Pattern Ghost

See Sam Guthrie, poor Coal mining family *Nod* I hope they show some parts of Sam that were in the comics but get forgotten, he was a great lover of science fiction novels for example and professor X praised his intelligence. Talk about breaking stereotypes, the smart Southerner who loves books pleases me.

Grab in 6e2 is over 6 pages by itself.  SIX pages for ONE maneuver.
 
6e feels to me like a GM detailing all of the rules calls they've had to make over the decades.  It's just too granular and the resulting book size is SO big that almost nobody will read it.
 
4th edition would have the largest FUN on my list, but I agree with you for the most part.
 
4th was the perfect blend of crunch and brevity (for me) and the game simultaneously failed to keep up with production values of competitors (Pathfinder and D&D are works of art AND game books) while suffering from terminal rules bloat.

Well, actually you are on the Hero boards and that thought is sacrilege
 
Years ago I and others made the same arguments we were subjected to the BBS version of “shouted down”.    
My version was to create the equivalent of a D&D starter with prebuilt everything for a small standard fantasy game through the 3rd “level”. 
All the lists shortened to just the basic delving needs.  Not details for builds in the “lists”.  Just what it does and the final point cost.  For example:
Spell: Fire Bolt, does 4d6 Normal Flame damage. Cost ## char points.
Weapon: Broadsword, 1d6+1.  Cost ## gold.
 
Just enough information to make 3-5 basic heroes that can go into a small dungeon and kill some goblins. 
And then “level up” a little.
The entire point to to simplify the initial character build by pre-packaging as much as possible which allows new FH players to exercise the game system before having to learn the build system.
An appendix in the “Fantasy Hero” starter would list everything that had been provided, weapons, spells, etc. and their point builds for the players after they have run through a few games and want to “customize”.  Being able to compare a build they have actually played in a game to the rulebook is very helpful.  Especially if they are self-teaching.
Take a humdrum “standard” or “typical” party of PC’s
1st level Human Fighter
1st level Elf Ranger
1st level Human Wizard
1st level Halfling Thief
1st level Human Cleric
There is practically no difference for these basic builds in D&D, Pathfinder, 13th Age, etc.  A thief is a thief.  A fighter is a fighter.  And so on.
The world they are placed into are also virtually identical, just bearing different sounding made up names/labels.  I have personally mixed and matched adventures between the systems. 
 
The point is not to present a unique and exciting all-encompassing world. 
The point to quickly and easily present a few stereotypical PC’s and run them through a small number of learning/practice games.
They can then use that experience to give them a perspective on the full rules. 
 
The difference between Hero and many other RPG’s is that most popular RPG rules give the players prepackaged options but do not actually release the underlying structure that was used to build the options.  They give you the rules to play and build PC’s, but not the rules to make the rules.
 
Hero plops the underlining rules needed to build everything and then expects everyone to simply understand with no frame of reference.   With each edition of Hero, any intuitive understanding of the game concepts was drowned in the unbelievably verbose walls of text. 
 
At least in my opinion. 

The problem with HERO pre-4e was that point costs often differed between genre books. Consequently, characters weren’t really cross-genre compatible, at least not in terms of the CP economy. 4e was the edition that cleaned all that up and made the system truly universal and genre-independent. It was also the last edition to enjoy an easily digested rules presentation. And the BBB wins the award for Best Cover Art.

I don't really see the point of playing math games when it is already straight forward.
 
Unless the point is to drive prospective new players away?
 
Active Cost = Base Cost x (1 + Advantages)
Real Cost = Active Cost / (1 + Total Bonus from all Limitations)
 
Are pretty basic and hard to mess up. 
And even if math is not your thing there is a chart......

Friend I pulled out my copy of Hero Basic. It’s design philosophy was that it  has 6th rules and boiled down to the *ahem* Basics of play and if you wanted to upgrade to the full rule set you could easily because then it would be an extension of the Basic Rules. The opportunity is there. 
 
You know what happened to Hero? We have too many people saying that if you aren’t playing Hero their way (Either by edition or specific rule choice) then you really aren’t playing Hero.

A good point, but the method has to apply to self teaching. 
 
Coming into the system with no one in the group having any knowledge of Hero.
 
A lot of people will talk about being introduced by another gamer, and then say they don't game at FLGS and only game with their closely knit group of long term friends.
 
For Hero to expand it needs to be formatted so that Bobby can pick up a copy and actually run the game within 3 calendar days. 
 
