Quote from: gleichman;532752This is one of the features of HERO, and why a single person designing everything (generally the GM) works best. How a character is built directly effects the flavor of the game world and that character's interaction with all the NPCs in there.

If it isn't done that way you can easily end up in conflict. For example a GM wanting a four color world can build things that way, but that would conflict with a player wanting a gritty death dealer PC. Thus Player and GM expectation  must match or the conflict will be plain in the game mechanics as well as in role-play.

The group I played with has a four-color vs. gritty split so we often wind up with something that's somewhere in between, where the PCs must have at least a reluctance to kill (Common, Moderate) and a general desire to do good, but the PCs can use deadly force if the situation warrants it, particularly when the bad guys are very evil.  I've still seen some problems with genre expectations, even between the four-color favoring players, that had nothing to do with character creation but interpreting what was happening and how things should be dealt with in the game.

We talk about tone and setting before anyone creates characters.  We've also always used more than just points to define the limits of a valid character, akin to the Character Ability Guidelines Table.  That puts everyone on the same page with respect to what ability ranges are valid.  It also helps to respect the caution and stop signs in the book and the GM generally says no to using those without scrutiny.  It's worked out pretty well for us.

Quote from: gleichman;532752I think highly of you John, but I know your PC expectations will never submit to another's in a game. I wouldn't recommend HERO to you as a result, you'd either end up unable to play the character correctly as you see it- or controlling the game world instead of the GM.

Well, I try to set my PC expectations to the game when I create my character and we talk about expectations and tone before the game.  If I know what kind of game I'm building a character for, I can generally create an appropriate character.

I have no desire to play a Punisher or Rorschach type killer but I also have trouble wrapping my head around the full four-color mindset.  At some point, when Doctor Doom or the Joker shows up for the fourth or fifth time, I have trouble playing a character who happily sends them back for the sixth and seventh time, especially with the naive expectation that this time, they won't escape, even though they always have in the past.

So if you mean that full-blown four-color spandex Hero is not for me, I think that's a fair assessment.  But it's worked fine for me as something a bit more dark and realistic, which is why we keep coming back to Hudson City as a setting, even though we probably don't play it as dark as Dark Champions probably intends.  The tone I prefer is something akin to the Unbreakable, Ghost Rider, Iron Man, Priest, The Cape, and Smallville rather than things like Superman, the Wonder Woman TV show, or Sky High (which I like a great deal as a movie, so it's not intended as an insulting example).  On the other hand, I'm also not looking for Watchmen or Kick Ass, either.  Hero, as a system, can do that whole range, largely depending on (A) how common and powerful Killing Attacks are, (B) the Psychological Limitations characters are expected to have (e.g., Code Against Killing, Reluctance to Kill, No Compunctions about Killing Bad Guys), and (C) how the GM has NPCs react to situations.

Quote from: gleichman;532752In it's original and best genre of four color supers (and to a lesser extent most other genres) work on a NPC is never wasted in that way.

Doctor Doom doesn't just show up for issue #2 and that's it. He's around as long as the Fantastic Four are. Hydra agents are there for the life of S.H.I.E.L.D., etc.

That's a fair point.  My D&D game wasn't four-color and the Hero System science fiction game I ran, the players were largely fighting what could best be described as fairly unique monsters, so reuse didn't seem appropriate for me, but that was my choice.

Quote from: gleichman;532752Outside of supers there is still great reuse, just like one Skeleton in D&D is much the same as any other.

Sure, and I probably could have been more generic with the NPCs that the players fought in my D&D game, but tended to create NPCs with a backstory and particular abilities.  

Quote from: gleichman;532752If you ended making a hour long creation one shot- It's because you decided to. Not because the system forced you to.

Again, fair enough.

Quote from: gleichman;532752One rule book was the one benefit, the core 4th edition was missing a lot of good things covered in 4th edition expansion. Given the choice, I always want one rulebook to cover the rules 5th was the first edition to almost do just that.

We tended to stick with the 4th Edition Campions book and didn't use material from the expansions, so that would explain why I didn't notice this.

Quote from: Rincewind1;533056Remember guys how Ancient Gamer used to know how good of a GM you were from online posts?

