Good Superhero-Game?

[Glyfair]

There are only 2 super RPGs I'd personally list as "bottom of the barrrel" for me. Foundation is one, Superhero 2044 is the other. I'd rate Superhero 2044 below Foundation, although my copy disappeared ages ago.

I never really like Fuzion, but I didn't hate it. I just didn't see any reason to use it when I had Champions.

The superhero RPG I was attracted to, that was somewhat reviled, would be Marvel SAGA. Although the SAGA system was trounced in reviews for Dragonlance, I thought it worked reaonably well for Marvel Superheros. It had rough edges, but I liked some things about it.

 

[mcrow]

I have to toss in a vote for M&M, its a great game and system.

Also keep an eye out for Supers INC. It is not out yet but in the near future it will be. It's a cool concept with a lite system. Most supers are genetaiclly designed by the government and large corporations and in many ways has a Spycraft/Supers feel. We had a cool adventure where we found a gate to another world called Nexus.

The way it looks Supers Inc will be prices lower than most RPGs and still be a complete game.

 

[woodelf]

*nod*. Case in point - I'd call the original Marvel Superheroes (the FASERIP version) both simple and elegant. What it isn't is "balanced".

Yeah, i can accept that. Though it points up a difference of POV: the fact that it *matters* that it isn't balanced, and isn't balanced, is why i'd say it isn't particularly elegant. Which, i think, is the exact inverse of what i said lasts time. Hmmm... maybe just a semantic problem.

Anyway, if the mechanics had been better structured so that it never mattered whether or not your characters were "balanced", then i'd consider it elegant. Something like, say, With Great Power..., where whether or not characters are of equal power is a moot point. In fact, it's precisely the fact that characters in superhero comics are clearly not balanced in the traditional RPG sense that lead us to developing Four Colors al Fresco as we did--throwing out the notion of mechanical balance entirely. I suspect a similar observation is behind the origins of With Great Power..., Truth & Justice, and Hearts & Souls.

 

[Felon]

Once again, my experience differs. I have HERO PCs who are powerhouses, and I have others who are not, like Seeker, whose powers were all about having extremely powerful perception abilities: X-ray visions, blindsight, etc., and had only a modicum of combat ability...not even enough that he could take down a black belt with any sense of certainty...or Dreadnought, the "invulnerable" PI with some base-level martial arts (boxing) and a Desert Eagle as his only offense.

Nothing you say here really indicates a "differing" experience. All you really seem to be saying here is that some of your players reconciled themselves to playing lightweight (or even featherweight) heroes. I certainly haven't denied that you can build Aunt May using the HERO system. Nor have I denied that players can have fun playing characters who are, at best, marginally effective in combat. However, a weak character doesn't automatically translate into an ambitious concept.

If folks do want to assert that they've never encountered any problems building a playable character with an ambitious concept using HERO system's point-based character design language, and furthermore that the GM's never needed to make any house-rule decisions to accomodate such a character, then here's my humble request: provide an example of one such character and how it managed to fit within the established point limit. Remember, no house-rules, no GM allowing a cheaper power to substitute for a more expensive power, no allowing Special powers within Power Frameworks. If you need some inspiration, look back at last couple of posts. There are ambitious examples there.

 

[Fishbone]

I think it is a testament to the power of HERO's system that so many differing builds can be made.

If folks do want to assert that they've never encountered any problems building a playable character with an ambitious concept using HERO system's point-based character design language, and furthermore that the GM's never needed to make any house-rule decisions to accomodate such a character, then here's my humble request: provide an example of one such character and how it managed to fit within the established point limit. Remember, no house-rules, no GM allowing a cheaper power to substitute for a more expensive power, no allowing Special powers within Power Frameworks. If you need some inspiration, look back at last couple of posts. There are ambitious examples there.

As to that question: It has been done a lot. No power frameworks? Come on, thats my bread and butter. Its better and easier for emulating known heroes than just about anything else on the market, especially the class based d20 stuff that is dominating the market. Replicate Long Shot, Swamp Thing, The Tick, or or Tahngarth, Talruum Hero using d20 and then do it with HERO and see which is more true to the character and balanced.

 

[Felon]

I think it is a testament to the power of HERO's system that so many differing builds can be made.

Absolutely. Unfortunately, it's a testament to its limitations that so many rich characters ultimately are whittled down until they're ubiquitous and unremarkable 250 point characters. Even the "high-powered" 375 builds don't cut it--ever notice how many villains in the Enemies books are written on blank checks?

As to that question: It has been done a lot.

Note that there's no question in that section you quoted (without actually using quotes).

No power frameworks? Come on, thats my bread and butter. Its better and easier for emulating known heroes than just about anything else on the market, especially the class based d20 stuff that is dominating the market. Replicate Long Shot, Swamp Thing, The Tick, or or Tahngarth, Talruum Hero using d20 and then do it with HERO and see which is more true to the character and balanced.

You picked some damned odd choices. How hard is it to create The Tick or Longshot? Sorry, don't know what a Tuaghathr is.

 

[buzz]

Even the "high-powered" 375 builds don't cut it--ever notice how many villains in the Enemies books are written on blank checks?

Felon, you may want to take a look at the 5th ed. NPC books. Sure, many of the iconic villains (e.g., Dr. Destroyer) have a lot of EPs, but there are a bunch of villains in CKC that are standard, 350pt characters. Look at Predators, the book for Dark Champions, and there are lots of great adversaries built on even less. Also, all of the sample PCs in the Genre-by-Genre chapter of the HERO core book are all standard 350pt supers.

I fully understand a lot of the issues you have with HERO, but I don't buy into the idea that the system forces you to make nothing but one-trick combat monsters.

I would highly reccomend newbies and disgruntled veterans to check out Sidekick, a 126pp distillation of the current HERO rules. It boils HERO down to the basics for easy digestion, and also leaves out many of the fiddly bits veterans may have come to dislike.

 

[Silver Moon]

M&M for me. Great system.

 

[Corinth]

I can play M&M cold and stupid. I can't do that with HERO. M&M wins.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Remember, HERO also allows a sliding scale of base points, as in:

Typical Heroic Level campaign (typical Spy genre or FRPG): 75pt. base + 75pt. in disads.
Low-level Superheroic campaign : 100pt. base + 100pt. in disads.
Superheroic campaign: 150pt. base + 150pt. in disads.
Comic book level campaign: 200-250pt base + variable (unlimited) disads.

I actually own some published versions of (mostly HERO 4th Ed) the X-Men, Teen Titans, DNAgents and several other teams and their villains. The heroes were typically 250base with about another 100-200 points in disads, plus some XP.

Master villains like Magneto, Dr. Doom, and iconic game NPCs like Mechanon, OTOH, were typically over 1,200 points in total cost, with a base of 200, some disads, and the "villian bonuses" (functionally a whole bunch of XP)- much of which wea pumped into non-combat "powers" like paying for bases, duplicate bodies/robots/clones and minions.

As for the "blank check," who cares? Many of such NPCs are supposed to be able to fight off teams of PCs by themselves. Besides, NPCs in many games break rules that apply to PCs. I just picked up D&D's DMG2, and there are NPC only abilities in it. Fair? Sure- those abilities are meant to make the NPCs more interesting and functional within the environment, but if PCs had them, it could unbalance the game.