Derek Hiemforth

Yeah, I took one look at the thread and determined that I had no interest in participating in the thread or returning to the site.

If we remove every repetition of the phrase 'unless the GM rules otherwise', which could be said just the once at the start, we could save about 10 pages.

Have you seen Champions Complete?

Want better, find a 4E book, and compute STR Min as Active Points/3, and you get a lot closer to realistic.

How exactly is basing STR Min on an Active Point formula more realistic than simply assigning a reasonable-seeming STR Min?

So psyber is incorrect, there is no "default".

I didn't read it as an attempt to be authoritative about what the rules as presented in CC say or don't say...

CC doesn't really change much for me on the "class of minds" front. Just because class of minds was removed a telepath doesnt get to know what the ficus is feeling or read a file off of a disk while standing across the room from the computer.

(added emphasis mine)

I took that to mean that psyber264 was describing one GM's application of the rules. So to the extent that Mental Powers work that way "by default" in that campaign, psyber264 is correct.

I'm totally fine with there being no single default assumption. Personally, my default assumption would be that -- unless the GM specifies otherwise as a campaign ground rule -- Mental Powers are assumed to work on minds that are similar to the minds of the most common character type(s) in the campaign setting.

So, say, in a setting that was mostly similar to the real world but included rare aliens, Mental Powers would...:

• Work normally on humans
• Mostly work on sentient aliens whose minds were fairly similar to humans, working less well (or not at all) on sentient aliens that were more different
• Work with declining effectiveness on animals as the animal minds became more removed from humans (so pretty well on apes, not as well on rabbits, still less well on birds, etc.
• Barely work (if at all) on plants; you might get some vague sense, but certainly no more than that
• Not work at all on machines

If you want Mental Powers to work more narrowly than this overall, you can take a Limitation.  If this only curtails the effectiveness (for example, they only work on young humans, and still don't work against plants) then it's a bigger Limitation; if it curtails some effectiveness while expanding others (for example, they don't work at all against humans, but work normally against machines), that's a smaller Limitation.

But that's just how I'd run it. 

Could you quote a passageor cite the page where thay is stated?

It isn't stated.  Because the book is silent about it, it's tacitly up to the GM to decide how broadly Mental Powers should apply.

I know I'm in the minority on this, but I'll toss it out there anyway...

In this day and age, where almost everyone has (or can borrow) access to the Internet and a printer, I think maybe RPG books still include things they really don't need to anymore.  For example, does anyone photocopy blank character sheets out of books anymore?  Couldn't that be left as a free downloadable extra on a website?

In Champions Complete, I tried to make the examples as useful as possible (by having the example characters match the ten superhero archetypes, by having the example powers show how to recreate Powers from older editions of the game or create some of the most famous comic book superhero powers, etc.)  But even there, I wonder... Those things are probably useful to folks when they're first starting out, but once they've been playing a while, does that chapter turn into 28 pages of wasted space that they just carry around with them now?  Would it be better to have a free "Examples" download for folks?

So I don't know...  Part of me wonders if maybe books would benefit from focusing more on only including things that you'll always need, and deferring stuff you'll only need at first (like examples) or only use once or twice (like an adventure) into downloadable freebies. 

This may be beyond your control, but if there's anything you can do to encourage the players not to read the GM's Vault material, I suggest doing it.  I think VB -- even more than most books -- really benefits from some of the GM's Vault stuff remaining unknown to the players until their characters discover it through play.  I also recommend liberal use of the Hot Spots For Cool Heroes.  I think they add a lot to the "feel" of a VB game. 

I think a lot of folks (including me, at times) overcomplicate this stuff.  The short, SHORT version (as they would say in Spaceballs):

If it would be fun, allow it.

The goal of the game is to have fun. 

I'm following CC, unsurprisingly. 