 

Er, I don't think rolling all the way back to ("re-issuing") the rules of 2nd edition is the way to go. Rather, merely look back to 2nd edition in terms of presentation and packaging, but set the rules themselves at something along the lines of 4e + selected good bits from 5e. I only mention the viability of a boxed set as a response to those who bemoan the lack of usable starting adventures (and, I guess, pre-gen characters) to help get newcomers into the system. Hero Games did it once before, and I see no reason the system couldn't have such a product again (hypothetically speaking, in a world where Hero System products are once again published by, well, the publisher).
 
 
Yeah, I think we agree on this. I see this primarily as a rules organization and presentation issue rather than a system mechanics issue. 6e, in my view, tried to encode too many corner/edge cases into the main rules, something that editions prior to 5e would have left largely in the hands of GMs and players to extrapolate from the core concepts and mechanics for themselves. There was too much pandering to the types of players who only trust the official word of the publisher, and so insist that every contingency be addressed explicitly by holy writ in the rules text. The Hero System needs to be described with less overreaching detail, and with more of an eye towards empowering players to answer questions of detailed system application for themselves.

See?  This is why there will never be a "perfect" or flawless edition of HERO:  we _all_ (on this board or not; it makes no difference) have different-- slightly? Radically?  "YES!" to all! -- different ideas about what is or is not "fundamentally HERO." 
 
That mechanic that you're wanting to remove?  That was the hook for me: that's the moment I knew there was something awesome under the hood of that little blue book with the boring superfight on the cover.   I understood it immediately, and I _loved_ it! 
 
Until Champions, I played either Traveller or D&D (Mostly because that's what there was back then, unless you were living in California and attending Cons to check out all the people peddling the home brews) 
 
 
No more "Roll your shoot this gun" skill to hit. No more "because he rolled his skill; that's why you're dead!". No more bulky armor makes you harder to hit. ". (dont; don't waste your breath: I'll be sixty in a couple of months.  I know damned good and well all the justifications about" but THAC0 doesn't mean they missed!  It means that you didn't take damage!  They might have been just whaling on that armor like a drum line! ". It stops holding water when that same extra-xumbersome armor makes it easier for me to hit the naked guy. 
 
And best of all, no more" okay, the wizard hits you with lightning!  Roll to not get hit! "
 
Wait; what? 
 
Saving throw!" 
 
Are you flickin' kidding me?  He hit me, fair and square; we saw it; you declared it.  Now I roll to not get hit?  
 
Well, to see if you took any damage, then. 
 
Why can't we roll the damage?  I've got some _great_ armor. 
 
Yeah, but that's not how it works. 
 
Excuse me? 
 
Armor doesn't protect you; it makes you harder to hit. 
 
What?  But you just said-
 
Well, yeah, but it boils down to the same thing.  Now roll to not get hit. 
 
. Yep.  Don't miss that crap _one bit_. 
 
I absolutely _loved_ (and still do) the idea that my natural Dex let me jockey for a good strike posture or to jerk aside and duck and weave, and that my skills (levels) could unbalance the odds.  I loved that there was a separate to-hit mechanic for things that are _not_ based on physical attacks (ECV, though later as we explored different themes and genres, we would expand on that). 
 
Are there other things that I like?  Oh, you betcha!  But if someone told me to pick the very best thing about HERO, that would be it.  Truth be told, and "point balance" be _damned_, the one thing I hate above all others in 6e is the divorcing of those CVs from their parent characteristics.  Do they work the same?  Yeah: math is math.  But I don't play recreational math; I play to create a story with my friends, to stir action excitement--to feel like something other than a powerless college kid or a rapidly-aging old man.  And that "liberation" of CV from parent characteristics liberated that wonderful and unique _feel_ right along with it. 
 
So no; I wouldn't get rid of that, not ever.  If I was going to change anything about that, it would be to change it back.  Seriously: there is a lot I don't like about 6e, but I can forgive it: all the editions are pretty much interchangeable anyway.  The only thing I can't forgive is that oft-applauded "advancement" that reads to me of little more than officially proclaiming that math is more important than the feel of the game ever should be. 
 
 
 
It already _is_ a skill contest; it's been simplified. 
 
However, to create a more skill-like mechanic, try this:
 
Create some Fight skills.  I'll keep it simple with two:
 
Fight: attack.and Fight:  defend. 
 
I'm not mocking, but without the character being active in his defense, you can't really replicate what makes Hero's combat unique. 
 
Attacker rolls his dice and succeeds by two. 
 
Defender rolls his dice and success by four.  Attacker fails. 
 
Or we can say attacker rolls his dice and success by six while defender succeeds by four again, and gets hit. 
 
