Doc Democracy

Are you saying you will believe a man can fly and shoot lightning from his fingers but not be universally attractive?

I am all for this in one-off and con games.  But I would take END away completely then - and anything that would otherwise tire people out would simply be doing STUN damage. 
In the past I have abstracted END to some "energy tokens" - I used glass beads.  When the narrative of the story was about pushing things on, I would take tokens away and some attacks (that I knew were END drains etc) would take away tokens.  It made it more physical and less abstract, and the tokens came back when they delayed or rested.
 
 

Reckon you need to add Superworld by Chaosium.  Big memories playing Bad medicine for Dr Drugs....
https://www.chaosium.com/superworld/

Eat Your Soul would be my ex-girlfriend.  Don't know whose picture that is, though.

Reckon you need to add Superworld by Chaosium.  Big memories playing Bad medicine for Dr Drugs....
https://www.chaosium.com/superworld/

Personally I think Israel fumbled the ball with this one.  The HAMAS attack was particularly heinous and broadcast across the world, everyone who did not watch in horror was giving themselves away.  It was something that serious pro-Palestinian nations could not actively endorse or excuse.  I think if Israel had played up the horrors inflicted upon it, called on the wider arab nations to condemn HAMAS, to expel them from their safe havens to face justice for the actions of their organisation and to force HAMAS to return the hostages they MIGHT have broken the back of the HAMAS organisation and potentially began a healing process.  I would have followed it up with a promise to release the non-HAMAS prisoners in Israel and a development promise to improve the infratructure of Gaza.
 
It seems so easy to sacrifice the lives of living soldiers and to excuse the sacrifice of innocent Palestinians when you can blame HAMAS for hiding behind them, but almost impossible to sacrifice the vengence owed to those already dead under horrific circumstances.  It is definitely an easier political line to take, to satisfy the short term demand for justice/vengence.  The current policy seems impossible to me - they will kill many HAMAS fighters, they will degrade HAMAS' ability to operate and attack Israel in the immediate future BUT they will radicalise a whole new generation of Palestinians both in the Middle East and beyond, they will provide "justification" for future horrors in what is a massively assymetric conflict, and the cycle will continue.
 
I think it is too late for a ceasefire - the Israelis are already too far in to withdraw now without significant victories, they have already damaged their credibility as victim and need to emphasise their ability, and willingness, to kill those who attack their citizens as a form of disincentive on future terror.  The disagreements are already too polarised into who you are for and looking for who is the real villain rather than looking for a longer term solution.
 
😞

Personally I think Israel fumbled the ball with this one.  The HAMAS attack was particularly heinous and broadcast across the world, everyone who did not watch in horror was giving themselves away.  It was something that serious pro-Palestinian nations could not actively endorse or excuse.  I think if Israel had played up the horrors inflicted upon it, called on the wider arab nations to condemn HAMAS, to expel them from their safe havens to face justice for the actions of their organisation and to force HAMAS to return the hostages they MIGHT have broken the back of the HAMAS organisation and potentially began a healing process.  I would have followed it up with a promise to release the non-HAMAS prisoners in Israel and a development promise to improve the infratructure of Gaza.
 
It seems so easy to sacrifice the lives of living soldiers and to excuse the sacrifice of innocent Palestinians when you can blame HAMAS for hiding behind them, but almost impossible to sacrifice the vengence owed to those already dead under horrific circumstances.  It is definitely an easier political line to take, to satisfy the short term demand for justice/vengence.  The current policy seems impossible to me - they will kill many HAMAS fighters, they will degrade HAMAS' ability to operate and attack Israel in the immediate future BUT they will radicalise a whole new generation of Palestinians both in the Middle East and beyond, they will provide "justification" for future horrors in what is a massively assymetric conflict, and the cycle will continue.
 
I think it is too late for a ceasefire - the Israelis are already too far in to withdraw now without significant victories, they have already damaged their credibility as victim and need to emphasise their ability, and willingness, to kill those who attack their citizens as a form of disincentive on future terror.  The disagreements are already too polarised into who you are for and looking for who is the real villain rather than looking for a longer term solution.
 
