D&D 4E 4E d20 Superheroes - I want that too!

[Felon]

I agree. 4e strikes me as very well suited to supers. I'm thinking something like:
Paragon -- the embodiment of a cause, ideal, principle, or concept (Captain America): Super Leader

Blaster -- master of energy (Human Torch): Super Controller

Avenger -- focuses on down-n-dirty combat (Wolverine): Super Striker

Tank -- big, strong, can dish it out and take it (Thing): Super Defender

So much of 4e that chafes me WRT fantasy works perfectly for supers, a genre which is never remotely simulationist.

I keep seeing folks say they see 4e as having a lot to offer the superhero genre, but I don't them really demonstrating many advantages.

4e didn't invent the notion of party roles. Nobody did. Those roles evolved all on their own in RPG's, and I can't see the official codification of them as being the primary basis of creating a superhero game.

 

[Lizard]

I keep seeing folks say they see 4e as having a lot to offer the superhero genre, but I don't them really demonstrating many advantages.

4e didn't invent the notion of party roles. Nobody did. Those roles evolved all on their own in RPG's, and I can't see the official codification of them as being the primary basis of creating a superhero game.

Well, if you just want the best system for doing *anything*, use Hero.

I view it as mostly an intellectual exercise. A lot of the 4e rules fit the very ritualized style of comic books, including the minion/regular/elite/solo model -- it seems that it would make team-on-team battles and 'everyone whoops on Galactus' battles easier to model.

 

[Felon]

I think that's kind of irrelevant, since M&M doesn't get onto nearly as many store shelves as WotC books do. Plus, if they make a Marvel Universe game with 4E rules? Forget about it... no competition at all.

The reality check here is that WotC has already attempted a Marvel RPG, and it was a total non-event. I thought it was pretty cool myself. Used cards instead of dice.

Also, I don't know what kind of shelf count you're talking about here. I don't know of any hobby shops that just carry D&D and not other games like M&M. The supposition that it's "no competition" simply because a WotC would be more widely available seems kind of shaky, especially when you consider that gamers actively seek out RPG products and we live in a digital age that caters to active consumption. If you want it, you can get it.

 

[Felon]

The same thing that any well-designed class/level based system gains over a point-based system:

Clarity, and Ease of Play.

In many RPGs, character creation is the hardest part of the game. But it's also the part that comes first, before you know any of the rules or have any experience with game play.

When you're just given a list of options, and told "spend your points on these", It's tough. You don't know which options are necessary, which are good to have, and which sound cool but aren't actually powerful. (That's also true of unstructured list choices in class and level based games, btw. My first 3e character was a melee rogue who didn't have any ranks in tumble).

Posts upthread touch on the fact that CoH started classless, and gained archetypes at a late stage in its development. The reason they did this, though, is that their original classless system was too confusing and hard to use..

Good point. This is why M&M's Instant Superheroes is a great idea for a product. You have a book full of template characters that you can play out-of-the-box. The player comes up with the personal touches, such as name and origin, and can tweak other elements as he becomes comfortable with the system. You can go from structured to sandbox easily, as opposed to the class-based system system where a players remains in a structured progression even after he's gained mastery over character design.

 

[Felon]

Neither. Powers are separate from classes.

So, in such a system, what is everything that a class offers? Hit points? Attack and defense bonuses?

The issue I see here is this: classes work in D&D because that system is not dedicated to providing faithful represenations of characters from the genre. The capabilities of wizards, clerics, fighters, and thieves were largely created from whole cloth. If you can build your favorite character from the genre using D&D's class-based system, that's great, but that's not really where the system's priorities lie. Never has been or will be, and that's why we've always heard about how you can't build a warrior armored solely with a loincloth, or why rangers used two weapons and cast spells. Sure, you can probably build Aragoran a little more easily with 4e, but again that's just gravy.

So, are we talking about doing the same thing with a superhero game? Do we wind up with a tabletop version of City of Heroes where you can build faithful versions of some characters, but others just don't fit into a codified class or role very easily?

 

[malcolm_n]

characters playing a superhero in a super hero game:
Regular attributes for 4e and treat nonsupers as minions unless expressly noted.

characters playing nonsupers in a superhero game:
Regular attributes for 4e and add a "0" to the end of any attack, damage, or skill check from a Superhero unless otherwise stated.

 

[Boarstorm]

The reality check here is that WotC has already attempted a Marvel RPG, and it was a total non-event. I thought it was pretty cool myself. Used cards instead of dice.

The reality is that Marvel RPG failed because it, quite frankly, blew. It failed for the same reason that Dragonlance SAGA failed -- cards are not a satisfactory substitute for dice. It... bothers us old schoolers. Go back to the TSR (I think?) Marvel RPG using the FASERIP system (and dice). It was, in-as-far-as-Supers-games-go, a huge success.

Also, I don't know what kind of shelf count you're talking about here. I don't know of any hobby shops that just carry D&D and not other games like M&M. The supposition that it's "no competition" simply because a WotC would be more widely available seems kind of shaky, especially when you consider that gamers actively seek out RPG products and we live in a digital age that caters to active consumption. If you want it, you can get it.

