The HERO System

[buzz]

They are not "more hideen". There is not some secret formula running around that WOTC keeps squirrelled away. Things are effect-defined and comparison-valued and playtested. Its all up front. The closest to formulas and secret inner workings are the spell level benchmarks and what not which are indeed "hidden" in the DMg section on, get this, making custom spells.

I don't agree. The core books do not go into much detail about what's "under the hood" in D&D. You have to look for it. E.g., the spell design rules are of less use, IMO, if you're designing something that doesn't have an obvious gauge of power, like dice of damage. Ditto creating classes. The assumpiton is that you're modifying an existing class, not building one from scratch. The class design document that was floating arond the 'Net when 3e was first released, and to a certain extent BESMd20, exist because the core books *don't* really explicitly explain how to build things from scratch, so third-parties decided to try and reveal the "underlayment" on their own.

Thankfully, this edition of D&D is rigorous enough that the underpinnings can be discovered, with some effort.

It appears they all could learn something from you. They are really overcomplicating things if indeed, as you say, total points will handle it.

I would ask again that you dial down the snarkiness.

It's not my position that HERO is *perfect*. I just don't think that, as you seem to claim, its point system it utterly worthless, nor that it pales in comparison to the available metrics in D&D. Given a setting context, you can look at points and derive meaning from them, not to mention, see all the building blocks laid bare. I *like* this, and I don't see using the system as a waste of time. If you don't like this and prefer the way D&D does things, that's great. Go and have fun.

What circumstances would occur frequently enough to allow the AOE guy to see his AOE as better than the spread EB guys?

IIRC, the AOE attack only needs to target a hex, i.e., DCV 3 (or 0 if adjacent), as opposed to the DCV of your average agent or super, i.e., DCV 5-8. I think that rolling a *single attack* that affects multiple opponents at a time against a DCV *2-5 pips lower* is a frequent enough circumstance to justify the attack as just as useful as Mr. EB Spread (who has to roll separate attacks against each opponent at their full DCV).

 

[buzzard]

You are the first person I've ever seen to argue that HERO system is not suited to running Superheroes. I admire you for being able to type that with a straight face.

HERO is good at running superheroes in its own genre. It doesn't really make it if you care to simulate comic books.

However, if detailed tactical combat between carefully constructed supers is your thing, it is probably champ(ions).

buzzard

 

[buzz]

You are the first person I've ever seen to argue that HERO system is not suited to running Superheroes. I admire you for being able to type that with a straight face.

Actually, ace HERO illustrator Storn Cook has done as much, and he makes a fairly convincing argument, precisely by citing things like M&M's Hero Points. I generally agree with him that supers in HERO (and HERO in general) could benefit from a similar Hero Point/Dramatic Editiing/Action Dice sort of mechanic. Of course, not everybody likes their games that "cinematic," so it's sort of a toss-up. The supers campaign I've been in for the last year hasn't really suffered for lack of this, FWIW.

Storn put it like this (paraphrased): "HERO can basically handle every genre, but it handles some genres better than others." To his reckoning, HERO is really good for certain types of supers and fairly cinematic heroic-level campaigns, e.g., modern-day mercenaries, SF, some types of fantasy, etc. In general, I think he's made a fair assessment. A lot fairer than the one being made here, at least...

 

[swrushing]

IIRC, the AOE attack only needs to target a hex, i.e., DCV 3 (or 0 if adjacent), as opposed to the DCV of your average agent or super, i.e., DCV 5-8. I think that rolling a *single attack* that affects multiple opponents at a time against a DCV *2-5 pips lower* is a frequent enough circumstance to justify the attack as just as useful as Mr. EB Spread (who has to roll separate attacks against each opponent at their full DCV).

buzz, f when i give specifics, as you requested, i get back generalities, this is not going much of anywhere.

I already covered the to hit dealy. I even mentioned only hitting two of the three with the spread... 11 damage to two vs 7 damage to three.

Its nice to just be able to say "its balanced" but that statement needs some backing. I gave you setting. i gave you flavor. i gave you total points. i gave you Rp. i gave you two powers and numbers and we went over the defense and packing thing...

AGAIN, let me ask, if for the 350 game i described two characters came to you which were the same except one had as his attack power the 9d6 Eb firebolt and another the 4 1/2 d6 Eb AOE 2" r fireball what would you tell them?

Do you routinely throw enough tight clusters of nigh defenseless joes with high DCVs to make up for the total ineffectiveness against supers who are at or near the 20 defense range in a 350 pt game? How many scenarios in ten would feature the clusters vs would feature supers with defenses in the 15+ range... really? for a 350 averngers styke game? C'mon?

Its simple to point to a difference and say "its a trade off it will balance".

Ok, maybe this is the wrong tact. Maybe getting you to talk about "your game" or what you would tell players is cutting too close. After all, you did not answer the direct question.

Would these two attack be equally effective against a random sampling, in your opinion, of say 30 published characters (15 from the Champions Universe sourcebook and Champions Genre book and 15 more from the villain book... crooks conquerors and killers say)? Or would you say the typical defense levels shown in those three products would show the 4 1/2 d6 ap attack to be significantly less effective?