😞

Personally I think Israel fumbled the ball with this one.  The HAMAS attack was particularly heinous and broadcast across the world, everyone who did not watch in horror was giving themselves away.  It was something that serious pro-Palestinian nations could not actively endorse or excuse.  I think if Israel had played up the horrors inflicted upon it, called on the wider arab nations to condemn HAMAS, to expel them from their safe havens to face justice for the actions of their organisation and to force HAMAS to return the hostages they MIGHT have broken the back of the HAMAS organisation and potentially began a healing process.  I would have followed it up with a promise to release the non-HAMAS prisoners in Israel and a development promise to improve the infratructure of Gaza.
 
It seems so easy to sacrifice the lives of living soldiers and to excuse the sacrifice of innocent Palestinians when you can blame HAMAS for hiding behind them, but almost impossible to sacrifice the vengence owed to those already dead under horrific circumstances.  It is definitely an easier political line to take, to satisfy the short term demand for justice/vengence.  The current policy seems impossible to me - they will kill many HAMAS fighters, they will degrade HAMAS' ability to operate and attack Israel in the immediate future BUT they will radicalise a whole new generation of Palestinians both in the Middle East and beyond, they will provide "justification" for future horrors in what is a massively assymetric conflict, and the cycle will continue.
 
I think it is too late for a ceasefire - the Israelis are already too far in to withdraw now without significant victories, they have already damaged their credibility as victim and need to emphasise their ability, and willingness, to kill those who attack their citizens as a form of disincentive on future terror.  The disagreements are already too polarised into who you are for and looking for who is the real villain rather than looking for a longer term solution.
 
😞

Personally I think Israel fumbled the ball with this one.  The HAMAS attack was particularly heinous and broadcast across the world, everyone who did not watch in horror was giving themselves away.  It was something that serious pro-Palestinian nations could not actively endorse or excuse.  I think if Israel had played up the horrors inflicted upon it, called on the wider arab nations to condemn HAMAS, to expel them from their safe havens to face justice for the actions of their organisation and to force HAMAS to return the hostages they MIGHT have broken the back of the HAMAS organisation and potentially began a healing process.  I would have followed it up with a promise to release the non-HAMAS prisoners in Israel and a development promise to improve the infratructure of Gaza.
 
It seems so easy to sacrifice the lives of living soldiers and to excuse the sacrifice of innocent Palestinians when you can blame HAMAS for hiding behind them, but almost impossible to sacrifice the vengence owed to those already dead under horrific circumstances.  It is definitely an easier political line to take, to satisfy the short term demand for justice/vengence.  The current policy seems impossible to me - they will kill many HAMAS fighters, they will degrade HAMAS' ability to operate and attack Israel in the immediate future BUT they will radicalise a whole new generation of Palestinians both in the Middle East and beyond, they will provide "justification" for future horrors in what is a massively assymetric conflict, and the cycle will continue.
 
I think it is too late for a ceasefire - the Israelis are already too far in to withdraw now without significant victories, they have already damaged their credibility as victim and need to emphasise their ability, and willingness, to kill those who attack their citizens as a form of disincentive on future terror.  The disagreements are already too polarised into who you are for and looking for who is the real villain rather than looking for a longer term solution.
 
😞

Personally I think Israel fumbled the ball with this one.  The HAMAS attack was particularly heinous and broadcast across the world, everyone who did not watch in horror was giving themselves away.  It was something that serious pro-Palestinian nations could not actively endorse or excuse.  I think if Israel had played up the horrors inflicted upon it, called on the wider arab nations to condemn HAMAS, to expel them from their safe havens to face justice for the actions of their organisation and to force HAMAS to return the hostages they MIGHT have broken the back of the HAMAS organisation and potentially began a healing process.  I would have followed it up with a promise to release the non-HAMAS prisoners in Israel and a development promise to improve the infratructure of Gaza.
 
It seems so easy to sacrifice the lives of living soldiers and to excuse the sacrifice of innocent Palestinians when you can blame HAMAS for hiding behind them, but almost impossible to sacrifice the vengence owed to those already dead under horrific circumstances.  It is definitely an easier political line to take, to satisfy the short term demand for justice/vengence.  The current policy seems impossible to me - they will kill many HAMAS fighters, they will degrade HAMAS' ability to operate and attack Israel in the immediate future BUT they will radicalise a whole new generation of Palestinians both in the Middle East and beyond, they will provide "justification" for future horrors in what is a massively assymetric conflict, and the cycle will continue.
 
