Doc Democracy

For me that particular restriction is sided at someone creating an NND power. When you are creating a power, you should not define the defence as being a lack of something. You should not create a power where lacking sight is a defence (forcing a weakness on an opponent). That does not preclude lacking a defence, sense or something else working as a defence when that would make sense based on the SFX of the power. So being deaf might protect you from a sonic NND where the SFX is maddening whispers but would nit protect you where the SFX is deeadly sonic vibrations. Doc

You know, as entertaining as the discussion is, is the whole thing not covered by a physical limitation. Either "Dies if EGO reduced to zero" or possibly a dependence on positive EGO score. When it goes below zero, they will die unless that EGO recovers to a positive score.

I see this, I guess that I forget that I use reputation as an evreyman quite heavily in my games, where you might burn Heroism and the results of that boost your reputation. But that feels like double dipping. As I said, I like the idea of used Heroism becoming experience Points, if you burn a lot of heroism on a massive victory, perhaps some of those points should be used to bolster reputation until you have time to build your Heroism again. It is kind of the opposite of the points you make below, is it really heroic to bully your way using Heroism to win? 🙂 Circular argument, I know, and I will need to put some thought into this. Ideally, I agree with you. I think I like the instant gratification of stuff though. I don't think that is what I am saying, if you are at no risk, then you are obviously not heroic but I think players welcome signposts from the GM of just how much risk they are taking. Will think more on what I am talking about though. I can see the risk you highlight. I agree, positive reinforcement instead of punishment beatings...

I think it is the job of the system to encourage genre play, I don't think there should be a serious tension between playing the game and emulating the genre. That is why I want a mechanism rewarding heroic behaviour baked right into the game. I reckon you slightly underestimate the tendency of players to want more of stuff. If I use heroism as a measure in the game, enough will be seeking to accumulate the "good thing". 🙂 I want them to have a significant effect and, should a player, or group, want to spend their heroism, then I think they should find it aids them to waltz through a difficult/impossible scenario. That would fix the value of heroism in the game and, hopefully, further incentivise heroic action (to accumulate more points). Yeah, this is probably also key. I think that I need to ensure that there is lots of narrative use, where social interactions with NPCs becomes easier the higher the heroism of a character is. When Captain Whitebread, with heroism of over 20 asks the general to trust him with the nuclear missiles needed to defeat BigBadGuy he should be significantly more likely to say yes than when StreetSlasher whose heroism bumps along in single figures asks the same. Every interaction should promote high heroism. Even bad guys will preferentially attack low heroism characters (you put down the most dangerous opponent first). Players should be getting a clear message from the game. A key consideration for me would be what bad actions do to heroism. I am not inclined to take things away from players, that is not fun. What I might need is a tally of bad actions (I need a good name for this), but when you actively act in selfish or dangerous manners, you begin to build up a karmic debt (which might actually be a good name). Future heroic action would pay off that debt before it once again begins to add to the Heroism characteristic. I think there might also be a need for the game to alert players when they should be accumulating and when they should be spending. In TORG, the GM declares certain scenes to be standard and others to be dramatic. In a standard scene players would know they are safer to risk less optimal actions to build Heroism and in dramatic scenes they may want to consider the use of Heroism as outcomes are more critically important to the adventure. Going back to TORG, I got disillusioned with that kind of thing. If I used my points to "win" the scenario, and another player did not, then my character progressed less quickly. It was a perverse outcome. However, I like the idea that spent Heroism become experience points. If you simply hoard it, you get passive benefits; if you spend it, you get temporary in-game benefit and potential character growth. Doc

OK. Am still putting together bits and thinking about this. I know I want a HERO player to recognise it's bones, but a novice would only see a game. One element of Golden Age that is not inherent in HERO is two-gisted heroism. This is not the 1970s comics code authority goody two shoes but that feeling of fighting for want is right. I am thinking of adding a new characteristic called Heroism. It would be a dynamic thing. You can gain Heroism by suffering bad things for heroic reasons (taking a hit to save an innocent, intervening when it would be sensible to stay hidden, leaving an opponent alive when it would be more convenient to kill them). You can spend Heroism much like you spend Hero points. In the meantime it provides help in being heroic, when resisting mind control to do something evil or bad, you add your Heroism to your EGO. When resisting presence attacks, or succumbing to fear attacks when protecting the weak and/or innocent, Heroism can add to Presence. Anything, essentially, that makes a Hero a HERO. 🙂 I think I see it very much trying to make Hero points much more fundamentally part of the character (they have always felt a bit added on). I also wanted them to have a passive effect that would drive heroic play (putting a bit of narrative in the game). Thoughts?

