zslane

Um, yeah, well if that is indeed what the OP meant, then I strongly recommend that the player in question avoid trying to GM this game system... I have always avoided GMing the Hero System precisely because of (what I perceive as) the intrinsic difficulty in effectively running so many separate characters (villains and agents) simultaneously. I suppose if I had a character concept that I absolutely loved which was best represented by Multiform, I'd bite the bullet and deal with the sheet swapping. But I do understand the reluctance to do that if it's not strictly necessary.

That last paragraph is a helpful annotation intended, I think, to provide guidance to GMs of non-supers genres where flashy power fx which are unambiguously preceivable by multiple senses is not the norm. Some other means of conveying the original intent of the rules becomes necessary because of a shift in genre conventions. I suppose Star Wars, being space opera and not strictly speaking superheroes, would not carry the implicit assumption that END-costing powers must have easily visible power fx (I'm sorry but the "its obvious that it is Telekinesis because all characters in the game universe knows what Force TK is" doesn't quite cut it). I would argue that the Star Wars Force TK example is not really a case of re-interpretation of the standard visible power fx rules (and, by extension IPE), but rather a genre-specific relaxation of it as a compulsory element on all END-costing powers.

I think you may be a bit too fixated on the notion of obviousness. The rules don't have much to say about what constitutes "obvious", except perhaps in the section on Focii, where it becomes an actual game term. END-costing powers are not merely supposed to be "obvious", they must be perceptible by normal Senses. The rules have quite a lot to say about what constitutes a Sense, what the "normal" senses are, and how they work. A power must be perceptible (I try to stay away from the word "visible" because that is restricted to the Sight sense group for the purposes of this discussion) to those things which the Hero System defines as a Sense. Objects floating through the air are visible, yes, but the power that is making them float may not be, and if not, it requires IPE. If a character could ever use his END-costing power in such a way that you can't tell he is using it, then it must have IPE. And by being able "to tell he is using it", that means perceptible to normal senses (at least one, usually more) even/especially if/when you can't perceive the user or the target. You can think of this as a subject-verb-object chain: the attacker is the subject, the power is the verb, and the target is the object. IPE relates exclusively to the verb in this analogy, and it doesn't matter how visible or "obvious" the subject or object are. If the verb itself isn't perceptible to normal senses, then it must be bought with IPE. There are too many ways for an observer to misinterpret objects simply floating in space: perceptible power fx are meant to eliminate such situational ambiguity.

Whether or not Multiform is "easier" than a power framework with a bunch of mutually exclusive slots depends on how different the power sets are between the male and female forms. Some things just don't fit into a Multipower. It may seem like more work, but the flexibility that having two completely separate forms, written as two different characters, often trumps the extra work involved. And if you keep the critical bookkeeping stats the same between them (BODY, STUN, END) then you don't have to deal with calculating proportional values when you switch between forms, and you retain the ability to easily give the two forms rather different characteristics (if that is part of the male/female concept). On the other hand, if the two forms are really not that different, and the differences are limited to powers that easily fit into the framework-with-limitations paradigm, then that would probably be the way to go. It's a lot like designing a piece of software. How much work you put into it up front often determines how easy it is to use and how easy it is to expand and enhance down the road. An awful lot of software developers start with a myopic view of their design and only implement the simplest possible spec, and then pay for that later when more flexibility is needed and not really supported by the adopted architecture.

I'm pretty sure that when it comes to the visual fx of a power, only the obviousness of the power itself is at issue (the state of the user/wielder is a separate, orthogonal concern). The reasons behind making a power's fx visible by default in the game are myriad, but do not in themselves govern whether or not a power has them. In fact, I believe you may have it backwards. The concealed state of an attacker can not render a power concealed by some wierd transitive property, rather, a power will "give away" a concealed attacker by virtue of its (compulsory) flashiness. If a character wants to be able to attack and not be obvious that they are doing so, they must be adequately concealed and the attack power must have IPE. Otherwise, it will be obvious to anyone within sense range of either the attacker or the perceivable fx of the power who is attacking and with what (assuming they recognize the fx). Other factors, like Indirect, can muddy the waters a bit, but Indirect isn't really meant to be a substitute for IPE.

The rule that a power costing END must have fx perceptible to more than one sense is not (situationally) context-dependent. It is an intrinsic part of the power regardless of whether or not the user is hiding in a crowd or standing alone in a set of villainous black armor. The power has visible power fx or it doesn't. The "obviousness" of the user is irrelevent. As such, the telekinetic powers of the Force have no visible fx in the Hero System sense of that term. Force TK has IPE no matter what the situational context is. The important thing to realize is that Vader could easily use his Force TK from a hidden position, with nobody knowing what is causing the objects to fly around. That means his Force TK has IPE. The fact that he often chooses to step out and fight in the open does not suddenly render his Force TK "visible".