I think it is too late for a ceasefire - the Israelis are already too far in to withdraw now without significant victories, they have already damaged their credibility as victim and need to emphasise their ability, and willingness, to kill those who attack their citizens as a form of disincentive on future terror.  The disagreements are already too polarised into who you are for and looking for who is the real villain rather than looking for a longer term solution.
 
😞

However, I don't. In the previous scenarios I ran during game conventions, END wasn't a big factor and tracking it slowed the game down significantly. The only time it mattered was when a player was hit with a Power Drain attack of some kind.
 
If I use the full rules while trying to replicate every minute detail of each character write-up, I'm back to square one: a game that no one wants to play and has no interest in being introduced to because of all of the excess information.

I can join the chorus of appreciating simpler sheets for play, divorced from build sheets or hero designer files.
 
Watch your players, if they can't find numbers they are not obvious enough.  One place the game mechanics drive a bit of confusion is conflating ability stats with game stats.  By that I mean things like STR, DEX, INT etc sitting beside SPD, REC, END and STUN. 
 
I would have a combat box where all these useful numbers sit together.
 
In the Supergirl sheet, I would probably remove the detail from the Enhanced physiology, just note that asterisked features are enhanced, then add some asterisks through the sheet. The GM needs the detail, the player's playing sheet just needs to know what is linked in this way.
 
I might also push it out to two sides.  I would put the picture, the background and the complications on one side, possibly bulking them out with some strategy hints and tips.  I would then add a bit of text "colour" to the powers to encourage players to play the power and not the numbers.
 
 
Yeah, when I was younger that was no problem, today it is becoming more of a challenge. 🙂
 
Doc

I figured out pretty early on that since two and three are remarkably, unavoidably universal, I can do my initial "world building" on an index card and completely avoid dealing with number four.
 
I enjoy watching the excitement of a new GM who has just spent an entire season filling two or more three-ring binders with more and locations and NPCs- sometimes I even like reading it, if there isn't a lot of political crap filling the pages-- _especially_ if there is _zero_ international or intercontinental or some other scale way beyond the scope of the first three sessions kind of political crap or tade agreements or anything else that....  Well, that's how you end up with Phantom Menace, okay?  Fill your world up immediately with crap your players do not care about or need to know right away.  Add that in as it becomes,relevant, and only _if_ it becomes relevant.  If your players are content building a smuggling empire here in the heart of Port City with no real interest in a city on the other side of the world that has struck an alliance with dragons to learn six secret magic spells, then don't cram it down their throats, and certainly don't fill a fourth of your world document with it.
 
The first thing the players want to do in _any_ campaign is to get a handle in their immediate surroundings, and then decide a few things for and about themselves.  Then you can start pouring in what-nots.  If you discover a detail or two that don't work for you or your players, _stop building on it_ and move on to something else.  Leave it in, to be sure: someone may want to revist this in a game year or two, or you may need an unchased string way back over there for some unforseen reason, but if it isn't working for everyone, leave it alone, and be grateful that you hadn't already committed ninety pages of 'starter information' to the topic.
 
After the last couple of decades, we are all familiar with the memes and alleged trope of "players ruined all the hard work I put into my campaign!" 
 
I built seven different kinds of magic, some subdivided!  I built nine actual deities and four existential planes!  I created nineteen types of spellcasting techniques, thirty forms of martial Arts, forty-nine playable character races, two of which are not based on elves in any way, created seven draconic alliances, tied the worlds and power of the undead to six compass points across the realm, and converted all the spells and weapons  from no less than eight of the greatest FRPs of all time!  I wove complex tales of intrigue and machinations between the most powerful states, and exposed the natural checks and balances of trade and location of the various routes and destinations, with the enigmatic Nomads always awildcard, always an unknown, and are they really celestial entities? Cosmic beings pretending to be flesh so as to freely move amongst us and control our destinies?  Do they really possess an unknown magic?  Are they sheltered by an unknown God?  Do they really seek to revive the last Titan and trigger the celestial reset that will end existence as we know it? 
 
Or do they just smuggle a lot of dope under their wagons and their mysterious and never-repeating paths from place to place symbolize not a cleverly treacherous means of increasing their security, but instead advertise the quality of their illicit goods?  You will never know!
 
