Just to be clear - I do think that Champions is absolutely one of the best superhero RPGs ever.  Full stop.

The only ones that I think are even worth considering talking about as alternatives are ones that just have very different design goals - MHR, for instance, is a fine game, it just has *very, very* different goals than Champions, to the point where you can't even compare them in any meaningful way.

Quote from: Bill;701758I don't care for the gurps skill system, so no real argument here. I was not saying Hero can't model regular humans, just that the stats, not the skills, are not very granular for a normal human due to its superhero roots.

I do like GURPS in general for more 'mortal' characters, but the heavy emphasis on stats instead of skills is a definite negative in my book.

Quote from: robiswrong;701764Just to be clear - I do think that Champions is absolutely one of the best superhero RPGs ever.  Full stop.

The only ones that I think are even worth considering talking about as alternatives are ones that just have very different design goals - MHR, for instance, is a fine game, it just has *very, very* different goals than Champions, to the point where you can't even compare them in any meaningful way.



I do like GURPS in general for more 'mortal' characters, but the heavy emphasis on stats instead of skills is a definite negative in my book.

HERO definitely requires a bit of house-ruling to get it to work correctly at the level of mere mortals.  Particularly in relation to characteristics and associated skill rolls.  That said, it can definitely work, it just needs a lot of prep work and thought put into "your campaign's dramatic sense and norms."

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702206HERO definitely requires a bit of house-ruling to get it to work correctly at the level of mere mortals.  Particularly in relation to characteristics and associated skill rolls.  That said, it can definitely work, it just needs a lot of prep work and thought put into "your campaign's dramatic sense and norms."

I have done plenty of prep work in Hero, but only have used four house rules.


1) Sometimes I split Dexterity into Dex and Agility; one stat for precision; the second for mobility.

2) Convert the OCV/DCV to d20 style AC. Actually very easy to do.

3) If you are rolling huge numbers of d6's, make some average. So if you have a 24 d6  Haymaker, roll 12d6 + 42Stun+6Body.  or just double the first 12d6 result.

4) GM decides what power combinations are game breaking, not the players.
The game book notes likely trouble spots, but the book can't gm for you.

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702206HERO definitely requires a bit of house-ruling to get it to work correctly at the level of mere mortals.  Particularly in relation to characteristics and associated skill rolls.  That said, it can definitely work, it just needs a lot of prep work and thought put into "your campaign's dramatic sense and norms."

I've played in a number of mortal-level Hero campaigns with no house rules, and thought it worked great - but then, everyone has a different idea about what it means to "work correctly".

Can you comment on what house rules you used?

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702206HERO definitely requires a bit of house-ruling to get it to work correctly at the level of mere mortals.  Particularly in relation to characteristics and associated skill rolls.  That said, it can definitely work, it just needs a lot of prep work and thought put into "your campaign's dramatic sense and norms."

In my experience the main barrier to noobs is the customization with points aspect, and that applies mainly to Powers.  Characteristics, Skills and Talents are all pre-set values, and those are what "mere mortals" are going to be dealing with.

JG

Quote from: jhkim;702261I've played in a number of mortal-level Hero campaigns with no house rules, and thought it worked great - but then, everyone has a different idea about what it means to "work correctly".

Can you comment on what house rules you used?

One fairly minor house rule I have considered for Hero when using 'Regular Humans' (I have always used hero for sisuperheroes) is:

Make the weight you can lift on the strength chart Linear. So a 60 Strength lets you lift 600Kg instead of 100Tons

Quote from: jhkim;702261I've played in a number of mortal-level Hero campaigns with no house rules, and thought it worked great - but then, everyone has a different idea about what it means to "work correctly".

Can you comment on what house rules you used?

One major issue is Strength differences at the Heroic level, right?  So your mage might have STR 10 (11- roll, 2d6 HtH Damage) and the Fighter might have 20 (13- roll, 4d6 HtH damage.)  You have basically three "levels" of Heroic Strength - 10-11, 13-17, and 18-20.  If one fighter has STR 19, and the other 20, who is stronger?  The guy with 20.  But they both have a 13- roll and 4d6 HtH damage.  So I often added +1 Pip of Stun damage if you had "more than %3 but less than %8" - 13 STR was 3d6 HtH damage, 14 to 17 was 3d6 + 1 STUN.  But even that is really not much "granularity."  Nor is giving the guy with the higher raw score the benefit of winning all ties in contested rolls.

