Scott Ruggels

i would allow a move by or grab if the thrower missed, but the  throwee needs to make an ocv roll, or appropriate skill rolls. Othewise he lands in the hex (apply knock back movement after impact for added fun as he skids across the linoleum on his belly).

Which complication best describes you?

 

 

Probably the 10 point version, because it's been 20 years or more since I was in a steady HERO campaign, and also at the time I was an occasional Rep for R. Talsorian Games, and Tri-Tac Systems. All my private, and personal games were Hero, but I had to be conversant in other systems for conventions and such.

Though in the intervening years all my Knowledge skills are back to 8 or less.  (Not to mention the stat buy down...)

I'd probably give someone breech loading an old rifle ½dcv too, its not quite like slapping in a new magazine

 Actually I may step back, and if' it''s a paper cartridge loaded Breech loader, it's still full DCV, but... you get one (1) shot per reload.  If the enemy is too close, then after discharge you get full DCV and your weapon is now a pole arm (Stabby stabby.)

I'd probably give someone breech loading an old rifle ½dcv too, its not quite like slapping in a new magazine

Fair enough, though that may make the muzle loader have even less DCV to no DCV while reloading, necessitating a half move to cover before starting a reload in static defense, or  in a Pike square. Still a bit wobbly on this.

The one advantage with having Hit locations is that armor can be built per location, so you don't have to roll armour activation, just see what type of armor is on each location .

Seconded.  This is the document that makes a very good introduction to the system for new players.

Took a trip to a local Comic Book store (Meltdown Comics on Sunset Blvd, west of La Brea. in West Hollywood). On a Sunday, they had two Gamin tables going on the floor. One was a system I did not recognize with 6 players, and the larger table with 8 players was playing 5e D&D.  I will ask what the rental on a table there is, and what the waiting list is like, but I found it interesting that 5th Edition is becoming very popular on Roll20.net as well. something about the rules, they did right as even players in my current games have good things to say, and run 5e. Something about the streamlining of the rules that now makes Pathfinder look complex and disorganized.

However i the last couple of years as I have gotten back into gaming. I am recovering the urge to run again. For me it has to be hero, because even though it's been almost 20 years since I have run a game, I still "think" in Hero (mostly 4th Ed, though I think I bought a big black book when it came out). For hero though, I think presentation is the key. In another thread, an effort of making a  light "Players handbook" version of Fantasy Hero. It doesn't replace Fantasy hero Complete, but serves as a system introduction and a "Quick start" pamphlet for players new to the system and introduces them to the stats, and how combat works, and in the appendix, there is equipment, a few spells and a short discussion on how points work, and every footnote refe4rs to FHC,  I think presentation is the key.

The Thread:  http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/94641-problems-with-fantasy-hero-complete-and-newbies/page-24 

 The PDF  written by Xotl:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/eye2cr3axykrf06/Fantasy%20Hero%20Primer.pdf?dl=0 

I hope this is found as useful.

If the game has hit locations (Danger International, Fantasy Hero, ect.) then general DCV is one value and hit location is rolled randomly on a a successful hit. The player has the option to call their locations, but the DCV and the Hit Location bonus stack. That's how i handle it.

I would kiiiinda recommend 5th, only because I am not that familiar with 6th, and it would make conversion to the older  (thicker) supplements  for FH. The Bestiary is kind of necessary. But anything m0ore, do you have an idea of what sort of magic do you want?  You also need to figure out how much  of the background , and NPCs you want to design yourself, or if you want a published back ground. Figure these questions out, and we can make things more detailed?

Note: the 1/2 DCV pentalty for muzzle loading reloads only occurs for "long arms." I.E. muskets, rifles Muskets, and shotguns. It does not apply to  Pistols or other short arms."

Ohh! and here is an example of the advantage that "one step" opf technological progression gets you in combat.  Muzzle loader vs. breech loader. I mentioned earlier that the breech loader allows you to maintain your DCV in combat, whereas a Muzzle Loader means you have maybe 1/2 DCV as you have to stand upright, and mostly still to reload.. here's the example:

Also, Flintlock Pistol.

 

I wonder if our game preferences (and magic style preferences) correlate with the Myers Briggs personality types or whether this draws on a different profile.... (I am ENTP for anyone that makes sense to).

 

:-)

 It could quite possibly be. I dont remember if I took Meyers-Briggs, but I did take the Minnesota Multi-phasic for a security guard job, but don't remember the results.   I do think there are  preferences in games, and game types or systems that prefer certain types of players.  FATE priviledges those that are glib, and/ or comfortable with the rule of cool, of which I am neither. I have fgound that in my previous location, HERO was preferred by engineers, rather than theater majors, if that is of any indication.