If "shades" of victory are important, then subtract defender's success from attackers successes for that last round: attacker success by 2.  Or fails, or thee is a tie (wouldn't that be awkward?) 
 
What if you have a really wide difference in skill level, though?  It would become difficult if attacker had to roll 16 or under and defender had to roll four or under. 
 
At the end of the day, though, that's what the current method _does_, and it does it in one roll. 
 
Let's assume your attack skill is a Dex-based Skill (as CV used to be).  You've got a twenty Dex, right off you have a 14 or less roll, buy it up to 20 or less for next to nothing. 
 
Your defend skill is also 14 or less, etc. 
 
So you both succeed _a lot_, typically, and spend a lot of time subtracting your success from each other.  No biggee: it works fine. 
 
But it's not one quick roll. 
 
11 is the midpoint of results for 3d6.  It's also the thing you are most likely to roll, if you check every possible outcome. 
 
So start with a fight: attack skill dead-center at 11 or less.  That's what the 11 is for.  Then subtract his defend skill from your attack skill.  Roll that or less. 
 
It's beautiful in its simplicity.  I have no idea why the creator of it would want to change it, honestly, because not only does it handle a wide range of skill levels against each other, the built-in auto failure/auto success gives everyone a fighting chance.  But back on course:
You are essentially using "a skill type mechanic.". You're just skipping a coulle of tedious steps and keeping the game moving. 
 
I wouldn't change it for anything. 
 
 
 

Well IMO 5th and 6th set increasingly higher levels of complexity.  Yes, secret ID can be replaced by a social complication.  But really, what was achieved besides added hoops to jump through.  5th and especially 6th was riddled with low or no value changes that catered to rule accountants rather than rpg fun. 
Also all just my opinion. 
 
But "cool! I'll buy Instant Change" is way more funner than "so I want to Instantly change into my costume, that is cosmetic what?"  Not intuitive at all.
Still just my opinion.....
 
 
 

My group back in the 80's got a ridiculous number of campaigns out of DI.  Modern military, modern conspiracy, a paranoid "government vs. UFOs" game, hard SF ("Near Earth Orbit", a homebrew campaign), hard SF (based on Chaosium's Ringworld RPG), squishier far future comedy SF (the prison ship "Uncle Louie"), Battletech Hero (at least five, probably more, different campaigns of this), a Twilight 2000 Hero campaign, a couple of ridiculous over-the-top military action campaigns ("Real Men", followed up by the Soviet "Real Men"), an SF game based on Aliens, a western game (with help from JI), a number of low-point PVP games ("Death Wish").  
 
Granted, some of them went one to two sessions, but probably a third of them of them went a year or more.  
 
There were a few that never happened: the Bureau 13 Hero game, an Autoduel Hero (using Autoduel Champions, but with DI), "Weekly World News: the RPG".  Probably some others that I'm forgetting.  
 
(I might point out: in not a single one of those games did anyone have any Powers.)
 
At least a dozen different Fantasy Hero campaigns, again some of which went a few sessions (one of which was my Myth Adventures based campaign), some of which went on for a year or more (the "October Game", the Bushido Hero campaign).  
 
At least three different Robot Warriors campaigns, one of which mutated from one of the above mentioned Battletech Hero campaigns, one of which was a sequel to one of them, and at least two of which went on a year or more.  
 
I would say there weren't more than half a dozen Champions campaigns throughout that time.  I don't think any of them went longer than a year.
 
Oddly, not more than one or two Justice Inc. games while I was part of the group; there may have been more before I joined.  
 
(My group back then was prolific.  A Friday night session, two Saturday sessions, one to two Sunday sessions, every week.   225+ sessions a year.  I was part of that group for about three years.  They'd been going for at least a year or two before I came along.  I was in high school, a couple of others were as well, at least half of the group were adult men.  There wasn't anything weird going on, except the table talk would get pretty foul at times; at least four were former military, and at least a couple of others including me would go on to join the military after.)  
 
Sometimes adulthood really sucks.  I'm sure I haven't had that many sessions, combined, in the 31 years since my time with that group ended.  

4th Edition is my preference, but I still see why someone would want 3rd despite the rules have becoming better defined over time.
 
The advantage of 3rd was that the game was what was in the book(s) of that one game, not what you selected from the available options in a book-of-all-games.
 
It's the difference between a house system and a universal RPG. Products made with a house system can be cobbled together by GMs to make a universal RPG if they want, but each game can be played as-is by anyone. A universal RPG can't be played as-is. It needs the GM to understand it first, and to make decisions about which optional rules to include and so on.
 