We played a League of Extraordinary Gentlemen style game where I asked players to pick an actor who would play the character if it was made into a film (and put those headshots on the character sheets). It actually made visualising the characters easier for everyone (though I got tired of casting the bad guys). 🙂 Doc

OK, I bought it as soon as I saw the news it was live. Not used it though? Anyone given it a road-test? What are the high and low lights? Doc PS: Why isn't there notifications on the site to tout it?

My work goes slowly but I intend to deliver some GM help. I want encounters to be more than just fighting. Spectaculars sets up a scene with things to do, both for the heroes and the villains. It means there is more to do than just whale on the villains (and vice versa) and it puts boundaries on how long a fight will go on. So, what are secondary aims? Secure items, rescue bystanders, stabilise the environment, protect secret ID, deal with environmental issues. What else? And what does this mean and how does it work? Well,I am thinking that I will make heavy use of change environment. I will use distraction style secondary aims to reduce chances to hit until it is dealt with. I am hoping that I can encourage encounters that demand wider use of skills or minor powers, a little bit mire narrative. I am also thinking about setting up everyman-style contacts and reputation. Dealing with these secondary issues should make changes to these things, hopefully driving greater engagement with the setting and NPCs and to drive heroic play. Doc

My secret ID is safe then! Being a Parliamentary officer was very useful though, I was in and out ten minutes after arriving at Westminster.

I only went because 1-my wife wanted to and 2-as a Parliamentary officer, I did not gave to use the public queue. My wife was delighted we got caught on camera. I am the one in the mask...

No offence, and I would not be surprised if there were not many refrains of God save the Queen Long live the King appearing on social media. Personally, I am a republican and feel very few emotions about this. Much more concerned about working out how it will impact my work over the next two weeks.

I think the salutation would be God save the King. We never ask God to save a Monarch that has died.

Sounds like an everyman power pool with no conscious control. Every power in the pool would require an expendable focus which would provide access to a power for a limited period of time. 🙂 The key is how they work in the game and I think that would be down to you. My suggestion above would mean that every character in the game would have the potential of additional power but no direct way of accessing this. The no conscious control aspect takes away the ability of the player to control and manipulate the pool. If you come up with the crest system, then owning a particular crest would "activate" the power pool to do something particular. I think, beyond this, there is no need for any additional HERO mechanic. Doc

My intention is to include at least three or four adventures from what was my last campaign with my home group, one that explains the dynamics, sets up superherodom in Europe at this time, suggests the origins of superpowers in this world and how they will interface with the war, ancient magic and modern science. (No lack of ambition, just the talent and willpower to deliver on it! 😉)

Spend a bit of time to provide pared back character sheets with good descriptions of powers in words rather than numbers...

I want a pretty four-colour game, though pre CCA as I want to learn into the WWII aspect. I think the UK setting needs to be significantly different from US superheroes, more directly involved much earlier in the conflict. However, am digging into the three Golden Age supplements I have to take what I can. Simpler builds, more one-dimensional powers are what I am looking at. Should also have a more detailed focus on UK politics of the time (am considering a bit of a rehabilitation of Neville Chamberlain).

My son is Hotspur, he has a passing interest in HERO and sometimes logs on, we use the same PC sometimes and last night I was browsing this thread and did not notice it was logged on as him. I started to respond, realised it was not me, could not delete the post and was too tired to start again. So it was my fail, not Hotspur's.... less intrigued? 🙂 I plan for the game to hide the vast majority of the numbers (builds available in a download for the HERO-nerdverse). This should make presentation less cluttered but gives me the biggest headache in what to reveal, what to hide and how to present stuff.

I have a very particular campaign in mind, so will be driving the templates towards meeting the needs of that campaign. Have also fixed a few dials for a particular style of play. All of that, currently is secondary to building the on-ramp for new GMs and players. 🙂 Appreciate all the comments. Doc

In my head, and that is the only place it exists, the idea is about options. Each template will have different options to flesh out the character. The complexity, for me, is providing enough meaningful choices for players to provide sufficient diversity of characters and keep the decision making more entertaining than confusing. I am hoping to find ways of choosing a few paths, based on broad brush concepts, that allow a character to quickly be put together. Doc

Thanks for the responses, guys. Appreciated. While I have decided on a new broad approach I have not settled on the details. I think Hugh is right about the split and ditching gadgeteer. I would like a category to include Thing and the Storms and considering whether I should ditch alien or speedster. considering extra-terrestrial instead of alien and perhaps something like Elemental (which could embody Speed, Fire etc). Doc