OMG I was totally thinking "Ancient Gamer" too!  We're Psychic Twins today, Rince.  But I assume because OHT seems to know this fellow it can't be the same person.

Can it?

Quote from: misterguignol;533061OMG I was totally thinking "Ancient Gamer" too!  We're Psychic Twins today, Rince.  But I assume because OHT seems to know this fellow it can't be the same person.

Can it?

Well, he certainly has a tighter hold on English - my bet would be he's AG from parallel universe.

Quote from: gleichman;533024Anyone can imagine stuff, it's only interesting if it's done correctly by the rules.

Quote from: misterguignol;533059Question 1: How often do you play RPGs and how many players do you have?.

If you've been reading my posts, you should already know the answer to that question.

Since it's plain you're not reading them, I'll waste no time on you going forward.

Quote from: Rincewind1;533062Well, he certainly has a tighter hold on English - my bet would be he's AG from parallel universe.

That's actually a good point.  I was totally getting an Kewlmarine vibe though.  Good thing we didn't ask if he'd punch Marleycat in the face.

Quote from: John Morrow;533060We talk about tone and setting before anyone creates characters.  We've also always used more than just points to define the limits of a valid character, akin to the Character Ability Guidelines Table.  That puts everyone on the same page with respect to what ability ranges are valid.  It also helps to respect the caution and stop signs in the book and the GM generally says no to using those without scrutiny.  It's worked out pretty well for us.

This a good way to manage things.

So why is it that you have to design the character instead of the GM if you are in fact meeting his requirements?

Quote from: gleichman;533064If you've been reading my posts, you should already know the answer to that question.

Since it's plain you're not reading them, I'll waste no time on you going forward.

So, unemployed, huh?  That's rough.

Quote from: misterguignol;533069So, unemployed, huh?  That's rough.

Hey now, most unemployed people I played RPG online were great and chill people. The answer I'd have deduced would be "Never".

Quote from: gleichman;532913Too much of D&D are corridoor and doorway fights, but even then I have never seen any version of D&D played without a grid and minis (or some markers) in real life.

I think I've always used a grid or hex map for anything but the most simple battles, going back to Traveller in high school.  We even use Battle Mats when we play Fudge.

Quote from: gleichman;532978Now, mulitple the number of figures on both sides by a factor of ten or more. I run battles with 20 to 60 combatants typically- and at times up to 300 figures on the board. Muliple the terrain features by a factor of ten as well. And I want correct and consistent answers to any question of range, position, facing, and line of sight *immediately* to keep the battle flowing.

While we don't generally go into the hundreds, battles with 20-30 combatants are fairly common.  This led me to ask people who claim that grid or hex maps aren't necessary how large their battles normally are in a thread a while back because I'm not sure how a GM and players could keep track of the actions of 20 NPCs without one.  I think a lot of people simply don't have battles this large.  It's also my experience that timing and position matter a great deal but a lot of people don't seem to do much with that, either.  Yes, you can handle 20 NPCs in a fight in a hallway because the battle movement becomes one dimensional, like the old Wizardry computer game.

A few years ago, someone on RPG.net was describing how one of the minor darlings handled one-on-one combats really well but didn't do so well if the PCs tried to fight the same opponent together.  I found that a stunning deficiency, akin to saying a car is great so long as you drive it fast straight ahead, but it doesn't turn very well and can't go in reverse.  I don't drag race so I wouldn't have much use for a car like that.

Quote from: Rincewind1;533071Hey now, most unemployed people I played RPG online were great and chill people. The answer I'd have deduced would be "Never".

I have nothing against the unemployed and wish them the best of luck.  

I was merely noting that Kewlman didn't want to answer Question 2 after suggesting that I inhabit a lowly rank in life; I can only assume his rank is even lowlier and he feels a bit bad about this.  I hope the economy takes a turn for the better and he does well for himself someday.

Quote from: John Morrow;533073While we don't generally go into the hundreds, battles with 20-30 combatants are fairly common.  This led me to ask people who claim that grid or hex maps aren't necessary how large their battles normally are in a thread a while back because I'm not sure how a GM and players could keep track of the actions of 20 NPCs without one.  I think a lot of people simply don't have battles this large.  It's also my experience that timing and position matter a great deal but a lot of people don't seem to do much with that, either.  Yes, you can handle 20 NPCs in a fight in a hallway because the battle movement becomes one dimensional, like the old Wizardry computer game.