Honestly, though... I didn't personally have anything against Classes of Minds -- removing them was an editorial decision.  But it didn't bother me to see them go, either.  They make logical sense, but I could see why someone might also say that they're an unnecessary layer of complexity.

Generally speaking, you can just have Mental Powers work against the targets you'd expect them to work against, and if they only work against a smaller group than that, give 'em a Limitation.  It only starts getting sticky in settings where there are more than one wide class of targets you might employ Mental Powers against (such as a technologically-advanced game where both Humans and advanced Machines are extremely common).  In that sort of setting, I might use Classes of Minds.  However, I'd probably do something different with the Alien Class of Minds.  Depending on the campaign, I'd probably either make every sentient species its own Class of Minds, or I'd make every sentient species part of the same Class of Minds.  Singling out only Humans in a setting where many sentient species are common would seem odd...

I'm pretty lenient about it.  As long as it makes sense for the character to have it, and it makes sense why it's in the Framework and not bought normally (makes sense in a way other than, "Buying it outright is too expensive!" ) I tend to allow it.  The main abuse of it I watch for is the "Hey, I've got a few extra points, so I'll stick a slot with 60 points of Power Defense in my attack Multipower so I can Abort to it!" 

I've used a house rule, in grittier campaigns, that you not only take a minimum of 1 STUN for every BODY you take (like the rules describe), but that you can't Recover that STUN until you Recover that BODY.  In other words, you're always down at least as much STUN as you're down BODY.  This makes it so that you're just not as "tough" when you're injured as you are when you're uninjured.  It takes less to knock you out when you're nursing a ruptured spleen... 

So if I understand this correctly, if a character falls below 0 Body they can still act completely normally, (Although a GM may applies penalties) acting in exactly the same manner as if they had over 0 Body except that after each Post-Segment 12 they lose 1 Body until stabilised.  If their body falls to negatively equal to their Full Body they die. (i.e. Character with Base Body of 12 dies at -12 body)

Correct.

It's already possible. With the disastrous decision to make the +1 Stun Multiple cost only +1/4, you could simply buy a 1d6 KA with +12 Stun Mod

Unless, of course, you have a GM...

Steve has repeatedly told people that CC is based on the Basic rules, and doesn't contain the full HERO System rule set. This is incorrect. CC is not based on Basic, and doesn't omit anything (at least, not intentionally), except Classes of Minds and the Absolute Effect Rule, which were both removed by editorial directive, not my choice.

Why he has told people this, I don't know. Perhaps he's not familiar with CC's contents, and believes it is based on Basic. But I agree that it is confusing people, and that it would be much better if the company spoke with one voice on the matter.

Does CC contain everything 6E1 and 6E2 contain? Of course not. But does it contain all the rules? Yes. (With the two small exceptions noted above.) Perhaps Steve and I have different viewpoints on what constitutes a "rule."

Seems like it could be either of those solutions, or neither, depending on the SFX. Can you provide any more details to go on?

About four months, but that included wedding planning, a wedding, and a honeymoon.  So really, closer to three months.  Of course, that was just the time from acceptance of the proposal to turning in of the manuscript.  That doesn't include editing, layout, etc.

Please, please DON'T use the cliche bank robbery story.  Make it interesting, make it personal to the characters involved.  Give them some investigation or chase, a little fight, a little more investigation or chase, and then the big fight.  Show them that the HERO system (and the GM) an do so much more than just 'a bank robbery'

I was actually thinking of using the cliche, but turning it on its head. I'm considering having a "hook" scene early in the scenario that starts out seeming to be a classic/routine comic book bank robbery, but quickly turns into, or is revealed to be, something different and more unusual. I want the scenario to include a mix of familiar supers tropes and less "expected" fare, and was thinking of using the "bank robbery" as the point where things really transition from one to the other.

Thanks again, all!

I've run many convention games in the past, so I know that most of the advice surrounding those considerations is right on the money. I'll likely go with a hero team that isn't actually the Justice League or the Avengers, but where each of the characters is an easily-recognizable homage to a famous comic book character.