Universal RPGs require more work up-front from the GM, and there's always more potential for mismatches between player expectations and GM plans regarding which bits to use, etc.
 
 

I agree that there was rules bloat going from 4th-5th-6th, BUT, dear Lord, 3rd edition over 4th?!  I played Champions back in those days, and 4th is a HUGE improvement over 3rd.  One of the biggest reasons for the increasingly "lawyerly" descriptions is that the rules as written back in the day were often clear as mud.  And there were new powers in 4th because a lot of kludges were needed to cover new instances. Plus a lot of mechanics were reworked to be more workable and balanced, like: mental powers, presence attacks, martial arts, etc.
"3rd Edition Hero System" is comprised not just of Champions 1/2/3, but also Justice, Inc, Espionage and Fantasy Hero 1st Ed, IIRC.  Lots of rules and abilities different between those games, so not universal or consistent.  Less than a couple dozen skills for Champions players to buy.  End Reserves were a mess.  The vehicle rules... 
3rd Edition Hero System basically is non-existent.  And 3rd Edition Champions is an inferior product, in presentation, consistency, options and flexibility compared to 4th.  It's like comparing MS-DOS to Win95.  Yes, some people preferred MS Dos, but it was problematic for similar reasons.  

They ran a Kickstarter to bring back all of their Pocketbox Games of the 80s.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sjgames/pocket-box-games-of-the-eighties/description
 
I'll bet you'll be able to get what you want once the Kickstarter orders are filled in a few months.

I'm not sure that's true....
 
Certainly people don't buy an RPG *just* for the art but I have also certainly bought any number of RPGs over the years sheerly based on cover and interior art. 
 
I think any pile of words can be a functional game system. I don't think people buy RPGs because of the words.
 
I think the book has to spark something in the person. Blue and yellow don't spark nuthin' for me.
 
Dr. D vs Seeker made me want to play that game without ever reading it.
 
I remember loads of Classic Enemies based on their art.
I remember buying Champions in 3d based almost solely on the cover art.
 
Since we're a bunch of Hero nerds here I know we all love our system of choice but I don't really think a system has ever sold a game.
I think art sells games.
 
Art invokes creativity.
Art informs potential buyers\players about all kinds of things about the game without them having to read a proverbial thousand words.
Art actually gets potential players to read those thousand or more words of the rules to actually play the game.
 
Shadowrun? Battletech? Bought 'em for the art.
Warhammer\40k? Art. In fact Warhammer and it's family are probably the best case for art being the only thing that really matters. IMO.
All those terrible Palladium games I used to play? It was the art that did it for sure.
Talislanta? Barely remember the system. Loooooove the art and the world and still wanna play that game solely based on the art.
 
Rules are bullshit (to an extent)\no plan survives contact with the enemy.
 
But pretty pictures are always pretty.
 
Art sells product.
 
IMO at least.
 
Gets pricey tho!
 
 

Mostly D&D is popular now because a certain outsider perspective on Geek Culture became popular, and D&D is familiar to those people while other games are not.  So it gets prominent mention and depiction in entertainment media such as TV shows, movies, etc.  I'm not confident that it is more popular now than before, I mean toy stores and book stores were carrying D&D stuff in the 1980s.  But its experienced a resurgence in popularity.  WOTC didn't use some clever technique to get it to this point so much as ride a wave of cultural sensibilities.

There was a free PDF of the basic Fuzion rules that was put out yeeeears ago that actually seemed pretty solid. Not sure if exists as any kind of retail product, though. I found this version of the rules for sale for four bucks:
 
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/2367/Fuzion-Core-Rules
 
And here's the freebie version I found way back in '98 (opens PDF):
 
https://rtalsoriangames.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/fuzion1.pdf

They stopped the shooting within six seconds of it starting, so a good result that I don't find disturbing. It is disheartening that people continue to shoot up our public places with such regularity.

I like your take on Enterprise, but as to The Rebel Generation:  cynical Star Trek ain't Star Trek.  DS9 is pretty much as dark as ST ever can be without becoming something else entirely.

I actually have a set of game proposals based on Star Trek.
 
Enterprise Done Right
Voyager Done Right
The Rebel Generation 
 
With the first one, I'd eliminate the anachronistic technology.  They'd be armed with lasers and "impulse torpedoes" with and without nuclear warheads.  They wouldn't have transporters (on the ship that is.  I'd have it as a buggy prototype on a research station).  They'd get battle damage reports in the form of hull breaches and casualty figures.  The focus of the campaign would be visiting each of the human colonies, helping them with their problems and use that to convince them to integrate with the United Earth Federation now that faster warp drive makes that possible.  
 
