Hero 5th ed Vs M&M

[TroyXavier]

Does Champions combat still take about 2-3 hours for a single combat?

I've played both and I like M@M a bit more simply because combat doesn't take forever.

 

[Psion]

Does Champions combat still take about 2-3 hours for a single combat?

It's never taken 2-3 hours for a combat?

(Okay, I hear some people drag their feet with the system, but I used to run some pretty sizeable groups and never had this problem.)

 

[TroyXavier]

Must have been the group I was with then. Mind you we did have 7 players, and some people took a while to decide on their actions.

 

[Dragonblade]

Thank you for all the quick responses! There seem to be a lot of good reports about M&M. Has anyone found a scenario or setting where they would have preferred Hero to M&M?

I actually prefer Hero 5th to M&M. I played M&M when it first came out and certain things bugged me about the system. First of all I feel its overly abstract, especially in combat. I also think the damage save system makes combat a little too fast. As a GM, I like to have a certain amount of control over how long a combat takes and how it flows. With M&M it can all be over with a couple good d20 rolls. Either for the PCs or for the bad guys. Yes, there are hero points, but I feel they are a metagame patch on what I consider a flaw in the system.

Second of all, although its common for GMs in Hero to set an active point cap on powers and abilities, I have never seen two characters who are similar in any Hero campaign I have run. With M&M's power level based point cap, I have found that a lot of players tend to make characters who are virtually identical to each other mechanics wise. Only their special effects differentiates them. To a point that is ok. But it really bugged me the way it affected my M&M games.

M&M also has a problem with front-loaded powers. For just a few character points, pretty much anyone can take both Invisibility and Incorporeal. Two extremely useful powers.

I do think M&M is a very slick system. But its not the be all end all that some people think it is. Neither is Hero. Hero combat can be slow and complex, especially for newbies. One thing I'll give props to M&M for is their setting and sourcebooks. Freedom City is one of the best superhero setting books I have ever seen. I highly recommend it regardless of which supers system you choose.

 

[Psion]

Must have been the group I was with then. Mind you we did have 7 players, and some people took a while to decide on their actions.

Actually, I'm not disputing you (hence the smiley). Lots of people report this. I just find it's not a situation I can relate with.

As much as I like hero, I was forced to admit that it's too complicated for most groups I was going to play with. But this had more to do with character cretion issues rather than the play time issues that some report. Even the (common) players that had difficulty grasping the power system never seemed to have difficulty with the pacing of combat.

 

[SWBaxter]

Thank you for all the quick responses! There seem to be a lot of good reports about M&M. Has anyone found a scenario or setting where they would have preferred Hero to M&M?

I prefer to Hero to M&M for campaign play. M&M has some balance problems (not surprisingly, Hero has had a lot longer to iron out the kinks), and while it plays fast it suffers (IMHO) from a lot of fencepost conditions that lead to high variance results. This is fine for one-shots and the like, but it felt a bit weird in longer term campaigns where we were never quite sure if a particular villain would be good for a long knockdown-slugout battle or if it'd be over in two hits. I also like the ability to stat out anything in Hero.

And of course, the 5th edition rulebook might just stop a bullet and that's gotta be worth something by itself.

 

[Laslo Tremaine]

The only thing I wish they would do would be put together a character generator.

And so they did...

http://www.elyzium.net/mnm/index.htm

It's an Excel spreadsheet, so you will need that program, but Simpson has done a fantastic job with it!

 

[Laslo Tremaine]

OH, and by the way. I played/GMed Hero system as my system of choice from 1980 - 2000...

And all I have to say is thank G*d for M&M. Power stunts, hero points, fast combats, and a bit of handwaving are all good things in my book. Yeah, it's still a bit rough around the edges, and combat/character balancing takes a bit of getting used to, but for my group and me it's been a very welcome change.

I fully expect a 2nd edition will solve most of my gripes with the system. We're already discussing grabbing a few things from True20 to bring over to M&M (namely the skill system, and simplifiying all stats to just the bonus)

 

[Gentlegamer]

Ok, now compare the two systems in question to MEGS as used in Blood of Heroes or DC Heroes . . .

 

[Psion]

Ok, now compare the two systems in question to MEGS as used in Blood of Heroes or DC Heroes . . .

The absrtactness of the powers in M&M matches 2nd Ed DC Heroes, though I think that DC Heroes models things a little more eplicitly, without going to the fine print details of Hero. (Basically, the bundling of powers is somewhat like DC Heroes linking in version 1.0, but DC heroes 2nd and later sort of did away with that and made it into a cost break.) DC Heroes scaling makes it really shine in high power supers type games, though both Hero and M&M handle normal levels better.

I like DC Heroes better than either Hero or M&M, honestly.