M&M2e: No HP!? What were they thinking?

[Dragonblade]

Ok, as a BIG fan of both Mutants and Masterminds and using Hit Points, let me weigh in.

First of all, you don't need HPs to have a good M&M game. Second of all, Hit Point rules will be included in the forthcoming Mastermind's Manual. A book with all the optional rules for the system. This book comes out in January, I believe. But Steve may come on and correct me.

If your friend insists that he can't play without HP, then just keep playing M&M 1e and wait until you can get the new Mastermind's Manual. OR play M&M 2e, but just use the HP rules from the 1e rulebook. Everything should pretty much convert over with little trouble. For strength damage, just convert your 2e strength score back to a 1e equivalent to determine the proper dice of damage.

I'm running my M&M game without HPs until the Mastermind's Manual comes out and then I will probably convert to HP.

 

[Dragonblade]

Note that I'm a big fan of hit points. However, if there is any genre that hit points don't fit, it's the superhero genre.

Actually, I think the opposite is true. HP encourage a very cinematic and heroic play style. In other damage systems, players are often reluctant to get into the thick of battle for fear of the penalty or injury that another hit may inflict upon them. In my experience, non-HP systems tend to encourage a more cautious play style.

Players in a hit point system are much more likely to play heroic characters and jump right into the thick of things because a single hit is not as significant or debilitating.

Hit point systems are also a useful guage for the DM to judge the remaining life of a PC and allows the DM to better adjudicate challenges that won't kill a PC. The Toughness Save system is much more random and its actually much harder for a DM to control the lethality of an encounter.

 

[coyote6]

I confess to scratching my head at the moral outrage of the complaint as well.

Me, too. In fact, I'm morally outraged about it.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Generally, a proper-PL foe will NOT have an attack that can one-hit-KO a hero if he rolls a 10 on his Damage Save.

And using a HP guarantees you'll get 11+ on the roll (if they used the True20 ones). Or 10+ (in MM1).

--fje

Actually, I think the opposite is true. HP encourage a very cinematic and heroic play style. In other damage systems, players are often reluctant to get into the thick of battle for fear of the penalty or injury that another hit may inflict upon them. In my experience, non-HP systems tend to encourage a more cautious play style.

Players in a hit point system are much more likely to play heroic characters and jump right into the thick of things because a single hit is not as significant or debilitating.

Hit point systems are also a useful guage for the DM to judge the remaining life of a PC and allows the DM to better adjudicate challenges that won't kill a PC. The Toughness Save system is much more random and its actually much harder for a DM to control the lethality of an encounter.

 

[jezter6]

Actually, I think the opposite is true. HP encourage a very cinematic and heroic play style. In other damage systems, players are often reluctant to get into the thick of battle for fear of the penalty or injury that another hit may inflict upon them. In my experience, non-HP systems tend to encourage a more cautious play style.

Players in a hit point system are much more likely to play heroic characters and jump right into the thick of things because a single hit is not as significant or debilitating.

Hit point systems are also a useful guage for the DM to judge the remaining life of a PC and allows the DM to better adjudicate challenges that won't kill a PC. The Toughness Save system is much more random and its actually much harder for a DM to control the lethality of an encounter.

Couldn't agree more. It's one of the things about d20 modern that I dislike, is that you can have a tank walk through tons of pistol fire and keep getting scratched and have plenty of HP left over. HP is not right for that game, but a damage save might be better with a fair shot of being seriously injured.

That said, for ease of use, I will stick with toughness saves for any M&M games.

 

[The Lost Muse]

Having played M&M with it's damage saves, I have been trying to add damage saves to D&D for a long time, if only because I like the fact that once injured, you are both more likely to be injured, and also find other things (attacking) harder to do. But I like hit points too.

 

[Captain Tagon]

Actually, I think the opposite is true. HP encourage a very cinematic and heroic play style. In other damage systems, players are often reluctant to get into the thick of battle for fear of the penalty or injury that another hit may inflict upon them. In my experience, non-HP systems tend to encourage a more cautious play style.

Players in a hit point system are much more likely to play heroic characters and jump right into the thick of things because a single hit is not as significant or debilitating.

Hit point systems are also a useful guage for the DM to judge the remaining life of a PC and allows the DM to better adjudicate challenges that won't kill a PC. The Toughness Save system is much more random and its actually much harder for a DM to control the lethality of an encounter.

I couldn't disagree more. In comics all the time characters get hurt but keep fighting, but seem to less effective, or have to push themselves to stay as effective. A damage save system that actually penalizes you for being injured reflects this much more than the super abstract hit point system where the only actual indications of being hit are being fully active or being dead.

 

[Dragonblade]

The thing to remember about comic books is that the author controls everything. So even though they may give the appearance that a character is hurt or wounded, guess who still ends up winning in the end? That's right, the hero. So I would argue that damage systems that progressively penalize PCs do not accurately represent comic book fights.

In an RPG, you add that random element that comes from rolling the dice. You also have players who more often than not, are far more concerned about their own character's mortality than the comic book writer who can play fast and loose with the heroism of his characters because he or she knows how everything will turn out in the end.

Hit points are not a realistic system by any means. But they encourage a more heroic play style by removing the need for excessive caution regarding character mortality. I simply prefer that for superhero role-playing. If I want to play in a grim and gritty setting where any orc with a knife is a threat, I'll play Warhammer or something.

 

[Michael Tree]

The thing to remember about comic books is that the author controls everything. So even though they may give the appearance that a character is hurt or wounded, guess who still ends up winning in the end? That's right, the hero. So I would argue that damage systems that progressively penalize PCs do not accurately represent comic book fights.

Well it's a good thing that the M&M damage save doesn't progressively penalize PCs then. Each wound only gives a -1 to future toughness saves, meaning that the character becomes more likely to be stunned or knocked unconscious the more his enemies beat on him. Nothing else is penalized: characters fight just as well after being pounded into the earth as when they're perfectly healthy.

The hero point mechanic for 2e was also designed to encourage the "villain pounds hero into the earth for a while, but hero comes back and defeats the villain in the end."

 

[Ranger REG]

Well it wouldn't be silly as M&M1e had them. There wouldn't be a reason to expect that options from 1e would turn up missing in 2e.

Unless to make room for more important material and new rules mechanics added to the standard rules. To me, standard rules should be first for a core rulebook.