zslane

Encounter balance is hard to nail in the absence of a point-build system, IMO. And even point-based games aren't perfect in this regard either. One of the benefits of "old school" RPGing is the general disregard for encounter balance on a mechanical level. It is up to the players to use common sense and realize that their party of 3rd level characters are no match for the two stone giants they just stumbled upon, and judiciously try to slip past undetected rather than engage them in combat in the mistaken belief that the GM (and/or the published module) has arranged the encounter to be "winnable".
 
I primarily blame video games (MMORPGs in particular) for establishing this mentality in players.

Why not start with the game effects of these rings in the original game and translate them roughly into Hero System terms?

Perfectly said.  Creation'wise with any RPG, I have to go paper pencil and physical book in hand. 
For Hero for 5th ed HD allows me to quickly use things form the books from NPC's to gear.  The combat sheet fast print out and the ability to quickly tweak NPC's and mooks is very handy.  For characters and full build villains I normally don't need the math check, but when I am speeding through adjustments between sessions it can be a very valuable tool. 
 
 

I don't hate myself either.
 
I see no reason at my age to have to develop a whole new skill set-- a quick look through the HD sub forum suggests it's anything _but_ plug-and-play-- just to do something I can do in ten or fifteen minutes with a pencil, and enjoy myself the whole time I'm doing it.
 

I'm old school. Paper and pencil for me. 4th grade math doesn't scare me. I can do that stuff mostly in my head.
 
I think doing it manually is a good way for beginners to learn the Hero System. You get a deeper grasp and appreciation for the character building architecture of the game when you do everything yourself. Once one has mastered the system, however, I can see how using Hero Designer could be a huge time saver. Hero Designer could also be a good way to "check your work", so to speak, and confirm one's understanding of the game. But in general I find that software can't keep up with my creative flow as I toy with various ideas and concepts, whereas I find no such cognitive lag with pencil and paper.

Why not just use the 5E rules? There's really no advantage to using 6E, in my view.

I support the idea of a Discord for Hero System/Champions players to chat in real-time. These forums are invaluable for long-form discussions where you want the content to be searchable and to endure for years. A Discord is good for casual conversation where anything said doesn't need to last any longer than the few minutes it will remain on screen before getting scrolled off by newer comments.

I think that's an astute observation, N-B. As the mecha genre evolved, it became more infused with samurai culture in Japan, whereas it became purely an expression of the technology culture in America. That's why mecha in anime move like people in samurai armor wielding katanas, whereas here in America mecha are primarily military ordnance on legs--ala BattleTech--emphasizing powerful ranged weaponry over the Japanese conceit of "pilots" squaring off as if they were dueling samurai.
 
So I think it is important to know which mecha tradition one is trying to simulate in a campaign: the Japanese tradition or the American tradition (such as it is). Because in the former, mecha are probably best built as characters, whereas in the latter they are probably best built as vehicles.

Back in my day, we played games like C&S and Champions without the aid of computers. #ExerciseYourBrain.

Sure, but this whiplash-like variation in his characterization is a relatively modern phenomenon, representing in my judgment an inability on the part of DC to maintain readership without constantly thrusting out a new hot take on the character every few months. More gimmick than organic character development, these takes on the character feel more like random experiments than natural progressions of the original character concept to me.
 
In part this is a natural consequence of having so many writers put in charge of writing stories involving the Joker. However, the fact that the Joker has virtually no core identity anymore, apart from his name and arch-nemesis status to Batman, is a failure of editorial leadership over at DC in the last couple of decades, in my view. Much like there has been zero leadership taking charge of the DCEU, and look at the hot mess that turned out to be.

Leto's Joker is IMO the most "Elseworlds" of all the cinematic Jokers. For me, Elseworlds stories/characters are only one tiny step above fan creations in terms of legitimacy within the canon. They may be entertaining in their own way, but they aren't "the real thing" in my view.

So I picked up the Affinity publisher a little while ago.  It has a really reasonable price plus it was on sale. 
 
I haven't had time to do much with it yet though.

I can't say I was that impressed with Shazam! Don't get me wrong, it was competently made, I just don't think I was its target demographic. The whole conceit of a kid driving a (super-powered) adult body, but still thinking and acting like a kid, was something that just didn't appeal to me all that much (as an older adult). That concept was cute when it was just a light, fluffy, dramedy starring Tom Hanks back in 1988, but it just didn't resonate with me as a narrative vehicle for telling a superhero story today.
 
Aquaman was another movie that a lot of people liked but left me fairly disappointed. While it had a lot of very comic-booky moments that I could appreciate, it was full of too much dumb stuff (most of the underwater action, for instance) for me. Plus I just can't get on board with this particular depiction of the character's personality. I don't care for Miller's bumbling, socially awkward Flash, and I don't care for Momoa's crass frat-boy Aquaman either.
 
I always thought Cavill and Affleck were good choices for Superman and Batman respectively, but I agree with Spence that neither really got to play those characters (except for Cavill who got to be Superman for Justice League's final act). I thought Cyborg was well conceived and executed in the movie, but he was weighed down with too much brooding angst, and I think that really marred what was otherwise a terrific portrayal. That leaves Gal Godot who takes the award for best portrayal as I feel she embodied--and more importantly, was allowed to embody--the character of Wonder Woman in all her powerful, compassionate, thoughtful glory.
 