With character sheets for introductory games, I'm always a little torn between using simplified/customized sheets that go light on the numbers, and using "normal" sheets like they're going to see in the books or from most Hero Designer exports. I don't want to scare them off with a sheet that makes gameplay seem more daunting than it really is by including a lot of accounting, but I don't necessarily want them to be completely lost looking at a full character sheet either.

I think maybe I'll do both... I'll give them the simplified sheets for the initial game, but also provide them with full character sheets (for the same characters) at the end, so they can see the full thing with a character they've already become familiar with. That way, they'll have a better idea what all those numbers on the full sheet mean before they confront it.

Great suggestions so far! Keep tossing 'em out if you've got 'em!

You may have to include a villain option for the PCs as well as some pre-generated villains. Also include some NPCs for the adventure and make it no more than about three to five scenarios.

Having villains to fight kind of goes without saying Phantom.  I really don't think a villain option for PCs to play is really needed in an introductory adventure though.  How many intro-level D&D modules had an "oh, and if you want to play as the orcs raping and plundering the village do this" option?  

Remember, this isn't for a book/module... I'm seeking suggestions for an adventure that I'm going to be running myself at a convention.  There will definitely be pregenerated characters, but it will just be the one scenario, I'll run the villains, etc.

Thanks for all the suggestions so far, folks!  Keep 'em coming! 

I'm putting together an adventure for Champions, and I'll be running it at a regional convention in February. I'm aiming to make it enjoyable for new players who may have been curious about Champions, but never played it.

I'm interested to hear what you all think would make an adventure a good "Get people hooked on Champions" adventure. Imagine that you're brand-new to Champions/Hero games, and you sit down at a table to play it for the first time.

What aspects of the game would really have to shine to intrigue you enough to want to buy the book and keep playing with your friends? Conversely, what elements might turn you off if they came up, and might make you not want to buy it or play it again?

These things can be related to the game rules, the character sheets, the GMing style, the storyline... whatever comes to mind. Thanks!

+1/4

It's been a while since I've run a game where I cared about Encumbrance.  But the last time I did, I assigned armor a STR Min, and based the Encumbrance penalties on how far below the STR Min you were.  A strong enough character might have no penalties. Weapons and other gear generally weren't factored in, but if you were carrying an unusual amount of gear or heavy items, that could add an additional penalty.

Probably depends on the level of "realism" you want in your game, and what the tone is meant to be. If superpowers were real, it would probably happen a lot, and it may also happen quite a bit in a grim-outlook sort of world. But not so much in a four-color sort of world.  "Superhero physics" would probably be more likely to win out in those cases... 

That's from months ago. He wasn't talking about the move a couple of days ago. But no, we haven't lost any in any move, near as I can tell (not posts, anyway). I can still find posts going back nearly ten years...

I just got the physical copy of Champions Complete Wensday of last, and I have to say, Derek, is that you outdone yourself on it.

 

Anyways, I am now working on doing a converting guide to converting the villains of the three Villain Volumes over to "advance 6ed" to "ChampCom". Right now I am up to Boomslang (from COIL). Got to love the electronic copys and a cheep $70 E-Book Reader.

 

My only complant is this about the E-Books as thay show on my Reader...when it gets to the stat boxes, thay read them as ARTWORK, which requiers me to break out the magnifieng glass.

What a tremendous book Champions Complete is. I got my copy a couple of weeks ago and already half my group have bought their own as well and we are launching a new Champions campaign in two weeks time, our first game in, well, more than 10 years. It is exactly what was needed after the off-putting bloat of 5th and 6th editions.

 

Truth be told, prior to the arrival of Champions Complete I had actually dug out my old copy of Original Champions (the 64 page typeset one with the monochrome Mark Williams cover) with a view to using that to get the gang back together.

 

Well done to all concerned - this is inspirational stuff.

Thanks, folks!