Multiform is complicated? I missed the memo somewhere along the way...

Sure, and my ultimate point is that many of those reasons only make sense in the context of a detailed tactical treatment as you would get on a battlemat. This was in response to: "...when the speedster can travel across literally every single hex on the map in a turn amd the guy in power armor can fly at Mach 5, what's the point of a map?" Even with Speedsters and their "insane" amount of movement, there are countless reasons to use a map. One pointless usage example (traveling across the whole map in a Phase) does not a compelling anti-map argument make, that's all I'm trying to say.

No, Mach 5 was an example of non-combat speed, to be sure. I was speaking to the issue of high levels of combat speed as a general principle. One does not purchase 100" of Flight in order to pointlessly cross the battlemat, or to look cool or impressive. And a Speedster can't use lots of movement to attack and move away in the same Phase, so that example is invalid (and I have to believe that someone who knows and uses the actual rules would know that, but whatever...) One does it in order to add +20DCs to a 20-hex Move-By, or to reach the other side of the battlemat in order to get between an innocent bystander and a villain's attack. Or any number of other legitimate tactical needs that arise on the battlefield in your average superhero battle.

Transform is an attack. One does not handle switching between multiple intrinsic forms of a character as an attack upon oneself, even in a design-by-effect game like the Hero System. The switching of gender would simply be a built-in part of Multiform since each form can be anything. If the difference was cosmetic only, and didn't involve a change in power sets, then Shapeshift would generally cover it.

I kind of feel that the benefits of having lots of combat movement are pretty intuitive? Crossing the map in a single half move is (mostly) pointless, but having the Flight ability to do so is not. There are many tactically valuable things you can do with that much Flight (or Running or whatever).

By default, attack powers must be perceptible to normal senses. Usually that means you can see and hear them, but other possibilities exist, so long as they are fairly "obvious" to anyone within sense range. If an attack power is not going to be perceptible to at least one normal sense, it must be bought with IPE. As strange as it may seem for TK to have visible power fx, by default it does, whether it is wavy lines of energy, a spray of sparkles, or translucent tentacles. Anime is a perfect examplar because it, perhaps more than any other form, fully embraces this principle. If anyone is uncertain as to how Hero System powers should "look and feel" without IPE, think of Anime. Darth Vader's TK is "traditional" in a non-comic-book (non-Champions) way; there are no perceptible power fx. One could even argue that when he Force-choked Admiral Motti, the hand gesture was for purely dramatic effect, not required as per Gestures Limitation. The definition of "perceptible power fx" is not that someone with half a brain could figure out, from context, that someone is using a power. Powers that use END are flashy and obvious: Nightcrawler's "bamf" is a good example; he doesn't just blink out without a trace. His Teleportation is easily perceptible to three normal senses as per the rules.

Yes indeed, the Hero System--and more specifically, Champions--is a tactical wargame once combat begins. I wouldn't want it any other way. I want to know that I can or can't do a half move and reach cover, fire at a target at a specific range so I know how to assign my CSLs and RSLs, and do it from a direction that will, with a good enough damage roll, knock the target into a nearby wall and get awarded extra damage. I don't want the GM fudging it and deciding for me how much of all that applies, and to what extent. That robs me of way too much agency.

Historically speaking, the rules have treated Knockback as optional in heroic level games, preferring instead to nudge players towards simpler Knockdown rules. But I never really saw the need to do that since Knockback isn't as prevelent in games with low DC attacks anyway. I mean, explosions could and probably should knock characters across a room, so I see Knockback as a perfectly "reasonable" and plausible mechanic even for heroic level games.

There are quite a number of things in the Hero System that depend rather heavily on precise distances and relative positions. Knockback. Explosions. RMods. And then there are issues like LOS, where knowing for certain if something blocks it can make the difference between hitting or missing. There is no way you can execute any of that accurately without a battlemat. Estimating simply isn't good enough, not for me anyway.

I've never encountered Champions players who used theatre of the mind for superheroics. Everyone I've ever played with wanted to use every bit of tactical detail available on the battlemat. The thinking was that if you're running supers and you're not trying to line up your opponents for maximum knockback damage, you're doing it wrong... ;-)

My experience teaching the Hero System always boiled down to two primary factors: one, how into superheroes were they, and two, what previous RPG experience did they have. I had the easiest time teaching the system to superhero fans who had played D&D, at the very least, before. I had the hardest time teaching the system to people who had little or no RPG experience and who had little interest in superheroes.