This of course assumes you dont want to answer the earlier question. if i am wrong, please, by all means, step up.

 

[mmadsen]

Yes, you can blame the system instead of the DM or the player. IF you ignore the fact that the DM created a very bad character and the player didn't understand the system well enough to work within the rules or take advantage of what he could actually do vs what he thought the character should be able to do.

Let's review what I said:

Second, although an experienced gamemaster could have designed a better Spidey clone, I think it is fair to blame the system -- not completely, but to a very large extent -- because that same gamemaster wouldn't have had those problems running another system.

If the same gamemaster and same players would not have had the problem playing a different system, how can I not blame the system?

(I am not arguing that no one could possibly enumerate a character's powers ahead of time, or that no one could possibly recalculate new powers using a VPP in the midst of a game -- or that no one could possibly play a fun game of Champions.)

Incompetence and stupidity have a way of screwing things up irregardless of the situation.

Indeed.

The question you are asking is "Is there a system with a mechanic that could have fixed this situation". And your response seems to be that if there is, then Champions is a horrible system.

I don't recall saying that Champions is a horrible system. In fact, I've made it quite clear that the Hero system has some excellent elements to it -- but I think it could be streamlined significantly.

Here you are not only nitpicking, but ignoring most of my arguments and their context to come up with a conclusion that is the anthesis of what I was arguing. You are even ignoring the fact that I stated specifically HOW to do in Champions, exactly what you are complaining Champions doesn't do.

Nitpicking? "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

As for the conclusion that is the antithesis of what you were arguing, I guess you don't see my point: you did not succeed in arguing for Hero, but for a system that could handle powers on the fly. Here's what I said:

I think you've successfully argued for a system where players can easily think up new uses for old powers, on the fly -- and then use them.

None of your proposed solutions (VPP, MP, EC, limited-use powers) work on the fly -- and comics are full of supers finding clever new uses for their existing powers, on the fly.

 

[Kannik]

As feared, this thread is devolving into a set of thinly-veiled pot-shots. }:/

However, I do want to bring up one clarification/point on the Webby character: Within the rulebook there is text stating something to the effect of: "A character can pick up a gun (or any universal focus) and use it, without problem or penalty. However, if they want to keep this item, they must then pay points for it." IIRC, there is a similar block of text that describes creative uses of one's power. It works the same way: A character can do something nifty with their powers if the GM believes it makes sense; however, if they want to do it all the time, they should/need to buy the power. (Otherwise certain FX would be more 'powerful' than others by the virtue of having potentially useful side abilities.)

Of course, that's not to say that if a GM wishes to introduce a Genre or Hero Point mechanic into the game, that it not work (it would probably work very well) and could allow for more frequent 'free' creative uses of powers (along with other nifty effects).

Kannik

 

[buzz]

Again, see FRED under extra limbs and you will see how to do it right.

p. 112: "If the Extra Limbs cannot exercise the character's full STR or DEX, the character may take a -1/4 limitation on those Characteristics to reflect that fact."

So, your Brick 3a costs 16pts less, i.e. 189. I'm not sure what you mean by mentioning figured characteristics, as they are not affected by this. How did you come up with 234?

 

[buzz]

AGAIN, let me ask, if for the 350 game i described two characters came to you which were the same except one had as his attack power the 9d6 Eb firebolt and another the 4 1/2 d6 Eb AOE 2" r fireball what would you tell them?

I'd ask how they managed to buy a half die of EB, since you can't buy it in less than 1d6 for 5pts. I'd also ask them why they're deliberately choosing to put their main attack at the bottom of the Active Point range for a Standard superheroic campaign (i.e., it's 40-80) when you're putting the DEF/rDEF at the top (20/10). I'd ask the same of the 9d6 guy.

At the least, I'd say that he'd better save his attack for VIPER agents, on whom it should work pretty well.

This of course assumes you dont want to answer the earlier question. if i am wrong, please, by all means, step up.

More snarkiness. (Do you post as tetsujin over on RPG.net and the HERO boards?) Did HERO shoot your dog or something?

I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove at this point. That I'm somehow deluded and am not really having fun playing HERO? I've already basically answered your questions. Yes, I think the points generally come up balanced. Go ahead and think I'm an idiot if you want to. I'm still going to show up for my Friday night Champs game and have fun.

 

[barsoomcore]

Just to say this is kind of fascinating to watch. Like praying mantids eating each other or something. It's like those discussions of Mac vs PC in the 80's and 90's.

There's lots of ways of having fun, it seems. And some people sure care about how good their way of having fun is.

 

[ScottDM]

I am not a fan of the HERO system. To me it just seems like too much work for too little fun. I must say it is because I played with a rules lawyer GM that I feel this way. The guy remembers all the modifiers in the book, all the "little" rules, and was very anal about the specifics. When I play a game, I do it to have fun. There are so may modifiers for certain instances that its not even funny. I will only go into specifics if someone asks, but I felt like the game was a munchkins dream. A 4D6 killing blast radius NND power for 7 points? Someones done it I'm sure. The game favors people who like to crunch numbers, and that not being something I perticularly enjoy, the game blew monkey chunks. But that is just my opinion. And we all know what thats like.....