zslane

Are you guys misspelling it FACERIP on purpose?

Trying to make sense of time travel plots is a waste of time. They never hold up to scrutiny, and most of them don't even hold up to casual consideration, which is why I hate them.

Trying to make sense of time travel plots is a waste of time. They never hold up to scrutiny, and most of them don't even hold up to casual consideration, which is why I hate them.

Trying to make sense of time travel plots is a waste of time. They never hold up to scrutiny, and most of them don't even hold up to casual consideration, which is why I hate them.

Tell us which book you have and we'll tell you which page the explanation of (rolling for) Killing damage appears on.

Jane becoming Thor is right out of a fairly recent comic book storyline, with Gorr the God Butcher at the center of it all. We have Christian Bale as Gorr and Natalie Portman reprising her role as Jane. I am cautiously optimistic that Thor: Love and Thunder won't turn into some sort of woke diversity play with a woman adopting the mantle of "Thor". Mostly because it has Taika Waititi at the helm again, and that just doesn't seem like his style.

For future reference, the rules explaining how to roll Killing Damage can be found on:
 
Hero System 5th Edition (Revised): p.405
Hero System 6th Edition Volume 2: p.98
 

And it will be Jane Foster (Natalie Portman).

I don't mind the occasional legacy character. They do make sense to a degree. Look how many actors come from a family of actors. Same with military families, or musician families. Passing the baton of a superhero career to a younger generation is completely plausible. However, in most cases I would still expect the new generation of heroes to at least have their own costumes, names, and possibly powers. Kids aren't clones.
 
But what we're often seeing today is all together different. For instance, taking a woman from South America and calling her Wonder Woman just to check off a box on a corporate diversity agenda sheet is not, IMO, worthy of praise. Nor is taking the name Superman and sticking it on whatever non-Caucasian "Kryptonian survivor" happens to pander to the current social justice climate. Just make these characters into their own superheroes, like Marvel did with America Chavez (Miss America). Marvel wanted a character that ticked three minority boxes off the diversity agenda sheet: Hispanic, female, and gay. Instead of making her the new Captain America, they re-used an old, obscure hero name from the 1940s that nobody remembers, essentially reinventing her from scratch.

I don't mind the occasional legacy character. They do make sense to a degree. Look how many actors come from a family of actors. Same with military families, or musician families. Passing the baton of a superhero career to a younger generation is completely plausible. However, in most cases I would still expect the new generation of heroes to at least have their own costumes, names, and possibly powers. Kids aren't clones.
 
But what we're often seeing today is all together different. For instance, taking a woman from South America and calling her Wonder Woman just to check off a box on a corporate diversity agenda sheet is not, IMO, worthy of praise. Nor is taking the name Superman and sticking it on whatever non-Caucasian "Kryptonian survivor" happens to pander to the current social justice climate. Just make these characters into their own superheroes, like Marvel did with America Chavez (Miss America). Marvel wanted a character that ticked three minority boxes off the diversity agenda sheet: Hispanic, female, and gay. Instead of making her the new Captain America, they re-used an old, obscure hero name from the 1940s that nobody remembers, essentially reinventing her from scratch.

Hollywood is loathe to take a chance on anything new and unproven. So they hedge their bets by making a movie with a black superhero in the title role, and calling him Superman in order to create fan interest that wouldn't otherwise be there. From what I can see, every race-bent or gender-bent version of an iconic character is a lazy, creatively bankrupt way to add diversity and representation while claiming it is a "fresh, new take" on the character.

You're right, being risk averse and profit-driven is not "the same" as being lazy and un-creative; rather, the latter is (too often) the result of the former. One begets the other, which is a shame. And worse, it's not necessary. For any creator (or publisher or movie executive) who thinks making Superman black is the best (or even just a good) way to make superheroes popular with black audiences, I offer Black Panther, Falcon, Storm, Blade, and Luke Cage as far superior alternatives.

You're right, being risk averse and profit-driven is not "the same" as being lazy and un-creative; rather, the latter is (too often) the result of the former. One begets the other, which is a shame. And worse, it's not necessary. For any creator (or publisher or movie executive) who thinks making Superman black is the best (or even just a good) way to make superheroes popular with black audiences, I offer Black Panther, Falcon, Storm, Blade, and Luke Cage as far superior alternatives.

