Brian Stanfield

I’d be totally lost without those tutorials. I’ve also watched every Kimiko one from TTS, and read the entire knowledge base. I think one of the biggest problems I’m having is getting used to where everything is in both Steam and TTS. It’s not always intuitive to me, but I’m finding that a lot lately with web apps. I want to love it, but I’m not quite there yet. 
 
My biggest hurdle right now is finding appropriate figures for a pulp campaign. Creating them is way beyond me. 

Dude, I don't know who first coined that "social distance" term, but I can't wait for this to be over just because of that:  I am sick to _death_ (go ahead; I'm sure y'all got jokes  ) of "maintaining a six-foot social distance."
 
I can't _wait_ to return to my usual eight-foot antisocial distance.......
 
 

I have, yet again, updated the Robot Warriors to HERO System Current Editions document.  I was never quite happy with the Ground Scale to Range Modifier conversion; I am now.  Link above in Lord Liaden's post or below in my signature.  

Interesting point.  BattleTech was a second edition in 1984, so I went and looked at the original which was also 1984. Note the game’s creators: https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Battledroids
 
Also note, this is the first actual case I’ve seen where George Lucas defended his rights to “droid” in the marketplace. I’ve heard of those battles, but I never realized this game was one of them.  

Steve Peterson.  That would make sense.  I would bet he wrote the parts in Robot Warriors that I'm referring to also.  
 
Edit to add:  And now I can't help but wonder if the original Heroes ever set up a Battletech Hero game using Danger International, which could very well have become Robot Warriors.  My group from around that time did.  Hmmm.

On the issue of dragons fashioning no crafts, building no buildings, making no art, I'll point out that in almost no depictions of dragons in any medium are they shown to have appendages capable of the fine manipulation needed for such activities. Which begs the question, is manipulation necessary for the development of intelligence? Are tool-users the only creatures which can think? Certainly the opposite isn't true. Ants, bees, termites create very elaborate structures, arguably of great beauty, but very few people would suggest they do so consciously.
 
One could argue that the common fantasy convention of dragons keeping hordes of treasure could arise out of their appreciation for the artifacts' beauty and craftsmanship, and perhaps also envy that they can't create such things themselves.
 
Intelligence also doesn't preclude a creature being a "monster." Tolkien's Smaug is sophisticated and cunning, but also indisputably malevolent and destructive.
 
To the original question; in any world in which dragons think in some ways that a human can recognize and understand, I have to ask myself: What would I think if I saw something wearing clothes made of obvious human skin?

On my campaigns, dragons are _monsters_:  giant winged reptiles that breath fire or acid or venemous clouds or sickening fumes ( not all of them in every campaign). 
 
But the are frickitty-fricken _monsters_. 
Quite possibly the largest, deadliest creatures of land or sky, but _monsters_. 
 
I have always been left cold by the "dragon as intelligent species that, even though it makes no art, builds no buildings, fashions no crafts, and raises no goods, totally gets mercantilism and lusts after great wealth (that nothing else in its tenuous and sketchy "society" makes remotely necessary or even practical) to the point of using other people's buildings to horde gold. "
 
I mean, I have played RPG since the seventies.  I have watched movies and read books since before I discovered RPGs:  I _have_ suspension of disbelief.  But I don't know if I will ever have enough to swallow that. 
 
The question, as it relates to my campaigns, is akin to "how do roaches feel about people who use roach shell armor?" 
 
 
 

I've been mulling over a setting (or part of a setting, at any rate) where there are social dragons and feral dragons.  They're the same species, but for the feral dragons, at a critical point in their development they missed out on something.  I'm not sure what it is yet; a particular vitamin, or rearing by a dragon parent, or what, but the feral dragons are monsters.  Wild animals.  They're not unintelligent, and in fact their intelligence is probably at the same level as the social dragons.  But they don't speak, they're solitary hunters, and they're very, very violent.  
 
I'm considering adding a third category: broken dragons.  They are again the same species, but these have been enslaved from birth.  Probably less intelligent; treated as animals by whoever it is enslaving them.  They're still dragons with all that implies.  Keeping one is probably something like keeping a tame tiger.  Violent and wild, and you don't ever take anything for granted about them.  When one bolts, usually killing its handler and anyone else in the area, it is put down.  
 