None of you!  You will never know!  You did not gaze upon your refection in the silver pool of Amorak!  You did not quest through the icy climes of the Forlorn Plains!  You did not choose a side when the Basharn swarmed the Fylestren Palace!  You merely watched as the terms of fealty slowly strangled the people of Carlaih and the Hestern nobles made sport of routing the refugees away from their own lands.  You cared not that Pious King Willyard was drugged and being manipulated by his childhood friend turned court sorcerer so that the vast fortunes could be plundered, then the people slaughtered in a demonic ritual, and the lands themselves be sold to neighboring Harklan!
 
Well, in our defense, we never got to repel energy beams with out lightsaber, either, and not once were we offered an extraplanetary dogfight or the chance to cloud the minds of the weak willed, so....
 
 
 
 
Yeah.  That's right.  Now, I am not saying players don't wreck campaigns.  I am most certainly not saying that it is the norm, but campaigns do periodically get wrecked.
 
What I am saying is that I have noticed that just as many times as campaigns have been wrecked by oblivious players, they have also been built to collapse by tone-deaf GMs.
 
 

I think my first step would be to assess whether the sheets could be customized for the specific Con game.  For example:

If no characters have mental powers, and no villains will, do we need Mental Combat Value or Mental Defense?

Do we need rDEF at all?  Only if the game will see killing attacks.  I guess Supergirl has one, so it needs to be explained.
Will there be adjustment powers?  If not, noting “unified power” isn’t relevant to the player.  If they will, Unified Power  will make them extremely complicated to deal with.  
I’m trying to look at this like I have never played Hero before.  Some thoughts:

There is some extra space in the bottom right of the Characteristics box.  Stretching Defenses into that area would allow “Resistant Defenses” to be more clearly identified.
So what’s this “Endurance” stat?  None of the abilities indicate their END cost, so this will be opaque to a new player.
The various “+x Characteristics” risks confusion as a player looks at Supergirl (for example) and thinks “OK, she has an OCV of 12.  I’ll use her Enhanced Physiology and Battle Training to increase that to 20”.
Flight could have a better explanation of Megascale (e.g. just “30 km out of combat”).
The player needs to know what “Absorption” does.
The player needs to know what “Damage Reduction” does.  This may be another unnecessary complication
A lot of abilities “Requires INT Roll” – the player needs to know what to roll.
A note that she can use only one Multipower ability at a time would help the player. 
Having these and the UP powers numbered suggests they have some common mechanic – one group is all usable at the same time and the other only one at a time? This will not be intuitive to a player.
Are all of the Complications necessary?  The player doesn’t need to know about Hunteds, and either the Danvers Family will be relevant or they won’t in the Con game.
A summary of attack options (especially for Supergirl’s STR) could be helpful to a player.
Dropped to Wasp here

An explanation of “Autofire” would also be useful. 
Is there any reason the player would choose the 8d6 attack instead of the 10d6 attack?  Maybe the 10d6 was not intended to be autofire?
Do any of her powers require that she shrink? 
Is that +5 OCV over and above the 11 at the top of the sheet?
Striking Appearance is unclear – does it add to the stats already presented?  Is it always applicable?  What does “+1 PRE” mean?

 


 
On the Builds
 I assume the intent is not to run Supergirl and the Wasp together.

If the goal is to introduce players to the game, I like the Wasp’s power level a lot more than Supergirl’s. 
Neither have much investment in skills.
As Doc D notes, having a two-sided sheet would open up more explanatory notes and more “how to run the character in a game” options.
I would also consider “full build” sheets, but only for interested players after the game, perhaps with "campaign guidelines" like DC and defense ranges, an expected focus on superhuman powers over skills, etc.

I can join the chorus of appreciating simpler sheets for play, divorced from build sheets or hero designer files.
 
Watch your players, if they can't find numbers they are not obvious enough.  One place the game mechanics drive a bit of confusion is conflating ability stats with game stats.  By that I mean things like STR, DEX, INT etc sitting beside SPD, REC, END and STUN. 
 
I would have a combat box where all these useful numbers sit together.
 
In the Supergirl sheet, I would probably remove the detail from the Enhanced physiology, just note that asterisked features are enhanced, then add some asterisks through the sheet. The GM needs the detail, the player's playing sheet just needs to know what is linked in this way.
 
I might also push it out to two sides.  I would put the picture, the background and the complications on one side, possibly bulking them out with some strategy hints and tips.  I would then add a bit of text "colour" to the powers to encourage players to play the power and not the numbers.
 