Indeed. In my view, he deserves his own superhero name and a costume that isn't so obviously just a derivation of the Spider-Man costume.

I would argue that what makes them interesting is their personalities, and maybe their personal histories, not the costume they wear or the superhero name they have. They could have, and should have, been given new costumes, names, and maybe even powers. In other words, entirely new characters. The only reason to call them Blue Beetle, Spider-Man, and the Atom is to cash in on their recognition factor and existing fan base. But, like I said, that is lazy and creatively empty; it happens only to hedge bets and exploit a known "name". These characters, if they are really any good, deserve to be their own superheroes, and not just inherit the name/mantle of an already popular one.

Hollywood is loathe to take a chance on anything new and unproven. So they hedge their bets by making a movie with a black superhero in the title role, and calling him Superman in order to create fan interest that wouldn't otherwise be there. From what I can see, every race-bent or gender-bent version of an iconic character is a lazy, creatively bankrupt way to add diversity and representation while claiming it is a "fresh, new take" on the character.

Even many comics fans weren't aware of the present-day lineup of the Guardians of the Galaxy before their first movie, including me. Now they're cinematic superstars. It's all in how the character adaptations are executed.
 
Dr. Strange and Black Panther go back to Marvel Comics' early years, and are deeply woven into the continuity of that universe. They are as A team as Iron Man was before RDJ put on the armor. Marvel still has Spider-Man, Thor, and Hulk, who are most emphatically A team. Scarlet Witch and Vision are still in the mix. Sam Wilson, another veteran character, is now MCU's Captain America. Plus Marvel Films now has access to all the X-Men and Fantastic Four-related heroes and villains. To me it looks like the possibilities for the MCU are vast, with plenty of "name" characters to work with.

Several years ago I made my own deluxe edition of the original Marvel RGP, along with all the guidebooks. They look great on my bookshelf but I have yet to actually use them. It's difficult to really get into any other superhero game when Champions exists.
 
 

Several years ago I made my own deluxe edition of the original Marvel RGP, along with all the guidebooks. They look great on my bookshelf but I have yet to actually use them. It's difficult to really get into any other superhero game when Champions exists.
 
 

As an aid to the GM I guess this has merit, but aren't there computer tools to help manage all this during play?
 
Players, even new ones, shouldn't need anything more "stripped down" than what you find on an old 2E Champions character sheet. Obviously for something like Fantasy Hero where you've got more adventuring equipment to track, and possibly lots of spells to keep track of depending on your chosen magic system, you might need more than what a single-page superhero sheet provides, but I think the essential premise is the same: keep it as simple as a 2E Champions character sheet in terms of overall information density (which, BTW, included the maneuver table and a line for circling your Phases during a Turn).

Several years ago I made my own deluxe edition of the original Marvel RGP, along with all the guidebooks. They look great on my bookshelf but I have yet to actually use them. It's difficult to really get into any other superhero game when Champions exists.
 
 

I think a book that re-prints characters from all their editions is of great academic value, but probably of little practical game value. But that's what I find so compelling about it. As a student of the system since 2nd edition, I find the evolution of the game to be truly fascinating. There's probably no better way to see that evolution in action than through character design (and presentation).

I like this idea.  I'd suggest only putting the Talent descriptions and the critical "how this actually works in play" information in the main part of the book.  The "under the hood" details of how the Talent was constructed from other Powers and such, I would put in an appendix at the back of the book (or maybe even put it in a free PDF download for folks who are interested, and don't put it in the book itself at all). 

I think a book that re-prints characters from all their editions is of great academic value, but probably of little practical game value. But that's what I find so compelling about it. As a student of the system since 2nd edition, I find the evolution of the game to be truly fascinating. There's probably no better way to see that evolution in action than through character design (and presentation).

Here an idea I’ll float out. Not sure how many people would buy this but, How about a PDF of legacy Characters with the original write ups through the editions? So say Starburst would have each of his listings as they were presented in each edition.  His 1st edition would be shown as his first edition, no conversions. Pulsar would be shown from 1st (?) - 6th (I know he’s in Basic Rulebook). Niche? Yeah but I think it would be neat. Just an idea.