In this setting, the social dragons destroy the feral dragons on sight, because a feral dragon can destroy miles of countryside.  They try to find any viable dragon eggs, to be taken and raised by social dragons to grow up to be social.  If they hear that a city is harboring a viable dragon egg, they will go to the city and ask nicely for it.  Usually it is handed over without question, because the alternative is that the city gets burned to the ground.  Most cities have a way to contact a social dragon, or one's representative (which may be human or other race).  (The assumption is that any egg is viable, unless it has been specifically rendered nonviable, but most humanoids aren't able to tell without serious study or high magic.)  In most of the civilized world, possession of dragon eggs is highly illegal. 
 
In this setting, the social dragons probably don't care if someone is wearing dragonhide armor.  The assumption is that it probably was a feral dragon that died to provide it.  Social dragondom is a small community, and usually when one dies the word gets out to the rest; if one is killed by a lesser race, the rest of the community probably doesn't get involved... but the dead dragon's family or friends might very well have a problem with it.  On the other hand, if dies of natural causes, they might very well specify in their will that their carcass is to be sold to wizards and armorers for whatever use they can make of them.  
 

I just wanted to give the nod to Christopher (@ Khymeria) regarding The HERO System Book of Templates. This is an excellent book to get people started quickly with character concepts that are very well-known. At 5$, it is great value and I want more of this. The fact that the HERO Designer files are included makes it even more valuable. If I may make two comments on the product:
 
1) It might not have been your choice but why name this supplement The HERO System Book of Templates? I believe it makes a disservice to your product and does not convey the flavor, nor the utility value it's due. I believe Champions Heroes: Volume 1 (assuming there could be more) would have been better at illustrating the goal of the suplement.
2) This book could be very useful for newbies and using the long form utilitarian character sheet format is a bit daunting for many. Having a short form character sheet excluding cost and advantage/limitation values and diving the stat block by functions (Characteristics, Movement, Offense, Defense, etc) would make the sheet more easily readable. Because you provide the HD file, we have all the detail anyway (well, for those who have HERO Designer). That being said, I understand it is a lot less work for you to use the formay that HD spits out.
 
Anyway, thanks again for doing this and I hope you will come up with more. Your supplement inspired me to do this right after I bought it (I am sure you will recognise the content of the characetr sheet ) 
 

 
Thanks again!

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.

@Brian Stanfield Well as it is almost midnight here, I will hope a reviewer check's and releases while I am asleep. If still not when I wake, I will re-upload with the far more boring Tutorial 3 as the title.
 
You should pop by the Discord sometime, I would be happy to give you a tour of the work. Especially as the price of TTS at the moment is so cheap.
 

One person can play multiple characters (using multiple "controllers" .. so in many ways like the GM sees all the time with multiple NPC's on his screen, the player would have multiple PC's on his screen. I wrote it that way for my Golden Age campaign, with Sidekicks etc. In theory a player could have any proportion of the 30 potential controllers he can handle on screen at a time.
 
It also is handy for a player who wants a vehicle etc (although have to admin I have not done vehicle support yet!)
 

Mostly in the game we use OOC when we are making a comment out of character, like:
 
OOC: This plotline reminds me of that episode of Moonlighting where they have a leprechaun as a client.
 
In the PBEM I also sometimes use AFK: "I'm going to be AFK (Away From Keyboard) for the next 24 hours"
 
I scrolled through a bunch of my game threads and those were the only two that jumped out at me. Of course we say things like NPC and GM--there are some Hero abbreviations to watch for (SPD, Rec, Disads, etc.)
 
Wait, I just spotted an IIRC (If I Remember Correctly) and IG (In Game, which means we're back to talking in game)
 
 

Tabletop Simulator is half off on Steam right now! If you buy a 4 pack, that is half off, too, plus the group discount! Go get it now!

Hey all. I’m participating, but I haven’t written anything yet. I’ve been fighting a virus while also going through chemotherapy (last round—hooray!), while continuing to teach 5 classes online, so my energy hasn’t been the best. I should be able to get caught up this weekend and be a better team member. 
 
Quick question: I don’t know all the roleplaying terminology for this sort of thing, stuff like [irl] when I’m writing. Anybody have a glossary of terms so I can figure out what’s “in game” and what’s “in real life,” and stuff like that?

The core combat mechanics, skills mechanics, etc. are not overly complex.  Toss on a pile of optional rules and that changes.
 
Relative to other games, how complex is CharGen?  Let's assume you want to play Pathfinder, or D&D?  How complex would that feel if you had to read every class, race, spell, feat and special ability in the game before you could make a character?
 