Additionally, you ended up with pretty much everyone doing the same amount of damage with differing SFX.  So I tried to really vary what types of Defenses they ended up facing and trying to kind of balance out who got to "shine" the most.  Invariably, that was the spellcasters, despite every effort to balance them vs. the fighter types.

I love HERO.  It is hands down my favorite system, it really is, mostly just due to the less random nature of it, the natural balance of it, and the depth of rules (especially Martial Arts and other combat maneuver rules.)

But it has its issues when you want to do lower-power stuff.

Quote from: Bill;702524One fairly minor house rule I have considered for Hero when using 'Regular Humans' (I have always used hero for sisuperheroes) is:

Make the weight you can lift on the strength chart Linear. So a 60 Strength lets you lift 600Kg instead of 100Tons

Yeah, but then you are dealing 12d6 Damage against someone with 6 PD and maybe 5rPD Chainmail.  42 STUN and 12 BODY or so, from a punch, dealing (on average) 31 STUN and 1 BODY after defenses.  If using hit locations, it gets that much worse.

I like the idea of re-parsing what a specific characteristic score "means" at different power levels, but such a change would require changing defenses costs and such as well to truly "balance it."

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702530One major issue is Strength differences at the Heroic level, right?  So your mage might have STR 10 (11- roll, 2d6 HtH Damage) and the Fighter might have 20 (13- roll, 4d6 HtH damage.)  You have basically three "levels" of Heroic Strength - 10-11, 13-17, and 18-20.  If one fighter has STR 19, and the other 20, who is stronger?  The guy with 20.  But they both have a 13- roll and 4d6 HtH damage. So I often added +1 Pip of Stun damage if you had "more than %3 but less than %8"

Are you using super-old Champions rules, pre-4th edition? Ever since 4th edition decades ago, there are half dice of STR damage. They are clearly listed right there in the basic STR table. There is also an optional rule for interpolate that further, so STR 18 is 3 1/2 d6, STR 19 is 4d6 - 1, and STR 20 is 4d6.

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702530Additionally, you ended up with pretty much everyone doing the same amount of damage with differing SFX.  So I tried to really vary what types of Defenses they ended up facing and trying to kind of balance out who got to "shine" the most.  Invariably, that was the spellcasters, despite every effort to balance them vs. the fighter types.

This I can sort of see. In a fantasy campaign, balancing spellcasters can be tricky. It depends strongly on which magic system restrictions you choose to fit the campaign (i.e. the magic system sheet from Fantasy Hero). If you put a lot of restrictions, then spellcasters come out weaker. If you have few or no restrictions, then spellcasters are stronger. I'm curious what restrictions you had, if any.

Most of my mortal campaigns using Hero were not medieval fantasy.

Quote from: jhkim;702553Are you using super-old Champions rules, pre-4th edition? Ever since 4th edition decades ago, there are half dice of STR damage. They are clearly listed right there in the basic STR table. There is also an optional rule for interpolate that further, so STR 18 is 3 1/2 d6, STR 19 is 4d6 - 1, and STR 20 is 4d6.

But then is 4d6 -1 (3 to 23) "better" than 3 1/2d6 (4 to 21)?  Potentially, yes, but statistically, no.  You can potentially roll higher with 4d6-1 but the -1 means it rolls, on average, a lower result than 3 1/2d6.  HERO really does lack granularity at the lower end of the power chart.

QuoteThis I can sort of see. In a fantasy campaign, balancing spellcasters can be tricky. It depends strongly on which magic system restrictions you choose to fit the campaign (i.e. the magic system sheet from Fantasy Hero). If you put a lot of restrictions, then spellcasters come out weaker. If you have few or no restrictions, then spellcasters are stronger. I'm curious what restrictions you had, if any.

Most of my mortal campaigns using Hero were not medieval fantasy.

