... The former has a good feel of magic and wonder and fantasy that takes you to another world and feels special, like when you were a kid and around that corner there might be a pegasus, based on that shadow and the forest has faeries in it that hide when you come but if you sit quietly enough.... The latter is just another blah place with different shaped animals working exactly like ours.

I think the word "believable" or "plausible" is better than "realistic." As in internally consistent and reasonable based upon certain assumptions like "magic exists" and "dragons can talk and fly." To me, the modern need to inject scientific explanations or quasi-scientific explanations into every single situation and setting is a silly concept that is going to be very dated when people look back at the books from this era. Who cares how dragons got here, why do you need to explain what evolutionary process gave orcs tusks? Its going down a rabbit hole that does not need to be explored and for me at least robs magic and fantasy of its wonder and charm by delving too deeply into parts that are best left unexplained.

Yeah I don't really associate Danny Rand with anything in particular. He's a blonde California like guy in the comics, but whatever, its the concept of the character that works for me. He's a martial artist without that martial artist persona. I would love to see Shang-Chi, he's great, but he doesn't really stand out particularly as a character. I'd love to see White Tiger (the hispanic guy version) though, he's kind of interesting and distinct. Especially if you start him out as one of three guys with the amulet who eventually learns how much powerful it gets with all three.

Yeah Zslane, we all know that, but now someone will trot out some nerd academic that can bench press 900 and pretend that's not abnormal.

I think you could definitely appeal to players along those lines: try the real thing. I've had some success with that in the past, its true.

I think its more that more immediate, visual and tangible methods of this sort of entertainment are available without as much trouble to attain. Computer games, fantastic films, console games, etc all fill the gap in the past which we filled with imagination and being together in person. True, the imagination/in person model is superior, but it is something you can do only once in a while, when people have the time and schedule to do so. I can play a MMOG any time I can log on to the game, and don't need anyone else. Playing a nice session of Champions or Fantasy Hero requires at least one other person, time, and a particular location. Someone has to put in a lot of work to prepare the game, and it is minimal in its visual presentation. So: its just easier to play computer games, even if they aren't quite as satisfying or deep. Educations are roughly the same, reading has gone down hill significantly, but is still out there. But attention spans and demands have changed. Role Playing Games are too much work for the level of personal satisfaction and pleasure.

Yes, you can, if you try hard enough, on a planet with 6+ billion people, find exceptions to the rule. That's what makes it a rule: the fact that you can find rare, extreme examples that are different - their rarity and extreme nature make the rule the standard.

I just want to be able to blind myself with fletching when I roll badly firing an arrow. That there is the Rolemaster experience.

Oh yeah, its awful seeing what people do with swords in films. Perhaps the worst is that they aim at each others swords when fighting, instead of their opponent. And there's a lot of blocking with the edge, which is a good way of cutting notches in your blade, or, as we have discussed, even breaking it. Swords will not, unless enchanted, slice through a chain easily, if at all. For that matter its really, really hard to decapitate someone with a sword unless its built for it, they're really exposed, and you get a heck of a swing. But it looks cool, so we have a choice as GMs: do we want gritty, Medieval-accurate swordplay, or cinematic badass swordplay? The same thing goes for weapon and armor damage. If you want a game where the heroes never have to worry about fixing their armor or swords, their equipment doesn't break or degrade, and they can wear their armor all day long, well cool. If you don't, its time to have some mechanism to make things go wrong. I prefer this latter sort of game, myself.

Some maneuvers are exclusive, that is, they cannot be used with any other attack maneuver. Thus, you can't do a sweep/dodge maneuver; its one or the other. Haymaker is one that I would consider exclusive, and the rules seem to as well. For multiple power attacks, I agree with the rules: Haymaker is by its definition an all-or-nothing complete attack in its self, an all-out blitzkrieg that negates any other maneuvers or attacks.

Supers is probably the easiest open field even with M&M and other knockoffs out there. Hero is still best known for Champions and its the standard for superhero games, even if its perceived as being a bit clunky and creaky these days. A killer intro and a series of great campaign arcs like Pathfinder games would go a long ways toward making it the gold standard again. We already have a campaign setting, all that's needed is the stuff to make it easy for GMs to jump right in.

I like them once in a while, and I like villains with vulnerabilities a smart character can exploit, but yeah, I'm with you overall.

Sure, just the more powerful and outrageous you make them, the more blatant and annoying it becomes. And there's a big difference between a fit academic (sort of easy to do, lots of down time in academia where you can exercise) and a brick academic. Someone like The Rock does not have time to do any heavy reading or thinking. Someone like Einstein doesn't have time to get ripped. A really great mage has no time or energy to become also a really tough front line bruiser that can take the hits, unless he uses magic to buff himself up.

Its time for a 6th edition version posted here as an homage!