zslane

The Ark was also supposed to be a divine weapon of antiquity. I'm not familiar with any works by Lovecraft in which an Elder God was carried around in a vessel and used by kings and generals to lay waste to armies on the battlefield. Moreover, I don't believe that the final scene with the Ark was intended to be interpreted as the unleashing of a Nameless Cosmic Horror From Beyond. If anything it was the Vengeance of Yaweh unleashed upon evil Men (the virtuous "heroes" at the scene, like Indy and Marian, were simply collateral damage).
 
But more important than any of that, the tone of the Indiana Jones series is utterly non-Lovecraftian.

The Ark was also supposed to be a divine weapon of antiquity. I'm not familiar with any works by Lovecraft in which an Elder God was carried around in a vessel and used by kings and generals to lay waste to armies on the battlefield. Moreover, I don't believe that the final scene with the Ark was intended to be interpreted as the unleashing of a Nameless Cosmic Horror From Beyond. If anything it was the Vengeance of Yaweh unleashed upon evil Men (the virtuous "heroes" at the scene, like Indy and Marian, were simply collateral damage).
 
But more important than any of that, the tone of the Indiana Jones series is utterly non-Lovecraftian.

Indeed. So how did the game go from being one in which creating characters could become an addicting activity after just one read-through of the rulebook to one in which "newbies" can't even begin to wrap their heads around it? As you say, basic process hasn't changed. But what has changed is the way the rules are written/presented. And therein lies the problem, I believe.
 
Maybe the more streamlined Complete edition(s) of the rules will help bring the presentation of the rules to something more manageable for newbies.

Second Hand Lions is full of pulpy adventure in its flashback sequences.
 
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
The RDJ Sherlock Holmes films maybe?
Captain America: The First Avenger
Spectre (1977 tv movie)...very pulpy even though it doesn't take place in the pulp era

The reasons usually given for dark, textured costumes--often with lots of pseudo-armor plating/padding--are unconvincing, IMO. Realism, as in what do soldiers wear in the real world when they go into combat, is usually irrelevent when we're talking about characters that can shrug off artillery rounds and punch holes in battleships.
 
Changing audience tastes don't dictate fashion...it is the other way around...fashion shapes popular tastes. Make characters with brightly-colored costumes cool and audiences will accept them and their costumes quite handily. See below.
 
The fact that comic books aren't movies (i.e., the media are different) isn't justification in and of itself to change costume aesthetics. Look at Kick Ass. The movie costumes for Kick Ass, Hit Girl, and Red Mist were either exactly the same or more "garish" than the comic book versions and they still looked great, and the movie was awesome. In fact, I would argue that the movie version of Hit Girl's costume is far more iconic at this point than the comic book version, and it is much more colorful and "silly" than the plain, dark blue onesy she wore in the comic.

The internet explodes with righteous indignation over vacuous nonsense every day. Listening to and accomodating that noise may lend it a dubious credibility, but it will not lead to quality television/cinema.

I think that's definitely true. Hollywood studios are notoriously risk-averse. But it only takes one success to show the way. Disney/Marvel is sort of doing this by making huge-budget movies with a bright green monster, a bright blue and red super-patriot, and a flashy red and gold armored hero.
 
The problem is that it isn't easy to make brightly-colored superhero costumes look like serious business. I don't believe superhero movies and shows need to be stuck in a dark, "gritty realism" to work--Marvel is proving that nicely, I think. But unless you're going for comedy, viewers do need to take the characters seriously. I think this is achievable with bright costumes, it's just that it's hard and nobody has really nailed down how to do it with consistency outside of the MCU. The fact that virtually nobody is doing it isn't proof that it can't be done; it is merely proof that nobody is trying very hard (for various reasons: lack of vision, lack of incentive, infection by misguided groupthink, etc.).

I think that's definitely true. Hollywood studios are notoriously risk-averse. But it only takes one success to show the way. Disney/Marvel is sort of doing this by making huge-budget movies with a bright green monster, a bright blue and red super-patriot, and a flashy red and gold armored hero.
 
The problem is that it isn't easy to make brightly-colored superhero costumes look like serious business. I don't believe superhero movies and shows need to be stuck in a dark, "gritty realism" to work--Marvel is proving that nicely, I think. But unless you're going for comedy, viewers do need to take the characters seriously. I think this is achievable with bright costumes, it's just that it's hard and nobody has really nailed down how to do it with consistency outside of the MCU. The fact that virtually nobody is doing it isn't proof that it can't be done; it is merely proof that nobody is trying very hard (for various reasons: lack of vision, lack of incentive, infection by misguided groupthink, etc.).

Bare midriffs are more of a college cheerleader thing, I'll grant you. But all cheerleaders are in mini-skirts or hotpants. Regardless, this new Supergirl is past college age and is old enough to be on any professional football franchise cheerleader squad where the outfits are right out of the Vegas stripper catalog. Still not child porn.
 