I guess my point about the combat sheets is that streamlining combat isn't just a problem for newbies struggling with the system. Even when the game was observably simpler (maybe "less cluttered" is more accurate) back in 1st/2nd edition, the old "combat sheet" was a key element to keeping the game moving smoothly, even for experienced players. Newbies can take comfort in knowing that the Hero System has always been a highly crunchy system in need of such aids. Moreover, they can take heart in knowing that something as simple as a 1st. ed combat sheet can handle the trickiest part, and that Hero combat isn't so complex that a computer is required to track everything. I sometimes fear that an over-reliance on computers can lead to the impression that the Hero System virtually requires computerized tools.

There are a lot of things to take into consideration when performing an attack, but most of the same situational modifiers are found in every other RPG combat system out there as well. Such modifiers apply to either OCV or DCV, just as they might to THAC0 or BAB or whatever. In Hero it's basically: roll against the OCV/DCV "to hit" number. If successful, roll and calculate damage. Apply defender's damage mitigation, if any. Take damage. That's not much different than calculating a to-hit roll, rolling to hit, rolling and calculating damage, roll saving throw (if one applies), modify damage based on saving throw, mitigate damage due to other factors (spells), take damage. I think the fact that computing damage is a little different is what makes people think the Hero System involves so many more steps, when in fact, it really doesn't. I mean, really, rolling a killing attack is a single dice rolling act; the BODY dice and the STUN multiplier die are rolled together and the damage components calculated at the same time. Describing it as two steps is a strange exercise in deconstructionism if you ask me. Nearly every RPG system has its own unique way of determining to-hit chances, calculating damage, applying damage mitigation, and then applying damage or other status effects (stunning, etc.). I've not encountered any system with a comparable degree of outcome detail that had substantially fewer steps than the Hero System.

Since Champions 1st ed. there have been "combat sheets" where characters get listed, in SPD and DEX order, so that GMs can cycle through combatants easily. There's nothing particularly revolutionary about such a thing, and you don't even need a computer. In my experience, players who are really into the game have no trouble knowing when their Phases come up, and don't need to be told it is their turn to do something. Players who are really into the game also spend every moment of their time between Phases watching the situation unfold and preparing for their next Phase. Telling the GM what they are doing, and doing it with figures on a battlemat, becomes a very streamlined process. Time spent in combat is always going to scale with the number of on-board combatants, but it shouldn't ever fall hostage to the indecisive or to those who can't follow the game in progress and plan their moves before their Phase comes up.

I think that's why I like Golden and Silver Age campaigns. To my mind, the heroes should be rescuing innocent bystanders from the machinations of the villains, not from the "collateral damage" caused by their own heroic efforts. There's a kind of cynicism inherent in that "gritty realism" that I simply have no interest in exploring.

Prior to the deconstructionism of the 80s and the nihilism of, well, Millar, four-color superhero comics allowed the reader to safely assume that innocent bystanders miraculously avoided death and dismemberment despite the massive environmental carnage happening all around them. That's the genre convention I prefer as well.

I always loved those old SJG cardboard heroes...

Champions Complete (as well as Fantasy Hero Complete) represent the current official state of the rules, whereas 6E1/6E2 are a wee bit out of date. Granted, the differences can be summed up on a single sheet of paper, but I think it is still worth mentioning that going forward, the Complete books are the ones to get if you want the official rules and mechanics in their most up-to-date incarnation.

If it sounds that way then either I failed to make my point clear, or you are not really making an effort to grasp it. For all the tv programming that wants a primarily male audience, pandering to men makes sense. For all the tv programming that wants a primarily female audience, pandering to women makes sense. But for any tv show that wants as broad an audience as possible, pandering to either sex too much is foolish as it almost guarantees it will lose a big chunk of that audience. If Supergirl's goal is to appeal primarily to women, then pandering to them makes sense, and alienating most of the potential male audience is of little consequence to its producers and advertisers. But if its goal is to appeal to everyone, then it would be a serious error in strategic judgment to pander to women, since that risks losing a significant portion of the male demographic they ostensibly want to hang on to. It isn't a question of fairness or chauvinism, it is simply a question of what kind of show Supergirl wants to be, or rather, what kind of audience it wants to attract (and maintain). My message to the networks is that they will make more money appealing to everyone than they will appealing to just women, so why not do that? Especially when the source material comes with tremendous potential to appeal to everyone right from the start.