My lockdown proposal to myself was that I would use HERO to create a game. I wanted to do a powered by HERO type thing that I could share with friends and possibly, if it was good enough, offer here. My God, it was hard. It was hard to sit down and really put the necessary thought into it. It was hard to do writing. It was hard to balance things up. It was hard to decide how much of the system to cover up and how much flex to leave in there. It was so hard, I am starting again for the fourth time. All that effort will inform this next one but it has shown me something. It has shown that I need to hide virtually all of the flexibility. To have something people can pick up and play, the character creation needs to be almost 95% done already. The previous three have floundered on me trying to make decisions easy for complete newbies and it branches out so far that I end up with something possibly more complex than fill HERO but with less agency. 😕 I plan to have a bunch of cookie cutter superhero templates that players can add SFX to and accessorise with secret identity stuff, colour abilities and perhaps a signature move/ability. Each template will have at least one fully formed character derived from the template to demo what can be done. It will be a UK based WWII game with a Campaign premise and three or four scenarios (I have run these scenarios with my home group so they are in playable form for me - lots of derail needed for others). I will outline all my design decisions as a document, the whys rather than the whats of what I did). I plan to bounce things on here as I do this. Big broad issues rather than the build details etc. My first consideration has been archetypes for the templates. As this will be Golden Age focused, my current list is Masked adventurer (e.g., Batman, Sandman, Plastic Man) Gadgeteer (e.g., Iron Man, Blue beetle, Mr Terrific, Green Arrow) Super-soldier/flagsuit (e.g., Captain America, Hourman, Uncle Sam) Alien being (e.g., Superman, Martian Manhunter, Aquaman) Bearer of occult/mythological artefact (e.g., Hawkman, Dr Fate, Zatara) Speedster (e.g., Flash, Johnny Quick) I plan to have three basic builds (these builds will modify CV, defences, and base damage scores) that I build out to each Archetype, possibly offering a build per Archetype (which would push this out to 18 templates with associated characters). Is there anything I am missing that is a MUST HAVE? Doc PS: this has a big potential to be a pipedream and never realised, I can see my biggest opportunity to have gotten it done was in the past two years, the next best time will be when I retire. But until then, gonna keep tinkering and writing as if it is real life thing.

Been interesting reading this stuff as I have not actually used Damage Negation. My instinct is that it is a decent tool for the toolbox as it is a defence that can cut across the traditional defences. I think I would apply it to all attacks that do STUN and BODY within the SFX. If I have DN against fire, then I would indeed apply it to fire-based NND and other attacks. I am interested in the effect on play at the table. My instinct is to lean into reducing the dice used which brings out the "what about advantaged attacks". I heard decent arguments to say that 6D6 with AP should not be reduced the same as an unadvantaged 6D6 attack. No mention is made about limitations though, if that AP attack is limited, should that not balance things out? The logic being that a limited attack is more easily negated than an advantaged one? Anyway, I prefer not to worry about such detail at the table. I might, instead prefer giving some price nuance to the DN. So vanilla DN is 4 points per 1D6. It reduces u advantaged attacks by 1D6 per D6 if DN. If the attack us advantaged, then it reduces 1D6 fircevery 2D6 if DN. Improved DN is 5 points per 1D6 and will reduce attacks with up to +1/2 advantages on a dice per dice basis. Superior DN is 6 points per 1D6 and works purely on 1D6 per D6 of DN. As I said, not used it but, if I do, that is how I plan to try it out - heavily SFX based with three versions available. Doc

Sunak's race is actually an advantage in the current Conservative leadership contest. While the membership might not like the idea of foreign brown skinned people coming into the country in boats, Rishi is one of their own. He is rich, speaks well and went to the right schools. Never make the mistake that English racism is the same as American racism.

I have been around for a lot of iterations of this debate and I had a thought which might be novel. Have we been approaching the problem from the wrong direction. We keep trying to change the way the damage is generated by the attack rather than how the damage is mitigated by the defence. Should we be looking at an advantage on defences that reduce the multiplier? If you have non resistant defences you are prone to greater volatility. If you have resistant defences then you can further advantage those defences to reduce the volatility of killing attacks. A different approach? Doc

For me it provided an SFX related defence. FireGuy can have Damage Negation versus fire based attacks, totally in keeping with the genre, regardless of what the defences are to those attacks. Drains, blasts, mental attacks, anything to do with fire affects him less. Everything else is unaffected. Its use can accentuate the schtick of characters in the game. Doc