With the second one, I'd make a simple change.  They aren't 70 years away from home.  More like 7.  I'd also call it the Ulysses and have it encounter adaptations of the Odyssey because "subtle" is my middle name.  I'd dispense with the Maquis thing.  That was an idea that just didn't work.  
 
The third one is just TNG interpreted cynically.  Earth and by extension the Federation are under the sway of a bureaucratic cabal using genetic engineering, propaganda and intensive psychological monitoring and conditioning to try to create a docile population.  In the process the Federation is crumbling under their mismanagement.  It would be to TNG as Blake's 7 is to TOS.  

I'd say it's a pretty good fit. Starwars has a lot of Lensmen elements (from Wikipedia):
 
E.E. 'Doc' Smith's writings contain elements central to the Star Wars universe.[7] These elements include:
Spherical, moon-sized spaceships. Smaller, spherical, jet-less fighters with accumulators for beamed power. Spacehounds of IPC includes light swords of slicing "blade of flame" and "planes of force" wielded by spherical ships, also attested in melee combat. Smith's Lensmen have the telepathic powers of the Jedi derived from crystalline lenses mirroring Kyber crystals in Star Wars. In Triplanetary, a "tractor beam" from an artificial planetoid captures another vessel and a damsel in distress adventure ensues. Space armor with a general focus on melee combat using space axes. Norlaminian worship of "the all-controlling Force" along with general use of "force" powers throughout. A Golden Meteor is the emblem and insignia of the galactic protectors. A galactic trade in drugs which are used as currency: Thionite in Smith, Spice in Star Wars. A galactic corps of heroes with telepathic powers. (Note: Lensman was written 10 years before Green Lantern) Benevolent guardians seeking to fight evil. (Called Arisians in Lensman; Aquillian in the second draft script for Star Wars.) A dark, unseen enemy seeking galactic domination. (Called Boskone in Lensman; Bogan in the second draft script for Star Wars.) Special powers running down through family lines, with twins playing a significant role. Epic space battles involving fleets of ships. Large-scale weapons including a free-roaming planet-sized fortress[8] and the sunbeam[9] (capable of focusing the sun's rays, similar to Starkiller Base in The Force Awakens). Jettisoning a space lifeboat with a data spool containing secrets of the enemy's ultimate weapon, the 'Grand Base'.[10] Training with a helmet with a blast shield, yet able to 'see' due to special powers.[10] Passing a ship off as a chunk of loose metal.[10] Numerous users of the word coruscant, a term which had declined in use after the 19th century.[11]

I'd say it's a pretty good fit. Starwars has a lot of Lensmen elements (from Wikipedia):
 
E.E. 'Doc' Smith's writings contain elements central to the Star Wars universe.[7] These elements include:
Spherical, moon-sized spaceships. Smaller, spherical, jet-less fighters with accumulators for beamed power. Spacehounds of IPC includes light swords of slicing "blade of flame" and "planes of force" wielded by spherical ships, also attested in melee combat. Smith's Lensmen have the telepathic powers of the Jedi derived from crystalline lenses mirroring Kyber crystals in Star Wars. In Triplanetary, a "tractor beam" from an artificial planetoid captures another vessel and a damsel in distress adventure ensues. Space armor with a general focus on melee combat using space axes. Norlaminian worship of "the all-controlling Force" along with general use of "force" powers throughout. A Golden Meteor is the emblem and insignia of the galactic protectors. A galactic trade in drugs which are used as currency: Thionite in Smith, Spice in Star Wars. A galactic corps of heroes with telepathic powers. (Note: Lensman was written 10 years before Green Lantern) Benevolent guardians seeking to fight evil. (Called Arisians in Lensman; Aquillian in the second draft script for Star Wars.) A dark, unseen enemy seeking galactic domination. (Called Boskone in Lensman; Bogan in the second draft script for Star Wars.) Special powers running down through family lines, with twins playing a significant role. Epic space battles involving fleets of ships. Large-scale weapons including a free-roaming planet-sized fortress[8] and the sunbeam[9] (capable of focusing the sun's rays, similar to Starkiller Base in The Force Awakens). Jettisoning a space lifeboat with a data spool containing secrets of the enemy's ultimate weapon, the 'Grand Base'.[10] Training with a helmet with a blast shield, yet able to 'see' due to special powers.[10] Passing a ship off as a chunk of loose metal.[10] Numerous users of the word coruscant, a term which had declined in use after the 19th century.[11]

I usually see the break as starting with midichlorians. We went from "the Force is strong with that one", to reading the results of a blood test.