Apart from a by-the-numbers, CGI-heavy Final Battle, the Wonder Woman movie did pretty much everything right, and in some cases showed flashes of cinematic brilliance. That's why, in my view, it stands head and shoulders above all other DCEU movies.

I can't say I was that impressed with Shazam! Don't get me wrong, it was competently made, I just don't think I was its target demographic. The whole conceit of a kid driving a (super-powered) adult body, but still thinking and acting like a kid, was something that just didn't appeal to me all that much (as an older adult). That concept was cute when it was just a light, fluffy, dramedy starring Tom Hanks back in 1988, but it just didn't resonate with me as a narrative vehicle for telling a superhero story today.
 
Aquaman was another movie that a lot of people liked but left me fairly disappointed. While it had a lot of very comic-booky moments that I could appreciate, it was full of too much dumb stuff (most of the underwater action, for instance) for me. Plus I just can't get on board with this particular depiction of the character's personality. I don't care for Miller's bumbling, socially awkward Flash, and I don't care for Momoa's crass frat-boy Aquaman either.
 
I always thought Cavill and Affleck were good choices for Superman and Batman respectively, but I agree with Spence that neither really got to play those characters (except for Cavill who got to be Superman for Justice League's final act). I thought Cyborg was well conceived and executed in the movie, but he was weighed down with too much brooding angst, and I think that really marred what was otherwise a terrific portrayal. That leaves Gal Godot who takes the award for best portrayal as I feel she embodied--and more importantly, was allowed to embody--the character of Wonder Woman in all her powerful, compassionate, thoughtful glory.
 
Apart from a by-the-numbers, CGI-heavy Final Battle, the Wonder Woman movie did pretty much everything right, and in some cases showed flashes of cinematic brilliance. That's why, in my view, it stands head and shoulders above all other DCEU movies.

I can't say I was that impressed with Shazam! Don't get me wrong, it was competently made, I just don't think I was its target demographic. The whole conceit of a kid driving a (super-powered) adult body, but still thinking and acting like a kid, was something that just didn't appeal to me all that much (as an older adult). That concept was cute when it was just a light, fluffy, dramedy starring Tom Hanks back in 1988, but it just didn't resonate with me as a narrative vehicle for telling a superhero story today.
 
Aquaman was another movie that a lot of people liked but left me fairly disappointed. While it had a lot of very comic-booky moments that I could appreciate, it was full of too much dumb stuff (most of the underwater action, for instance) for me. Plus I just can't get on board with this particular depiction of the character's personality. I don't care for Miller's bumbling, socially awkward Flash, and I don't care for Momoa's crass frat-boy Aquaman either.
 
I always thought Cavill and Affleck were good choices for Superman and Batman respectively, but I agree with Spence that neither really got to play those characters (except for Cavill who got to be Superman for Justice League's final act). I thought Cyborg was well conceived and executed in the movie, but he was weighed down with too much brooding angst, and I think that really marred what was otherwise a terrific portrayal. That leaves Gal Godot who takes the award for best portrayal as I feel she embodied--and more importantly, was allowed to embody--the character of Wonder Woman in all her powerful, compassionate, thoughtful glory.
 
Apart from a by-the-numbers, CGI-heavy Final Battle, the Wonder Woman movie did pretty much everything right, and in some cases showed flashes of cinematic brilliance. That's why, in my view, it stands head and shoulders above all other DCEU movies.

Wonder Woman is the only DCEU movie I would watch again. It is the only DCEU movie I own on physical media. It is the only DCEU movie worth watching more than once, IMO.

Wonder Woman is the only DCEU movie I would watch again. It is the only DCEU movie I own on physical media. It is the only DCEU movie worth watching more than once, IMO.

Wonder Woman is the only DCEU movie I would watch again. It is the only DCEU movie I own on physical media. It is the only DCEU movie worth watching more than once, IMO.

It's all good. DC is getting JJ Abrams, so they should be put out of their misery fairly soon.

Unless the space involved is going to be used for combat, I tend to agree with Spence. What's the point of maps made to miniatures scale if it's just for reference? However, if the environment is going to host a battle, then out comes the vinyl battlemat and the minis and a to-scale drawing of the space.

I'm now picturing Superman's mustache being stop-motion animated by Ray Harryhausen.

About to start a superhero RPG as a player and one of the other guys in the group used to play CoH with me, so we were getting nostalgic via email.  I finally broke down and did the download and signed up, thinking "I'll just go in, play with the costume designer, make a hero for my upcoming game, and that's it."  And 3 hours and many levels later I logged off.
 
I forgot what an incredible time sink this game is.  I will have to use it sparingly.  
 
 

I've never noticed much difference between the editions from first to fifth. Sixth I am emphatically NOT a fan off, and play it only because other people do.

I kinda agree with Spence on this. Adobe has effectively priced the hobbyist out of their product suite.

I kinda agree with Spence on this. Adobe has effectively priced the hobbyist out of their product suite.