Here is another classic Flintlock. Note the discussion of barrel lengths to increase accuracy in the old  flintlock rifles.

The Pathfinder scenario imposes mechanical consequences. A good campaign striving to give magic unintended consequences should look to impose story consequences.

 I had to think on this through an insomnia period last night,  It all came back to the word, "story".  I came into this hobby through wargaming back in the mid to late 1970's (Microarmor for the win!), and I approached gaming as a competitive/cooperative group activity. Roleplaying was important, but it was in support of the activity. It was later in the  early 80's when playing Champions  with Carl Rigney, that we got into "Deep Roleplay", but even so, when I played and when I ran, I was thinking  "what would the characters do in this situation?{", rather than, "What would the characters do to be entertaining?".  In the old Usenet newsgroup rec.games.frp.advocacy, there were long and drawn out discussions and debates, and I found that I fell mostly in the "Simulationist/ Situationist" camp in that I was uncomfortable fudging die rolls as a GM, and  I would be completely transparent as a GM about rules and rolls, while being intentionally opaque about in game information and the intent of the opposition. That was what asking questions and detective work were for.  Sometimes the players found clues and stopped X, Y, Z on time, and sometimes they were ambushed because the missed, or didn't bother looking for clues.  I would also try not to play favorites among the players or characters.  I would lay out Hero System constructed "Tactical Puzzles" for my players and  see how they would solve it. I was entertained by watching them think, and fight. I didn't go for that "cooperative storytelling" philosophy, because my entertainment was seeing other people come up with creative solutions within a very tight, and mechanically constrained situation.

I rebelled against the trend  moving at the time that gave us "the Rule of Cool", and heavy reliance on literary sources.  To me, games like Amber or Fudge, and now Fate, were an anathema.  I desire structure and some amount of internal logic to my games. It may be, that I just don't "feel" the magic.  For me, a good game was a good "game".  It was cooperative in the way  a wargame was cooperative, but it was also competitive to a degree.

You mentioned " A good campaign striving to give magic unintended consequences should look to impose story consequences.", but all I can think of is the back an forth  between P.C.'s and N.P.C.s as they react to each other's moves in game. Having  utter, but localized crop failures because a P.C. used a spell seems unnecessarily arbitrary.  To me Consequences are a result of action and intent, usually. (or a bad decision or even bad luck), because in the end I want to have my game seen as "fair" to the players, and as open as I can manage, because I despise railroad tracks in games I play, as well, and a lot of RPG's of "Narrative significance", seem to invest a lot in steel rails and right of ways. 

For me, though it's all about the mechanics. I has to be, or it feels unfair and arbitrary and unattractive. Hero arrived, and for me was the fairest system I had experienced up to that time, as it was all about points rather than die rolls, and one could "wargame" a fight easily and simply. A good chunk of the fun of Champions was designing characters to test (or exploit) the rules in different combinations. This may be an antique point of view these days, but I still like it as a "game". For me a story is what the players tell "after the game" , not so much as during it. XD

 

Something I haven't thought of?

Spells based off different characteristics?  This is something that Pathfinder does, with different types of magic using different characteristics for each subclass of spell caster.  You could also in Hero be spcific on the skill rolls by school or type of magic, and also bring in  magic based on INT, EGO, PRE, ect, like the pathfinder example.

How about this?

Another thing that can be done is all spells of a certain type have a limitation of 1d6 of unluck opper X number of dice of effect, up to 3D6, with the an added mechanic of  the GM rolling a secret roll for how "delayed" the unluck is for that by rolling 2d6 for the number of phases of delay, until the unluck event occurs, which could with unfortunate systems, stack  more than one d6 of unluck on a single phase. One could also play with the amount of delay, as well.  

Wellll...

Recently, in our Sunday Morning Roll20.net pathfinder game, we found ourselves in a dimension where magic became very unreliable. Every time one cast a spell, one spent the endurance/ consumables, and then rolled a D100. 99 to 59 the spell performed as expected. 59 to 39, nothing happened, and you were out the charges/spell slot/ consumables. on a 39 to 01, the opposite effect occurred (Light became darkness, cure light wounds became cause light wounds, ect.)  Because of this, the Sorcerer (me), and the Cleric (outside of defined, divine powers) became rather ineffective, and frustrating. You know it's bad when 1[.) The Sorcerer falls back on his first level acquired back up weapons  of a dagger and sling, and the other players who were way down on hit points declined any healing after or during combat because a D6 of damage might kill them. It left us panicky and frustrated, but we managed to survive this, thankfully, temporary frustration.  If this had been the base mechanic for the entire game, no one would play magic users, really at all, or if they did, their spell choices would be radically different.  Players loathe unreliable tools, and will tolerate it for certain temporary effects, but it's not something that they want to  endure as the default normal.  This was a big discussion when I worked in video games in the 90's, that too many random results or unreliable elements frustrated the player, and they became avoidant, like how people structure their income to minimize taxes.