I've GMed a battle of 40 Imperial Troops against 200 Fimirs + wizards + Greater Demon, and we managed very fine with just a bunch of tokens from a battle game (then again, I am quite pro - token/pro - figures, if not pro - grind etc.), and a rough drawing showing the area where the battle took place.

Quote from: misterguignol;533074I have nothing against the unemployed and wish them the best of luck.  

I was merely noting that Kewlman didn't want to answer Question 2 after suggesting that I inhabit a lowly rank in life; I can only assume his rank is even lowlier and he feels a bit bad about this.  I hope the economy takes a turn for the better and he does well for himself someday.

I know you didn't, I was just stressing that one out. You know, so that someone who just enters RPGsite, does not think for a moment (the shame that'd be!!!) that we hate unemployed or something.

Quote from: John Morrow;533073I think I've always used a grid or hex map for anything but the most simple battles, going back to Traveller in high school.  We even use Battle Mats when we play Fudge.

My first D&D session used a chess board and some plastic knights we had from an old toy set. Battle maps and mins weren't availble yet although that quickly changed.

Quote from: John Morrow;533073While we don't generally go into the hundreds, battles with 20-30 combatants are fairly common.  This led me to ask people who claim that grid or hex maps aren't necessary how large their battles normally are in a thread a while back because I'm not sure how a GM and players could keep track of the actions of 20 NPCs without one.  I think a lot of people simply don't have battles this large.  It's also my experience that timing and position matter a great deal but a lot of people don't seem to do much with that, either.  Yes, you can handle 20 NPCs in a fight in a hallway because the battle movement becomes one dimensional, like the old Wizardry computer game.

This seems to be the case with most of the members of this site. One-dimensional combats (forward/reverse) or limited to very small numbers of characters and a GM and players willing to ignore the rules and just have things go the way they want them to.

Forge concepts have indeed spread far and way. The course of this thread would have been very different say 10 or 15 years ago.

Quote from: gleichman;533068So why is it that you have to design the character instead of the GM if you are in fact meeting his requirements?

Because I'm going to take things into account about how I want to play the character that the GM may not and also capture nuances of the concept that I might not communicate well.  For example, when I create Martial Artists, I tend to work within Normal Characteristic Maxima under the assumption that the characters abilities are the result of special training.  The Hero GM in my group tends to do what I'd do with Skills and Damage Levels with attributes, so he might build me a hero with Strength of 30 or 40 to get the damage I'd get with Damage Levels but without the other Strength advantages like lifting ability.  When it comes to things like power pools, the player needs to know how they want to play the slots and how they are going to allocate things like Multipower slots in play.  One character may be able to do A and B, A and C, or B and C while another character will work with A, B, and C.  Adding advantages like Reduced Endurance or Zero Endurance can also really change how a character is played, being able to go all out for rounds instead of having to worry about pauses to recover.  

At the most basic level, another person is going to make different choices than I would, and that's going to impact the way the character plays, especially in a system like Hero where things are so specifically defined.

Quote from: John Morrow;533078Because I'm going to take things into account about how I want to play the character that the GM may not and also capture nuances of the concept that I might not communicate well.  For example, when I create Martial Artists, I tend to work within Normal Characteristic Maxima under the assumption that the characters abilities are the result of special training.  The Hero GM in my group tends to do what I'd do with Skills and Damage Levels with attributes, so he might build me a hero with Strength of 30 or 40 to get the damage I'd get with Damage Levels but without the other Strength advantages like lifting ability..

Ah, I see.

That sort of thing would cause me a real problem as a player because normal humans shouldn't have a Strength at that level. It would unhinge my ability to make sense of his world unless I started to treat it like a cartoon where normal men hurl cars whenever they want to.

Quote from: John Morrow;533078At the most basic level, another person is going to make different choices than I would, and that's going to impact the way the character plays, especially in a system like Hero where things are so specifically defined.

It's all good if the GM signs off on it. And it doesn't appear that he's a very demanding sort.