zslane

I had very much the same trajectory as you, starting out with AD&D in 1980 and then discovering Champions in 1982. However, Champions revealed to me how tired I was of the fantasy genre as a whole--not just as an RPG genre but also as a literary one as well--and so I only ever reluctantly played fantasy RPGs after 1982, usually because it was the only genre being played by the group I joined at any given time. The superhero genre remains my favorite RPG genre of all, probably with science fiction right behind, mostly because I've had so little opportunity to play sci-fi RPGs and so  it is sort of an itch that never really got scratched. But to this day I still feel that if I never play or read the fantasy genre again I'd be just fine with that (I approach the prospect of someday bingeing Game of Thrones with a mixture of ambivalence, curiosity, and mild indifference, especially having read the first book many years ago and thinking it was merely okay).

Mostly because I've worked in Hollywood for the past 15 years and am pretty well informed by those who have an even broader and deeper view into it than I do. I don't trot out my so-called "credentials" every time I post about this industry because I normally don't have to. Events usually transpire to prove the validity/veracity of most of what I say, making it unnecessary.

Mostly because I've worked in Hollywood for the past 15 years and am pretty well informed by those who have an even broader and deeper view into it than I do. I don't trot out my so-called "credentials" every time I post about this industry because I normally don't have to. Events usually transpire to prove the validity/veracity of most of what I say, making it unnecessary.

I'm trying to get through Legion. I really am. But it is such an incoherent mind f*ck that I'm ready to give up on it. It gets high marks for being artistically ambitious--though I'm sorely tempted to call it pretentious instead--but it fails to be entertaining in the process, at least for me.

I'm trying to get through Legion. I really am. But it is such an incoherent mind f*ck that I'm ready to give up on it. It gets high marks for being artistically ambitious--though I'm sorely tempted to call it pretentious instead--but it fails to be entertaining in the process, at least for me.

Yes, absolutely. There is an inherent cinematicism in the Hero System that you just can't get out in the wash completely, no matter how hard you try. But honestly, I'm glad of that. It's what separates it from GURPS, in my mind.

There's really no need to move the show. Disney will own a 60% stake in Hulu post-merger*, and they've already stated that they will be pushing Hulu into more international markets as well as using it as a platform for releasing more adult content that they don't want on Disney+. 
 
 
 
*There are rumors floating around that Disney might be interested in acquiring the other 40% as well.

There was a lot of design experimentation going on in those early days, and many of those experiments led to dead ends, and for good reason. There were also plenty of cases where the designers themselves had only a modest understanding of probabilities and the combinatorial nature of the interplay between game mechanics, which often led to in-game outcomes that made little sense. Unfortunately, most GMs weren't any better at understanding these things than the designers, and so their home-brew "fixes" were usually cures that were worse than the disease. Worse still, the need for GM intervention in this manner evolved into the dubious belief that GMs should always be guiding PC action resolution towards "satisfying" outcomes, which I regard as a profound overreaction to the problems posed by the "era of badly designed game systems".

More!
 
Immediately!
 
Remember.....
 
remember how much more fun you had, back in those simpler times.....
 
Early editions for the win!
 
 

The first new character I created was one that I originally created and played under 5th Ed (I think...maybe it was 6th? It's been too long.). Her name is Morningstar, and she's a flying character with a mace.
 
I actually have a picture for her!
 
 
 

That may describe the proto-D&D of the Chainmail miniatures days of the early 1970s, but by the 1980s roleplaying had evolved quite further than that, even the "old school" style. Just because PCs can die--fairly easily if players are not smart and cautious--doesn't mean they are disposable characters that should be treated like nameless figures on a mass battlefield. It just means the campaign is more of a sandbox simulation of a world in the given genre, rather than a story-driven collaborative experience where every PC is a precious snowflake that must not die unless it serves a satisfying dramatic purpose.

Hit Points were always a gross abstraction of many cinematic elements all rolled into one pool of points. They represent luck, divine favor, heroic destiny (i.e., a benefit of being the heroic protagonist in the "story"), endurance and toughness, dodging and parrying, etc. Anything (that isn't armor) which might prevent a blow from dealing actual bodily damage is abstractly covered by all but maybe the last dozen Hit Points a character has. This mechanic isn't lacking in realism so much as it is lacking in fine detail.

TNG, and the series that followed, quietly retconned/rewrote quite a number of established elements in order to tell stories to a rather different audience (i.e., the casual sci-fi fan) who had no knowledge of or use for TOS canon. It’s one reason why I don’t particularly care for the Star Trek that Berman Built.
 