Now, by all means you can have  consequences, and unpredictability, and there are mechanics in Herof for that already. Skill rolls turn Magic from a science to an art, especially if they have to roll to target as well. But you can see how that will affect the design of spells as well as the "feel" of them.

Another thing that can be done is all spells of a certain type have a limitation of 1d6 of unluck opper X{ number of dice of effect, up to 3D6, with the an added mechanic of  the GM rolling a secret roll for how "delayed" the unluck is for that by rolling 2d6 for the number of phases of delay, until the unluck event occurs, which could with unfortunate systems, stack  more than one d6 of unluck on a single phase. One could also play with the amount of delay, as well.  There is your consequences.

But in general, if you "want" magic in the game IMO, keep it clean, keep it useful and lay the assumptions out on the table for the players. The mechanics should nudge the players into making decisions consistent with how their characters perceive the world, though. 

Magic systems are Really subjective, and as such I have tended to run Superhero campaigns, SF, and Fantasy with low magic content (mostly politics or war). Pick the wrong style of magic system and you have players walk out.  The Semi-Byzantine campaign, Magic is mostly of the alchemical variety (Chemistry) and  "Hedge Science"., i.e. learned from empirical evidence, and sometime a very weak, and subtle form of psychics. Most spells are potion lists, of what is available and their point and cash cost.  Also weapons with various  properties ( good tempered steel is really expensive but often gets the AP or Resistant bonus, compared to iron or other metals).  The anti-swashbuckling campaign (Grit & Stuff) was a Northern European inspired slog with  commercial, and Imperial interests all grabbing for a new continent, and had a lot of firearms and the "Magic, similar in framework to the  Quasi-Byzantine campaign, but with some "Powers",  gunpowder, and fast healing.  Mages were generally Renaissance men (and women) who were also the party's logistical point and  healer, and Veterinary, and were to be protected by the rest of the party of "explorers".   My Old Old campaign from the 90's, has fairly unrestricted magic, and was basic "Out of the Book" Spells and a flavor inspired by L. Douglas Garrett's Fantasy Hero campaigns where I had been a member of the original Fantasy Hero Playtest group, and that campaign went on another several years.

Okay, back to guns. Here is, to me, the most advanced flintlock technology, from the 1720's, let me introduce to you, the Puckle Gun:

I actually kind of "reject" the Mysterious magic concept, especially in my games. (especially if we are dealing with my Quasi- Byzantine era campaign, or a campaign where magic and firearms co-exist). It's definitely a  personal taste issue, but anything "Mysterious" rarely remains such, because humans are curious creatures, and are also endlessly looking for patterns, even where they may not exist (superstitions).  Everything gets put into a framework, and the ambitious will rules lawyer reality given the chance. Magic is a tool, with predictable results in a game, just as science or engineering, it just uses different rules and equipment. It has a different flavor, then, but it's still a tool for manipulating reality like a shovel and fire are as well.

Most traditional spell-casting in folklore is very much in the same vein as a recipe for cooking the family Christmas cookies. One learns at the elbow of an elder, and it taught the steps one at a time, in sequence to get the desired result. Experience modifies it to make the results more consistent, and creative individuals will try different ingredients to experiment, Eventually when she's old, the family will ask for it to be written down so the knowledge of the recipe is not lost. Sometimes it's well written, sometimes it's not and steps are misplaces, forgotten, or badly explained as the language shifts. Some people can follow instructions or have a talent for cooking, and some people wont. The differences between Magic and cookies thought tend to be societal, with the overarching culture coloring people's perceptions of magic and what is, and what isn't acceptable.

In Roman Times, magic was believed in, but a lot of small household charms were within the knowledge of  everyone, as were small rituals.  In the Dark Ages, anyone that could read was nigh unto a wizard, but anyone saying they could practice magic was a heretic and consorting with the devil, and therefore burned. In the Renaissance a general spirit of curious research gave us Alchemy, and the beginning of science, and by the enlightenment, witch burning was no longer practiced in Western Europe, and the scientific method was used, and soon gave birth to engineering and the industrial revolution.

