Doc Democracy

Anyone ever tried playing with both systems? Any significant differences??

Too late, depends on how you define it! 😁 But I mean that in narrative terms rather than game ones. The electrical crackling field might simply be electricity, bringing in a second effect under the same die roll, if you hit you do the physical damage and, because you brought the electrical field close enough, it also exposes the target to electricity which might mean normal damage to ED or it might mean NND. On the other hand, the electrical field might enhance the penetration of the cutting edge either doing more damage or more effectively penetrating armour. It might even cause other effects, rendering the target immobile (due to electric shock) or immobilising the part of the body hit. It really does need a more detailed description before you get into the mechanics. 🙂 Doc

And I guess the problem arises when the system blurs the boundaries. Environmental effects bring combat effects into adaptability questions and the NND effects discussion brigns adaptability powers into combat. 🙂 So what is the system to do. I like the fact tha things can be drawn from various aspects fo the system to answer questions, it avoids needless duplication in the system. There is always the thing that the GM says the life support power to withstand extreme heat does not help tyou against a Fire Bolt attack because the attack is causing extreme trauma over a short period of time rather than allowing the character to operate within an extreme environment. I usually pre-empt such things by raising it with the player when the character is being designed: "Why can he walk through a raging conflagration but will fold when he is hit by a bolt from Johnny Storm??" That is a management response rather than a system one (relevant in HERO as so much of it is managing the options). Systemically, I agree with Neil, I think the system claims to be balanced and, if we recognise that claim, then 4 points spent in one area should be reasonably equivalent to 4 points spent in another. In this very specific issue, I agree with those saying that you should be explicit in your language when designing powers. I do think that we all recognise that we are often lax in some of our language and, when it comes to the current question, it looks like the intention of the power might not match up with what was written down. I am inclined, always, to make rulings that are more likely to favour players. So, if this was a villain, I would be inclined to tell the players that I will rule the NND was stopped by either heat or cold LS. I would then point out that, next time, only having one of those LS would reduce the effectiveness of the NND rather than stop it (and would then probably build it like Hugh suggested near the start. If it was a player then I would probably give them a reduced effectiveness (handwaved with a promise to come back and re-model after the game session was finished). Doc

Oh Duke, you come so close, sometimes to my fantasy HERO system, which is probably the other side of the spectrum to yours! I think there are a few things that could be added and a chunk of stuff taken away. What you dislike so much is often the complexity people like putting in and the volume of chat around adding that complexity. You like to eyeball stuff. You grok the system so deeply that you are happy handwaving a bunch of stuff because you KNOW it will work and trust the underlying system to function in that way. Problem is that where you see simplicity, other folk, especially new GMs see vague. They want the detail and when you start looking close at the simulation, it has holes, and so they fill the holes with detail. I think the biggest holes are partly due to the systems infrastructure. Personally I see some characteristics as black boxes that skew the skills and powers of the game (others are just counters - like STUN, END, and BODY - or guages - like CV). Now, I don't think my system would sell outside the nerd HERO ecosystem. Designers might use it and teenage boys with endless free-time. what would sell is clear gameable material. It doesn't matter if DEX is there as characteristic, when I know it is essentially skill levels with all dexterity related skills. or if STR is there as a number when I know it is skill levels with STR related skills, bonus HtH damage, a gauge of how much mass can be lifted, and bonus leaping. People expect these numbers because we have been programmed to expect them in our games, not to be able to manipulate them at will. So. To the "expert" eye and to the newbie, build complexity is detrimental to play. Some expert GMs know where things are and can confidently tell their players what to roll, how many dice that would be etc. without needing the complexity on display. The newbie player trusts that GM and the in-game results are consistent enough that the trust grows. Other GMs expertise gets expressed in them explicitly nailing down the system for their players, either because they need to "see" the detail to judge it or because their players ask so many questions it needs to be upfront. This is most likely the position in groups where there has not been a guru style person running games, demonstrating the game play rather than the system detail. My experience is that HERO has heard much more from the second group, not least because it is the one that needs more help with the system. it has catered to that group by providing the intelligence (system detail) asked for rather than the wisdom (how to run good games with HERO advice) that was needed. I actually think the ICE books (like Robin Hood and Mythic Greece) were what the system needed, and still needs. Delivering gameable experiences out the box with an underlying unified system that guru GMs could tweak, if desired. Doc (channelling Duke style diatribes early in the morning)

Nice to see you Sean but I reckon, in the past 11 years, the OP has probably made their decisions. 😁

Well, I was thinking of a three attack autofire, with a boost to one of them (the bite). 🙂 D&D poison has all kinds of effects beyond killing. I might be inclined, for save versus death, to give certain SFX death effects, and for everyman to have a physical complication, make a CON roll or die when subjected to that SFX. Even for instant death stuff, giving vulnerabilities etc can really dial up the lethality for PCs. It is easy to build spells that are all or nothing and to limit the flexibility of mages. I am thinking of mages with very flexible cantrip level magic and fixed spells as they progress through the wizardly "levels". It will not be D&D, don't want to play that, but it should feel like Greyhawk. Would not need 6E to do that, but I think 6E is a better tool than 1E. Doc

OK. You can use any system to play any setting. Often using the system you all know is better than any other system for ease of gameplay. However, a well-thought-through system drives and rewards actions that enhance the setting and deters actions that go against the setting mores. Often it comes down to how much effort you want, and need, given your group, to drive the game you want to run.

I disagree, not about the complexity, but about needless. 1E and 6E are performing entirely different tasks. 1E is giving you a very specific game experience, 6E is giving you the tools to create multiple game experiences. Now, if you are content with the granted experience 6E is not needed. If you want to create both Newhon and Greyhawk and Glorantha experiences, then 6E is a better toolbox than 1E.