I disagree. Every single gaming store within 120 miles of my location carries WotC products. You know how many carry M&M? Zero. Oh, sure -- you can special order it. But most people -- hell, most gamers -- aren't like us. They don't hang out on the 'net researching different games. For most of us, if we don't pick it up in a game store and leaf through the pages, we don't even know it EXISTS.

No disrespect to M&M (or... Green Ronin, is it?), but it's ludicruous to think that third-party publishers can compete with the big boys on a meaningful level. Now, before anyone jumps on me for that -- I'm not saying third party publishers don't produce quality products, just that they don't have the resources/costumer base this early in their corporate lives to saturate the market as well as WotC or WW do.

 

[Relique du Madde]

4e (4e modern) + Poison Pill = WoTC's attempt to kill MnM 4e

 

[smathis]

I love M&M. Always have. It's a great game. I'd still wouldn't mind WotC putting out a Marvel RPG. I was really into MURPG (and am still quite fond of TSR's FASERIP Marvel game). But MURPG was rushed and never felt finished to me. It still needed a lot of work before it saw print.

And FASERIP is going on 20 years old.

It would be nice to have an update.

Shadowcat: Heroic Tier, Striker
Capt. America: Paragon (maybe Epic) Tier, Defender/Leader
Spider-Man: Paragon Tier, Striker/Controller
Nightcrawler: Heroic Tier, Striker
Wolverine: Heroic Tier, Defender
Storm: Heroic (maybe Paragon) Tier, Controller
The Punisher: Heroic, Defender/Striker
Batman: Could be Heroic, Paragon or Epic, Striker
Iron-Man: Paragon, Striker/Defender
SuperMan: Epic, Leader
Thor: Epic, Defender/Controller
John Constantine: Would be part of the d20 Modern Heroic Horror line, not supers.
Green Lantern: Epic, Controller
Dr. Doom: Epic, Controller
Mr Fantastic: Epic, Controller
Iceman: Heroic, Striker/Controller
Warlock: Epic, Striker
Beastboy: Heroic, Defender
Puck: ???
Aquaman: Paragon, Leader

As far as classes go...

What are the templates in the M&M game but a basic definition of classes of superheroes? Sure it's nice to be able to pick from a list of powers to create a unique super...

But I don't think that classes negate that possibility.

You can create a PC that's a Powersuit (making him a Defender/Striker by default). Give him the power source of Super-Science, Arcane or Alien. Then select powers based on that.

To me, it's no different that giving a Warlock a Fey, Stars or Demonic Pact. Pretty similar, actually.

 

[Vigilance]

So, in such a system, what is everything that a class offers? Hit points? Attack and defense bonuses?

Classes do what classes always do: they identify your archetype and the way you play the game.

Powers are things that help you, but dont define your archetype.

This may seem counter-intuitive, but it works.

For example, Vision and Shadowcat both have desolidification, just as Plastic Man and Martian Manhunter can both change shape.

Are those powers what define how they operate in a team setting?

I don't believe that they do. Vision isn't generally skulking around in the background any more than Shadowcat is generally running up to punch guys.

Of course, you need to keep two things in mind: a character's archetype is much easier to pick out in a team book, in fact, team books are better rpg fodder in general, since they are actual adventuring groups; second, yes you can find cases where Vision has been stealthy and yes you can find cases where Shadowcat has punched someone.

If your argument is that classes dont work because classes should be straight jackets, I disagree.

The issue I see here is this: classes work in D&D because that system is not dedicated to providing faithful represenations of characters from the genre. The capabilities of wizards, clerics, fighters, and thieves were largely created from whole cloth.

I couldnt disagree more. There were archetypes listed by the original designers of D&D for every character class. Sometimes they were historical, such as the Cleric being based on the Knights Hospitlar, but there are fantasy archetypes for D&D characters.

They just didn't choose genre over good design.

So if you're asking me if I would institute a rule I thought sucked becuase it would make a better emulation of comics, the answer is no.

This is also why Superman is so hard to handle for most comic games. A reader doesn't care how much more powerful he is than the group. Fellow players probably would.

So, are we talking about doing the same thing with a superhero game? Do we wind up with a tabletop version of City of Heroes where you can build faithful versions of some characters, but others just don't fit into a codified class or role very easily?

When I design a supers game, and I guess at this point I'll mention that I have, Blood and Vigilance, and it's sold quite well and gotten good reviews (and it's class based), I have two goals in this order: make it a good game; make it a good emulation of the team comic experience.

I realize I am in the minority on this issue and Im ok with that.

But I also have given this a lot of thought as a long time supers gamer.

Ive played more Champions, Hero, GURPs and M&M than I can count. Those games have a lot going for them.

But point based systems also have drawbacks, that are handled quite nicely through class-based games.

Im not coming at this issue half cocked.

Unlike most people in this thread, I have actually played superhero games both ways: point based and class based.

You can emulate genre characters, and both games work well.