Christopher Reeves wore bright red and blue and nobody I know of thought he looked silly. The Raimi Spiderman costume wasn't nearly so dark and muted either, and I don't recall audiences pointing fingers and laughing at the "ridiculous pajamas". Captain America gets to wear fairly bright blue and red, and Iron Man's armor is a pretty vibrant combination of crimson and gold. The whole "bright colors" will look silly argument doesn't hold water, IMO.

Bare midriffs are more of a college cheerleader thing, I'll grant you. But all cheerleaders are in mini-skirts or hotpants. Regardless, this new Supergirl is past college age and is old enough to be on any professional football franchise cheerleader squad where the outfits are right out of the Vegas stripper catalog. Still not child porn.
 
Christopher Reeves wore bright red and blue and nobody I know of thought he looked silly. The Raimi Spiderman costume wasn't nearly so dark and muted either, and I don't recall audiences pointing fingers and laughing at the "ridiculous pajamas". Captain America gets to wear fairly bright blue and red, and Iron Man's armor is a pretty vibrant combination of crimson and gold. The whole "bright colors" will look silly argument doesn't hold water, IMO.

I dunno about that. That comic book costume looks no different to me than any high school cheerleader outfit in the country. Add to that the fact that this particular Supergirl is in her mid-20s--it wouldn't be child porn even if she flew around naked.
 
The whole muted color palette for superhero costumes thing has just got to go. It is tedious in its ubiquitousness, disappointing in its creative sterility, and dismissive of its genre roots.

I dunno about that. That comic book costume looks no different to me than any high school cheerleader outfit in the country. Add to that the fact that this particular Supergirl is in her mid-20s--it wouldn't be child porn even if she flew around naked.
 
The whole muted color palette for superhero costumes thing has just got to go. It is tedious in its ubiquitousness, disappointing in its creative sterility, and dismissive of its genre roots.

If that's the sort of player that dominates the hobby today, I'm glad I'm not a publisher, that's all I got to say.
 
I'm also glad I don't have to GM them either...

Invader Zim also showed how being small (really small) can even be a special effect for Mind Control...

Or play Champions.

Or play Champions.

My understanding is that Ant-Man will be a "heist picture," presumably with the shrinking being used to sneak into and out of high-security facilities. While he will no doubt fight a critter or two while shrunk, I doubt it will be a major focus of the character or the film.

My understanding is that Ant-Man will be a "heist picture," presumably with the shrinking being used to sneak into and out of high-security facilities. While he will no doubt fight a critter or two while shrunk, I doubt it will be a major focus of the character or the film.

You have my unfettered support in this matter...

That's a nice little cheat sheet, Christopher!
 
Hero's combat system was so intuitive to me when I first encountered it back in 1982 that I am largely unable to imagine how anyone else finds it overwhelming, but I realize that many do. I originally came to RPGs from a wargaming background, and you generally end up with a pretty deep understanding of combat simulation mechanics that way. Compared to the mechanics in many wargames, the Hero combat system is surprisingly simple.
 
When coaching new players, I ususally start by asking them if they'd like to punch, kick, or use one of their powers when their Phase comes up. I reduce their choices to only the most intuitive ones. If they are actually trying to learn the game as they play, as opposed to just sort of passively experiencing the game as a half-interested spectator, then it usually only takes a few Phases before they start wanting to try other things. Then the internal logic of the system does its magic and the vast array of options ceases to be an overwhelming cornucopia, and becomes a treasure trove of possibilities instead.
 
Sadly, I also feel it is necessary these days to advise newbies not to look at published characters for guidance on design. It used to be that I could show newbies the write-up for Mechanon and they would stick around to learn how his powers worked in practice. Since about 5th edition, this just hasn't been possible. The Mechanon write-up is now a great way to drive potential newbies to D&D.

I worked up this little sheet to help people just starting to play.  Its based on a Savage Worlds sheet someone did and I got handed when I learned that system and it was useful.  Just a quick reference for some options in combat and combat maneuvers.  I tried to strip it down to the simplest language, leaving details to the GM to handle.
Hero Combat Sheet.pdf

Second Hand Lions is full of pulpy adventure in its flashback sequences.
 
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
The RDJ Sherlock Holmes films maybe?
Captain America: The First Avenger
Spectre (1977 tv movie)...very pulpy even though it doesn't take place in the pulp era

Agreed on all counts. Hide the complexity until either a player wants to know about it, or it becomes necessary for resolving some important action. Eventually, players will either want to dig deeper and learn the nuts and bolts, or they won't. In a campaign/group not consumed by power gamers and min/maxers, there's no reason I can think of why the more casual players can't continue to have boatloads of fun without ever looking behind the complexity curtain.