You are too late Duke, I got there in 2015, scroll up!

Hmm. I do believe Duke just said what I said but added detail and did so in fewer words! Surely that is a first and possibly worth celebrating?!? I endorse this perspective of edition comparisons...

If you enjoyed Fantasy HERO in first edition, you can continue to play it. HERO has been on a journey, going from a bunch of related games (Champions, Fantasy HERO, Justice Inc, Danger International) to a generic underlying system HERO System. The big books like 6E Fantasy HERO do not give you a playable game but instead guidance on how to build a variety of fantasy games with different flavours. One of which might indeed be first edition Fantasy HERO! Unless you are desperate to build the game you want to play (or have an interest in reading round the tropes of various fantasy genres) stick to the books you own. You will quickly be gaming. I found the Fantasy HERO book useful as I tried to decide how I will package the HERO System for my players to play in Greyhawk. Doc I quoted just the beginning. OMG, what a huge post! 🙂 @Duke Bushidohas a post size rival! 😁😇

THAT, is a lot of work. Very generous to share.

Am a huge fan of Runequest and a lot of my inspiration for more bespoke magic has come from running games in Glorantha. Binding spirits into items is almost the default in Glorantha!

All good points, I could (but wont) go into the differences between setting and system. I was commenting on Mr R's question about what about the various gods asking for items to be made for their members. This was going to the question of the numbers of wizzards etc. I think that when anyone thinks of a magical item being made, they often envisage an artificer type wizard rather than a cleric. I am all for popping that particular balloon. Your comments however reinforce my concerns about magic items being made via the clerical route having a different feel in-game to those made through wizardry. D&D made no real distinction which I think is a bit detrimental to the setting (and one I intend to rectify). Obviously there will be items that may require oth arcane and clerical input - I am immediately looking at you +5 Holy Avenger longsword.... 🙂 Doc That is indeed another use for those low level magic items. Again, I would be making the distinction - the PC could pay gold and have this better item artificed for them (and almost certainly lose at some point in the future) or, for a better story, spend XP, do it themself and have an item that they will only ever lose temporarily (or when an even better story opportunity arises). Doc

Trust issues or thrust issues?? I think Greyhawk was a setting with a sense of humour, it was pre-continuity, pre-grimdark and almost certainly breached the fourth wall on multiple occasions. I reckon you can have it all. Sometimes a +3 sword is just a +3 sword, on others it becomes your annoying sidekick. Doc

What I never understood was why weapons were almost uniquely arcane in nature. If gods want magic weapons then why not provide them to their followers? I have an idea of holy weapons, they are blessed by priests and gain their bonuses via the power of prayer, possibly coming with a small bonus to hit and damage but which have additional benefits that require the "power of prayer". So essentially the weapons have charges or END reserves that can only be re-charged by seeking out a relevant congregation, led by a priest, which draw the deities power back into the weapon. I would even consider only giving the basic benefits to hit and damage as long as a single charge or point of END remains. Using the weapon delivers a relationship with the deity and the wielder would be watched by the God, ensuring it was used "properly". I don't think religions should need to rely on wizards for magic.

While I am all for taking foci from people, inconveniencing and frustrating players depending on the discounts they sought when building their characters, I was never in favour of them losing experience points. Items should come and go, unless points are paid for them. If XP has been used then SOMEHOW that item finds its way back into their hands. The reason that some weapons are part of the character sheet and others exist purely in the equipment list.

I am inclined to think of it more like a shard of his life-force, something more single-minded and not a full-fledged personality. However, sometimes the whole personality is there and perhaps, for a while, submerged until something provokes it into revealing itself. Or the shard has grown over time gecoming more rounded. 🙂 So many better ways than just giving a +3 on a weapon.

I am intending to make good use of the legacy stuff I have. I reckon I am going to start with "Fate of Istus" before seguing into "Five shall be one" and "Howl from the north". I think that will be enough to get started.

If I didnt know you had been about for as long as I have, I would think you had never met a HERO GM. Don't overthink?!! You might as well tell me to play D&D!! 😄 It will be the ability of monsters to do lots of damage upfront that will make them scarier than almost anything else. Three killing attacks each phase...

I hope not! 😄

Almost like saying Lord of the Rings is a bit of a generic quest against Big Evil. Just happened to be the one everything else copied or kicked off from/against. 🙂 This thread is relatively meta, but it does ask the question of what are the tropes that make that faux-European setting. What was Gygax reaching for while being limited in how that was expressed by his game system? What is it about D&D that makes it feel like a D&D setting? WotC got it wrong in 4th Edition. While it may have been been a decent system, people did not feel D&D when playing it. I want to incentivise folk to hug the D&D feels while being liberated to escape the limitations, so am exploring what that means for creating the game. I like to think the magic items found in wilderness and dungeons were mundane items imbued with the spirit of the person wearing/using it when they died under heroic circumstances. That +3 Shield was held by Ardra who held back a horde of orcs while his comrades escaped. It wasn't magical when he was using it but part of his departing life-force remained in that object, helping defend others even after his death.

I do too. I want a better system but if I let the players go wild I don't think I will get the Greyhawk feel that I want/need. 🙂 I am not going to stick to the limitations if D&D, and so some of the mix and match you are talking about is indeed what I am aiming for, I just need it to make sense in the setting.

oh! oh! the Road Crew

There is definitely a place for one-off "named" items. And for the low level +1s, I mean how else are you supposed to beat creatures that need +1 weapons or greater to hit?? 🙂