What makes these seem simpler is that the abilities are bundled.  OK, I want to play a warrior-type, so I don't read any class that doesn't get +1 BAB every level, or any race that doesn't have bonuses suitable for combat.  No need to read any spells I can't get at first level, or many feats, and I only need to read low-level class abilities for the class, or classes, that catch my eye.  A "powered by HERO" game would, or at least could, provide similar pre-bundled, pre-fab abilities with no build data, just game effects.

This pick up and play notion attracts me.  I so want to do a Golden Age adventure with templates for key heroes and stripped down rules.  It might need to be my coronavirus project that I can share with folks here informally even if, once he has seen it, Jason does not think it Hall of Champions material.

There are dozens, Sir. 
 
I'm afraid most are outdated or flat-out intentionally-wrong humor pieces.  (irl = in real life, by the way.  OOC (capitalized) is "out of character," and is for making inquiries or smart remarks.     
 
Best solution I have found is to hit Google when you're stumped:  "define: X" 
 
You get a few business, science, and government hits, but then you get the "tweet speak" most currently in use. 

This has become a standard approach for a lot of the so-called “indie” or “rules lite” games out there, and it has a lot of merits. In my mind, I keep coming back to the “powered by HERO” notion. If DOJ wants to remain relevant, I think they are going to have to at least consider dipping their toes into this market with a similar approach to the PbtA games, or Fate, or whatever. And then hit the convention scene with an assortment of game sessions that would truly teach the system. 

I've been thinking of this too.
 
Basically you create a bunch of, for want of another name, playbooks, containing what you need to know to play a particular character. Add some tactical hints, suggestions on END management and so on. Maybe even some suggestions for tailoring the character to the player's tastes.
 
8 pages would probably cover it. Or maybe 12.
 
They could be freestanding, presented as members of a team, or both.

There seems to be confusion as to what "HERO" refers to. Does it refer to the system (i.e., the mechanics) or the presentation of the system? I think Scott is saying that you can't meaningfully streamline the HERO mechanics without altering them to a point where they resemble some other game rather than the HERO System, whereas Gnome seems to be focusing on the idea that the presentation of the game can be streamlined without altering the mechanics.
 
I am of the mind that both are right, and that mechanics and presentation are orthogonal elements; radical changes to the latter need not have any impact on the former (nor, IMO, should they).

Off-topic:
 
Diamond Spear:  How's things in my old stomping ground?  
 
Brian:  Looks like we're on a team!    
 

It needs to be  multiples of 4, for printing purposes, and for longer books they need to bound into groups of signatures and signatures are in multiple of 32 pages (i think). 

3) My pet peeve is not the "races" themselves, but the fact that they're even called races at all! Race is not genetic, but games treat them as such. It's a leftover assumption from older games like D&D, and just won't go away! What I can't stand is that "races" seem to smuggle in all kinds of horrible and antiquated notions about genetics that just aren't true. "Species" I can get behind, and that would be scientifically defensible. Sustaining some sort of vestigial eugenic notion like "race" is just loathsome, especially when the humans are considered the "standard normal" race.
 
I'm not pointing my finger at anyone on this thread, so please don't be offended. I'm just saying "Shame" on D&D and other games that depend on this sort of racism.
 
Ok, I'll come down from my soapbox and go back into quarantine.

I threw out my idea (for dealing with multiple fantasy races) on another thread. They're all the creation of some ancient civilization (elder gods, traditional gods, ultra-tech/magical mortal civilization, whatever), and effectively different breeds of humanoid. Humans are what you get when any of the other races don't carefully police their bloodlines, i.e., mutts. The elves (and dwarves and goblins and et cetera) have specific appearances (as opposed to humans, who can vary widely) because that appearance is *the definition* of an "elf" or "dwarf" or whatever (again, like breeds of dog). Vary from it by too much, and you're considered a "half-elf" (etc). Vary even farther, and you're just another mutt (i.e., human). Some cultures practice infanticide on those who don't meet the criteria, others will simply banish you, or just view you as definitely a second-class citizen or worse, and would never let you marry their daughters. In this world, humans are more numerous than the other races (they can breed like rabbits and nobody cares--other races have to police such things, so tend to be fewer in number), but also the least respected--albeit, to quote the News Monster from Futurama, "numerous and belligerant."
 
This is *why* elves are graceful and beautiful (they were playthings). Dwarves were bred to labor in mines and other enclosed places. Halflings were intended as quiet,  unobtrusive servants). Giants, goblins, hobgoblins, orcs, and the like were bred as cannon fodder. More exotic forms ( minotaurs, for instance) were bred to be hunted for sport. 
 
This rationale satisfies my desire to explain how and why so many different intelligent races co-exist.