 
Yeah, when I was younger that was no problem, today it is becoming more of a challenge. 🙂
 
Doc

Last month I enjoyed the fall game convention (Nuke Con) and am slowing building up the desire to revitalize Champions and run it at the next major game event. The challenge remains, though, is to take something that's very rules heavy (Hero System) and make it easy enough for brand new players to pick up and be interested in like the rules light superhero game ICONS that I typically run, while still providing the details (e.g. "crunch") that existing Hero Systems players enjoy.
 
I came up with what I call, "Simplified Sixth" where I combined powers, skills, talents, and perks under the generalized category of, "Skills & Attributes" (I got the idea from Silver Age Sentinels), spell out what I can, minimize acronyms (which really confused new players in the past), and make it fit on one page. Below are two examples and constructive feedback would be extremely helpful.
 
Thank you!
 

I never understood the idea that you had to try and act out social interactions that your character should be able to do, but you cannot.  That is not role playing, that is using your own skills in place of those of your characters.   That is in fact the exact opposite of what good role playing should be.   I am an engineer with decades of experience with computers, but I don’t force my non-technical players to give me detailed descriptions when they try to “hack” into a system.  What I will do is after the roll come up with a reasonable description of how they did it.  
 
Real role playing would be to make the roll and then play out the results.  For example, if the player is good at making speeches and fails his roll by a huge amount, they should start spouting of absolute garbage that is going to totally screw up the situation.  That is role playing, not trying to salvage the situation.   If the player makes the role give some suggestion on how they did it and maybe change their wording to something that actually sounds reasonable.  
 

That might be preferable to a player with poor speaking skills being expected to orate in character or simply not be able to play face type characters. 
 
I say that as the player who often plays face type characters and am often deferred to in such situations even when my character is supposed to be a slow-thinking grunt.  My friends expect it of me, and not of others.  The game system should not reinforce this kind of stereotyping.  In the example above, I would seek a bit of additional information - what is he drawing on to persuade the guards, why should they look the other way, why should you be different.  I would not make the player orate (and potentially have them embarrassed at doing something they know they are not good - and perhaps not even competent at - in front of their friends).

My questions would be, what is it about this limitation that limits what you can do.  Personally, I dont think there is a huge limitiation on the fact that they are all armoured suits.  Possibly if that limitation meant that they are all (at least) IIF and that the focus is trashable if someone does enough damage, then I would be up for the limitation.
 
There would be some interest if the most relevant suit (the HulkBuster) got busted and then he had to go fight the Hulk with whatever suit happened to be available.  🙂

My questions would be, what is it about this limitation that limits what you can do.  Personally, I dont think there is a huge limitiation on the fact that they are all armoured suits.  Possibly if that limitation meant that they are all (at least) IIF and that the focus is trashable if someone does enough damage, then I would be up for the limitation.
 
There would be some interest if the most relevant suit (the HulkBuster) got busted and then he had to go fight the Hulk with whatever suit happened to be available.  🙂

I have just flicked through this @GoldenAge and I think it looks thoroughly professional.  Would not be disappointed if I paid for this.  If the content is half as good it will be worth reading.

D&D is indeed bound to Vancian magic but I dont think Greyhawk needs to be.  I think there is a role for circles of magic and hierarchies and how I make that work is something I am working on.
 
I am looking forward to working through the Monster Manual and comparing to what has been done elsewhere.

Well.  There are other options.  I had the shadows as the physical manifestation of the additional SPD I suggested.  I would consider allowing the attack to be Blast with a +1/4 no range (meaning the attack could be delivered where either the main character or one of the shadows was in melee range.
 
That not only avoids indirect and stretching, it gives a bonus.  The drawback is that it does not allow all of the skills etc that Zed might have.  However, you could buy indirect or stretching on a much smaller amount of STR to do much of that stuff.
 
These are not complicated in mechanics just a bit of a mind stretch to apply SFX to those mechanics.
 
I would be considering this as a bit of a speedster character, acting more times in a round than most other characters but not the 3-4 times as often as characters with Duplication or Summons.

Really, the only way to judge that would be to play it and see what you think.  If you allow it, you might see people take bigger movements, allowing them to dive in, hit and move away (possibly into cover) with no ability of the person attacked to intervene.
 
The rules as written mean that if you run in and hit someone then you will have to be there to take the consequences of that melee attack.

Also. I maintain that while looking to our own world can be informative, it cannot be definitive on what happens in a fantasy world where a vast array of other forces, powers and laws of nature exist.