Having Firearms presupposes having a supporting society, that  carries a more Renaissance view of the world, rather than a dark age, or barbarian outlook. It supposes  the primary users of said weapons are no longer tribal, or feudal, but proto-nation states with economies large enough to support a class of experimenting "renaissance men", as well as being able to support standing armies and navies (Small, but professional at this time, or even mercenaries). None of that prohibits the existence of magic in a campaign, but it will definitely "color" the attitude about magic.  Making magic "mysterious" presupposes that there is an organization that decides the morality of knowledge, and has the power, and the motive to suppress knowledge, and remove it from society, and cause severe social penalties, including death upon those that continue to quest for such forbidden knowledge.  

Mystery is generally just in it's simplest term a lack of knowledge, and all of us even in this modern age have blind spots in our knowledge about something, whether it be cars, computers, firearms, or the law, all forms of knowledge we trade with specialists for money to maintain our standard of living. IF one looks at magic like the ability to draw or paint, as in it's a mystery, and not everyone knows how to do it, speaking as an artist, it's the product of observation, practice, book learning and time, and the more of each one spends on one's art, the better they get. Artistic Talent is just how much self motivation does one have to put in all that time and effort to learn? The same could be said if we looked back at magic as cooking, where a few years on Culinary school may give one a leg up on using exotic ingredients, and cooking techniques to prepare meals at the highest skill,  and different schools teaching different skills.  This would relegate Grandma's Christmas cookies to  "hedge magic", though also a beloved local or family ritual. This sort of read still allows anyone with a school diploma so command respect and high fees  in society, but it's not the dark age folklore flavored image. How magic is viewed by "the Characters" is dependent upon how magic if viewed by society.  Sure magic will be mysterious, if knowing about it means danger to one's immortal soul, or membership in the church, the town or the polity.

So I reject "Mysterious Magic" for Mystery's sake, and lay it all out fair and open to the players, and in general it's another tool, and a tool, like a gun is neutral, and dependent on the motivations of the user, and the perception of the tool by society.

 

Maybe the scientific revolution was also a magical revolution. The open study of magic allowed magical knowledge to advance rapidly....

 the Colonial era. with magic, and you get Randall Garret's fiction type universe.

But yes, if applying a scientific method of study to magic resulted in improvements in the quality, precision and focus of magic, then that would be the approach they would take, as well has having a very clear idea of the advantages , limitations, and frameworks of the meta -magic.  One would then be able to figure out if effects were scalable, applicable to scientific/ industrial processes, the advancement of academic interests,  and/or commercial exploitation.

if it's not  amenable to the scientific method, and continues to be irreproducible, capricious, and emotional, then it will continue to be the domain of eccentrics and  sages, leaving scince as a more reliable, and reproducible effects.

I missed getting this file, would anyone be willing to post it to the Downloads section on this site?

Seconded please!

A thought: if magic is the be all and end all, how did technology advance beyond the Stone Age?

 

Obvious answer: because the gods taught humanity.

 

But that doesn't work for a naturalistic setting, where the gods don't do this: "Where's the Zeus who used to turn into a cow and pick up chicks?" (Simpsons quote.)

 

So, since most of the posters here seem to favour naturalistic over mythological settings, the question remains open.

You could possibly consider Magic like how society sees the ability to draw or make music, in that you need an innate talent. (This is not how those talents really work, what they are is an affinity for practicing that skill, even in the face  of setbacks=as a sometimes art instructor). You could have  Self taught, and wild talents of  moderate to low skill, but then apprenticed and instructed mages that stand on the shoulders of giants, so to speak.

Another way of looking at it, is that magic requires a college level education. Universities existed in late medieval times and you could have magical colleges, which would make magic contingent on literacy, and patronage, which means that magic would be the bailiwick of societal elites, like the Nobility and the clergy. The One Percenters who can fling spells around and become rich off of it, but also  represent a wide variety of interests and  activities.

Magic could be  a random effect, delivered to the just and the pious, and usually only used by clergy.

lots of ways to approach the conceptual framework for magic, but in general in most settings, magic is used by a small percentage of the population, or a small percentage can use it with large, and powerful effects.  This means that non-magical methods of force multipliers would be advantageous to countries with large armies and large populations. Canon, Firearms, Greek Fire, repeating crossbows, all would be effective for a large army, and Magic would only be an enhancement. What magic may give you though is  more tactical flexibility and agility in the face of a changing situation. Magic becomes the tool of the specialists, the Special Operators, and the spies.  The cost of training and educating one mage, may cost a multiple of what it takes to train qand equip a common soldier, and that multiple (Cost, even point cost) is going to dictate the commonality, or scarcity of battlefield magic. 

All good ideas.