I run a fairly gritty steampunk fantasy world, and even with heavy restrictions, the spellcasters fared better.  It is just the simple versatility granted by "magic" and that is as much or more my fault than the system itself.  The guy with the gun did more damage, overall, in a straight up fight, but the magic users were less stymied by the "find a way to win" encounters and scenarios.

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702534Yeah, but then you are dealing 12d6 Damage against someone with 6 PD and maybe 5rPD Chainmail.  42 STUN and 12 BODY or so, from a punch, dealing (on average) 31 STUN and 1 BODY after defenses.  If using hit locations, it gets that much worse.

I like the idea of re-parsing what a specific characteristic score "means" at different power levels, but such a change would require changing defenses costs and such as well to truly "balance it."

I think when a man that can actually lift 600 kg punches someone, they drop like a stone.

Quote from: Bill;702582I think when a man that can actually lift 600 kg punches someone, they drop like a stone.

Not disagreeing there (though, in actuality, lifting strength does not linearly apply to punching force; boxers are actually not encouraged to "body build" and instead are better off with repetition exercises than raw lifting strength.)

What I am saying is that such a change to Strength (or, less so, other characteristics) does not address all of the granularity issues; only some of them.

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702584Not disagreeing there (though, in actuality, lifting strength does not linearly apply to punching force; boxers are actually not encouraged to "body build" and instead are better off with repetition exercises than raw lifting strength.)

What I am saying is that such a change to Strength (or, less so, other characteristics) does not address all of the granularity issues; only some of them.

I never used Hero for normal humans, always superheroes.

I would like to give it a try for Star wars. Aliens, droids, and Jedi are essentially superheroes.

I have a theory that Hero is perfect for lightsabres.

Quote from: Bill;702587I never used Hero for normal humans, always superheroes.

I would like to give it a try for Star wars. Aliens, droids, and Jedi are essentially superheroes.

I have a theory that Hero is perfect for lightsabres.

Indeed.

Reflection, on a Trigger, requires skill roll, etc. etc.  

The first genre conversion I did was for Star Wars.  The HERO system vehicle rules work wonderfully to represent Star Wars space combat as well, and using a multipower with variable slots let me perfectly do the switching of deflector screens.

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702568But then is 4d6 -1 (3 to 23) "better" than 3 1/2d6 (4 to 21)?  Potentially, yes, but statistically, no.  You can potentially roll higher with 4d6-1 but the -1 means it rolls, on average, a lower result than 3 1/2d6.  HERO really does lack granularity at the lower end of the power chart.

No, you have your statistics wrong.  1/2 d6 average 2.0, while 1d6-1 averages 2.5.
(1+1+2+2+3+3)/6 = 2.0
(0+1+2+3+4+5)/6 = 2.5


Now, I'm sure you feel like you want more granularity. Some people prefer Rolemaster with its 1-100 stats and 1d100 resolution to D20. That's a matter of taste rather than an objective problem with D20, though.

Personally, I like that Hero makes attributes relatively cheap, while emphasizing skills and offering a profusion of skills and talents. It means more variety - so I can have a melee fighter who doesn't have his strength maxed out but is still effective, compared to many systems where that would be unworkable.

As an illustration of objective results, let's compare D20 with Hero. Suppose an average-strength magic-user faces off against a top-strength fighter in a contest of strength. In D20, the magic user rolls 1d20+0 while the fighter rolls 1d20+4 (for his 18 Strength bonus).  In Hero, the magic user rolls 3d6 under 11- while the fighter rolls 3d6 under 13- (for his 20 STR).  In both cases, the magic user has about a 30% chance to beat the fighter. You might prefer a different chance, but no one says "D20 is objectively broken because of stat granularity".

Quote from: Kraven Kor;702568I run a fairly gritty steampunk fantasy world, and even with heavy restrictions, the spellcasters fared better.  It is just the simple versatility granted by "magic" and that is as much or more my fault than the system itself.  The guy with the gun did more damage, overall, in a straight up fight, but the magic users were less stymied by the "find a way to win" encounters and scenarios.

If you think spellcasters are doing too well, then presumably you should put more restrictions on them.