It also seems that the massive shift in direction and tone, starting with TNG, has made fans forget that Starfleet was originally, first, and foremost a military entity. The Federation is the governing body, and Starfleet is its primary military arm. Just because Picard thought every aggressor could be dealt with rationally and diplomatically doesn’t mean Starfleet had ceased to serve a military function. If it had, then Wolf 359 could never have happened.

Personally I couldn’t care less about RT scores. But unfortunately, Hollywood itself does. Production and financing decisions are made based on the perception and prestige created by RT scores, box office performance, and awards earned. I didn’t create this screwed up system, I am merely elucidating it.

The way I look at it, if a game uses a D20 for most action resolution mechanics, including combat to-hit, features six stats called STR, DEX, CON, INT, WIS, and CHA, has classes, XP levels, hit points, armor class, saving throws, spells with vocal, somatic, and material components, and a spell called Magic Missile, then the game is either D&D or a descendant of D&D. Pathfinder fits all these criteria, and no matter how many other bits they add, it can't escape its D&D3.5/D20 DNA.

"Imbecile" refers to lack of intelligence. All of Thanos's other actions and interactions with other characters display his exceptional intellect and cunning. "Delusion" is an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument. Thanos has been living his conviction that his plan is the right one for so long, he's incapable of seeing its flaws despite his intelligence. In that he's like a great many real people.
 
His plan, despite the incredible odds against it, actually did work. It won't have the end result he assumes, but he did exactly what he set out to do.

Did you mean Nakatomi?

Same here, Scott. Maybe that's because I started out as a wargamer in 1977-78 before I got my first taste of (A)D&D. And given the wargaming origins of RPGs, I think it is only natural that RPGs would play just like wargames, at least when characters get into combat. I sort of feel that the various attempts in the past to abstract all resolution mechanics, including and especially combat, to a very low crunch level come from designers with little or no wargaming background. They were/are trying to design RPGs for non-wargamers, which is sort of like designing assault rifles for pacifists, but whatever.
 
Having said that, I wouldn't want a science fiction RPG session to turn into a physics exercise just to get the PCs from one encounter to the next. There comes a point where a little bit of narrative lube (i.e., abstraction) in the right place goes a long way towards making the overall RPG experience a lot more fun. I believe in putting the crunch and gameplay focus where the drama, tension, and risk is, and gloss over the rest with abstraction.

Don't be ridiculous.  Aquaman is a heavily tatted underwater biker Wookiee.  Namor is a Speedo-wielding Vulcan who waxes daily.  Vulcans bear no resemblance to Wookiees.

As I think back on the 80s and 90s, when the so-called edition wars were going on between Hero and GURPS, I feel that the main advantage GURPS had going for it was the steady stream of genre and setting books that were made available on pretty much a monthly basis. No matter what you were interested in, chances were there was a GURPS book for it. That made it a very attractive system for gamers who liked to jump around from genre to genre, or mix them together. Yes, the Hero System can do the same thing mechanically, but its support material didn't make that fact nearly as apparent to the marketplace as GURPS did. And, of course, GURPS has remained with its original publisher the whole time, a publisher I might add who appears committed to releasing material for the system until the day he dies.

The Darkhold already exists in the MCU. Nearly an entire season of Agents of SHIELD was devoted to its recovery.

You don't understand why it has lost popularity? Well, it doesn't help that you can't purchase it through Amazon Prime. It doesn't help that it isn't being marketed, advertised, or evangelized by its publisher. It doesn't help that it gets no official supplemental material from its publisher. It doesn't help that there is no organized convention play (like there is for D&D or Pathfinder). In short, there is absolutely zero effort or resources put into improving the game's penetration into the RPG marketplace. Lost popularity is a natural consequence of all these (and other) factors. What other outcome can we reasonably expect?

Yep, totally.
 
But then, I feel that managing the balance and fairness of the campaign, whether we're talking about combat encounters or PC builds, is part of the job of the GM in any game. The fact that it requires more care and attention in Champions doesn't give the GM an excuse to be lazy on this front; rather that the game should only be run by someone willing to put in the necessary effort.

I think that depends on what sort of wish one is looking to fulfill. I found it far more rewarding to experience the imaginary life of a superhero than that of a fantasy hero. I'd rather be Thor than Conan any day. But that's just me. The fact that most teenagers don't feel the same way probably explains why more fantasy RPGs are played than superhero RPGs. So I guess your assertion probably holds true for most young gamers. It's just that it didn't for me or for the other players in the various Champions campaigns I played in over the years.

I love me my Supergirl, but sometimes the writing is so dumb I want to shout at my tv in frustration. For example: