TheRPGSite

I'm going to warn everybody from the outset. This is going to be a controversial topic with Hero System fans. Because it takes a direct critical view of what some people consider a pillar of the system. It's a full-on roasting of that subject. But I believe it is well deserved.

I'm posting this warning here in advance. So people are well warned about what is to come. So they can avoid getting into a potentially contentious discussion before it even starts.

brb grabbing some popcorn.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1102381brb grabbing some popcorn.

Bring double I'll bring the sodas. :cool:

Damn I ate all my popcorn in the Grifter thread so I will just imagine eating popcorn.

The Multipower. What I consider the biggest cheat in the entire Hero System's history. Which also became the foundation in which another Power Framework called the Variable Power Pool was based upon.

It's a construct based on flawed math that breaks apart if you put too many power slots on it. Of either of the two varieties.

It works by paying full price for a central pool that determines the maximum Active Point Value of any power to become a slot. Active Point value is: The cost of the power level itself. Plus any Power Advantages attached to the power.

The cost of additional slots stops being worth it if you reach 5 different powers in a Variable Slot or 10 for a Fixed slot. As the collective cost of the slots tends to exceed that of the central pool.

The point cost of the Variable Slot is 1/5th the Active Cost of the pool itself. And for Fixed Slots the cost is 1/10th the cost of the central pool. But that is also where it is broken.

The Multipower is doesn't limit powers significantly at all. It's literally giving some huge discounts without really doing anything but adding extra complexity to the character build.

A central meta-rule of the Hero System is: A limitation that doesn't limit isn't worth points. Yet the Multipower gives huge discounts on powers without any real hindrance to the player at all. It's a direct conflict with the central meta-rule.

Additionally. The discount given for each type of slot is well in excess of how the actual math in Hero System character creation works. It is way too beneficial on both levels. Creating a discount based on the simple idea that multiple different powers with different advantages give diminishing value the more you have. Which really isn't limiting anything.

Oh, and you can put Power Limitations on both the Central Pool and the Slots individually. Which just complicates character creation even more.

The way the math works in the Hero System is based on fractions. Fractions added or subtracted from the base power depending on how much the Advantage or Limitation brings in benefit.

These fractions are measured in .25 increments. With .25 representing something that comes up a quarter of the time. A .5 appearing in play half the time. And a 1 appearing all the time. This is for both Advantages and Limitations. Which are the foundation of how the Power System in the Hero System works.

To get the final cost of the Advantages. You multiply 1 plus the additional fractions. And for Limitations you divide instead.

But if you look the progression of how Limitations are valued. Then compare it to the discount the slots of a Multipower cost. You get a conflict in the values. The Multipower slots give way too much benefit. It's broken because it contradicts how actual limitations work.

And in my opinion? It and its derivations need to go away.

On top of that. There was the adoption in Hero System 5th Edition of a new Advantage called Variable Advantage. Which does everything the Multipower was supposed to do. But at correct pricing.

Variable Advantage lets the player switch Power Advantages on that power on the fly. Depending on what they do in play. So same function as a Multipower. But at an actual cost. And a lot less complicated to express on a character sheet.

One of the other meta-rules of the Hero System is: You are supposed to take the most expensive option on creation of a power. Not the cheapest. Which pretty much kills any use of the Multipower at all.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102377I'm going to warn everybody from the outset. This is going to be a controversial topic with Hero System fans. Because it takes a direct critical view of what some people consider a pillar of the system. It's a full-on roasting of that subject. But I believe it is well deserved.

I'm posting this warning here in advance. So people are well warned about what is to come. So they can avoid getting into a potentially contentious discussion before it even starts.

But but? We allready know the rulebook can only stop SOME bullets? :D

Quote from: Omega;1102397But but? We allready know the rulebook can only stop SOME bullets? :D

Add the Sidekick book, and maybe one other and I think it might work up to a 45 cal.

I feel I have to address this issue. Because the Multipower has been replicated by many other systems. From Mutants & Masterminds to the newest version of Villains & Vigilantes and more.

And the creator of this mathematical abomination seems pleased as punch that his cheat has been inflicted on as many RPGs as possible.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102409I feel I have to address this issue. Because the Multipower has been replicated by many other systems. From Mutants & Masterminds to the newest version of Villains & Vigilantes and more.

And the creator of this mathematical abomination seems pleased as punch that his cheat has been inflicted on as many RPGs as possible.

Not saying you're wrong, now how would you solve it? How do you get a character with multipowers without what you call a mathematical abomination??

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102410Not saying you're wrong, now how would you solve it? How do you get a character with multipowers without what you call a mathematical abomination??

Already exists with Variable Advantage. Which covers the same functions that both the Multipower and Variable Power Pool are most commonly used for. Changing Advantages on Powers.

With the Multipower and Variable Power Pool, you have to write out a completely different power for each option you want on a power. Variable Advantage makes it so you don't have to.

I don't necessarily disagree, but there are other things in Hero I would redo before Multipower. Like getting rid of the Body/KA scale and just using the Stun/Normal Damage scale. Or getting rid of Endurance, which is just a waste of time. Those things bother me more.

This is like complaining about a rule in Tunnels and Trolls, dude.  Nobody's going to change it. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.  I mean, I'm certainly not convinced it needs changing.  At all.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102396The Multipower is doesn't limit powers significantly at all. It's literally giving some huge discounts without really doing anything but adding extra complexity to the character build.

A central meta-rule of the Hero System is: A limitation that doesn't limit isn't worth points. Yet the Multipower gives huge discounts on powers without any real hindrance to the player at all. It's a direct conflict with the central meta-rule.

The Multipower is an imperfect way to address the problem that one big effect is worth more than a choice of several small effect. To take an example:  

Captain Power has a single 15d6 force blast. That's 75 points.

Captain Flexible has five different powers: a 3d6 force blast, a 2d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 1.5d6 ego attack, a 1.5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 2d6 no-endurance attack. Each of these is 15 points for a total of 75 points.


These are the same cost, but the 15d6 attack is vastly more effective. No one is going to want Captain Flexible on their team, doing almost no damage in five different ways. I would argue that the multipower cost scheme is a more reasonable price for flexibility. With a multipower, Captain Flexible could have slots with a 10d6 force blast, a 6d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 5d6 ego attack, a 5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 6d6 no-endurance attack. I think that's a more reasonable peer for Captain Power.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;1102415This is like complaining about a rule in Tunnels and Trolls, dude.  Nobody's going to change it. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.  I mean, I'm certainly not convinced it needs changing.  At all.

I've played classic Tunnels & Trolls. That game has nothing compared to this particular abomination. Those rules are actually consistent.

This thing? It comes up in literally every character made. And is the cause of endless at the table arguments and headaches for the GM. Which detracts from actually having fun with the game.

Quote from: jhkim;1102416The Multipower is an imperfect way to address the problem that one big effect is worth more than a choice of several small effect. To take an example:  

Captain Power has a single 15d6 force blast. That's 75 points.

Captain Flexible has five different powers: a 3d6 force blast, a 2d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 1.5d6 ego attack, a 1.5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 2d6 no-endurance attack. Each of these is 15 points for a total of 75 points.


These are the same cost, but the 15d6 attack is vastly more effective. No one is going to want Captain Flexible on their team, doing almost no damage in five different ways. I would argue that the multipower cost scheme is a more reasonable price for flexibility. With a multipower, Captain Flexible could have slots with a 10d6 force blast, a 6d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 5d6 ego attack, a 5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 6d6 no-endurance attack. I think that's a more reasonable peer for Captain Power.

As I pointed out in an earlier post. One of the Meta Rules of the Hero System states: That if there are multiple options for creating powers, the person is supposed to take the most expensive option. Not the cheapest.

The Multipower gives an extremely unfair advantage to those who use it. One, that by the rules themselves, shouldn't exist.

Advantages, as stated in the rules, are to be paid for. Not provide ridiculous discounts.

Quote from: jhkimCaptain Power has a single 15d6 force blast. That's 75 points.

Captain Flexible has five different powers: a 3d6 force blast, a 2d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 1.5d6 ego attack, a 1.5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 2d6 no-endurance attack. Each of these is 15 points for a total of 75 points.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102418As I pointed out in an earlier post. One of the Meta Rules of the Hero System states: That if there are multiple options for creating powers, the person is supposed to take the most expensive option. Not the cheapest.

The Multipower gives an extremely unfair advantage to those who use it. One, that by the rules themselves, shouldn't exist.

Advantages, as stated in the rules, are to be paid for. Not provide ridiculous discounts.

Do you feel that in my example that Captain Power and Captain Flexible are fairly priced?

It seems to me that in the absence of Multipower, Captain Flexible is nearly useless compared to Captain Power.

Quote from: jhkim;1102421Do you feel that in my example that Captain Power and Captain Flexible are fairly priced?

It seems to me that in the absence of Multipower, Captain Flexible is nearly useless compared to Captain Power.

That's the risk of point-based character creation. Not all characters are going to be equal in capability or expression.

But that doesn't excuse the creation of a blatant cheat. Which the Multipower is.

Quote from: jhkim;1102416The Multipower is an imperfect way to address the problem that one big effect is worth more than a choice of several small effect. To take an example:  

Captain Power has a single 15d6 force blast. That's 75 points.

Captain Flexible has five different powers: a 3d6 force blast, a 2d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 1.5d6 ego attack, a 1.5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 2d6 no-endurance attack. Each of these is 15 points for a total of 75 points.


These are the same cost, but the 15d6 attack is vastly more effective. No one is going to want Captain Flexible on their team, doing almost no damage in five different ways. I would argue that the multipower cost scheme is a more reasonable price for flexibility. With a multipower, Captain Flexible could have slots with a 10d6 force blast, a 6d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 5d6 ego attack, a 5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 6d6 no-endurance attack. I think that's a more reasonable peer for Captain Power.

So I did remember correctly and it's for you to be able to play Superman like characters. And to have them be effective in play. Does it make those characters as OP as Supes or the big cheese are?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102427So I did remember correctly and it's for you to be able to play Superman like characters. And to have them be effective in play. Does it make those characters as OP as Supes or the big cheese are?

It makes them grossly overpowered. To the extreme.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102427So I did remember correctly and it's for you to be able to play Superman like characters. And to have them be effective in play. Does it make those characters as OP as Supes or the big cheese are?

(MP = Multipower.)

MP's aren't really meant for Superman (he can easily be built w/o an MP) but for characters who have lots of variation on a theme, like Green Lantern:

• Green force blast
• Green mini-gun  
• Green stun-only blast
• Green force wall
• Green giant hand that grabs you
• Green magic carpet that people can ride on
• etc.

Or characters with either/or powers, like Captain America. Cap can:

• Throw his mighty shield*
• Or use it to block
• Or bash people with it

But he can't do all three at the same time. Superman, however, can fly, use heat vision, and lift a tank all at the same time.

However Darin has a point that MP's provide such attractive discounts that almost everyone uses them. I think it's worse in MM3.



*Limitation: Will not work against a plane, or a bomb, or ice, or a brainwashed buddy with a metal arm, or Spiderman, or just plain Thanos. In that case, you do not necessarily have to yield.

Quote from: Aglondir;1102433However Darin has a point that MP's provide such attractive discounts that almost everyone uses them. I think it's worse in MM3.

My position is: The discounts that they do give contradict the most basic rules of the game system. And that they are vastly unfair and unreasonable.

One thing you're ignoring in the costing is that one of the inherent limitations of the multipower is that you can't actually use all of the powers at the same time. You pay extra for flexibility, but that flexibility is NOT worth the value of an entire separate power.

As it stands, the guy with the multipower is paying 10% more to be able to use either a fire blast (say with the penetrating advantage) or a cold blast (say linked to a drain of movement) on a given turn (the flexibility is a +1/10 advantage).

It also, as demonstrated above, allows for the grouping of more varied effects to fit a theme. My favorite superhero character who started in Champions, but migrated to Mutants & Masterminds is a classic Super Strength hero, but he's learned to use his strength to perform many tricks over the years such as a sweeping strike to use against speedsters (area effect damage with a limit of requiring a physical object like a lamppost to make it) or a foot stomp to knock everyone off their feet (a burst knockdown attack), the "big wrap up" (snare attack requiring improvised materials to use), "bunker buster" (burrowing movement leaving a large tunnel) or "shore it up" (a transform that allows local material to be used to reinforce a structure in danger of collapsing). There's also super breath to push people back and blow out fires or the hand clap that stuns and deafens. He also has one that just extra strength with a limitation that it can only be used for lifting things.

I'm never going to using more than one of those effects at a time, but if I bought all of those different effects individually, they'd be at such low levels as to be useless. Instead, I'm paying 90 points to get eight 50 point effects usable one at a time. Someone not using a multipower can get a single 90 point ability for the same price (i.e. 80% more potent than any one of my abilities; hopefully I can make up for that with versatility of my many strength tricks).

The non-ultra multipower slots also allows for things like a Green Lantern Ring or power armor with a limited power output where it can produce a number of effects, but only has a limited power supply to split between them (so it could sacrifice some shields for more firepower or route all power to the engines for maximum speed). It can't operate all of the things at full power at once so in terms of points it shouldn't cost as much as each at full power individually. Instead you effectively pay for the pool and then 20% for each option you can put those points into. At five abilities you're paying 100 points to use 50 points worth of abilities at a time.

Also, at least for Mutants & Masterminds, is literally built into the assumptions of the system so your claim that this somehow unbalances them is specious at best. M&M takes the time to explain that you are expected to use alternate powers (their version of the multi-power) for things like attacks because the added flexibility in attack choices isn't worth nearly as much as raw power increases are because you can only use one at a time and the prices for things are scaled with the assumption everyone will be using alternate powers everywhere it's practical.

Indeed, the previously mentioned super strength hero actually had to drop half his strength tricks in the conversion (even though they're far less expensive in M&M than multipowers are in HERO) because of the increased cost of other elements like skills (and the removal of point granting flaws keeping me to a strict budget instead of playing the "game the flaws for extra build points" mini-game). Fortunately, M&M also includes a baked in power-stunting system so I only need my most common strength tricks (extra lifting, sweeping strike, super breath and "the big wrap up") and the rest I can stunt with Hero Points or fatigue if I really need them.

Basically, I wholeheartedly disagree with your premise and, indeed, think Champions and M&M basically couldn't begin to emulate the superhero genre effectively without a multi-power type structure.

ICONS does it effectively without using any type of structure like that. So does GURPS. And they simulate superhero comics just fine. So yes. I disagree strongly with you.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102439I'm never going to using more than one of those effects at a time, but if I bought all of those different effects individually, they'd be at such low levels as to be useless. Instead, I'm paying 90 points to get eight 50 point effects usable one at a time. Someone not using a multipower can get a single 90 point ability for the same price (i.e. 80% more potent than any one of my abilities; hopefully I can make up for that with versatility of my many strength tricks).

Exactly. If you take Multipower out of the Hero System, the result will just be that you'll get a lot more one-note type characters. There won't be any characters like, say, Green Arrow with an array of many different trick arrows -- because each of those different effects will be essentially useless compared to a more single-focus character - i.e. someone who just shoots one type of arrow.

Quote from: jhkimDo you feel that in my example that Captain Power and Captain Flexible are fairly priced?

It seems to me that in the absence of Multipower, Captain Flexible is nearly useless compared to Captain Power.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102425That's the risk of point-based character creation. Not all characters are going to be equal in capability or expression.

But that doesn't excuse the creation of a blatant cheat. Which the Multipower is.

Calling it cheating is emotional bullshit. Multipower is defined in the rules. Lots of people play with it and have fun. The question is what is it's effect. I'd say that it doesn't produce overpowered characters. It allows for more flexible characters who can do more variety of effects, and those characters are reasonably priced compared to single-focus characters.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102443ICONS does it effectively without using any type of structure like that. So does GURPS. And they simulate superhero comics just fine. So yes. I disagree strongly with you.

If you're perfectly satisfied with how ICONS and GURPS do superheroes, then just play those games. If you want to propose changes to the Hero System, though, you have to show how your changed system is better than the basic system. And I think your change would just result in more single-focus PCs, because characters with more range of effects will be much more mis-priced.

Quote from: jhkim;1102446Exactly. If you take Multipower out of the Hero System, the result will just be that you'll get a lot more one-note type characters. There won't be any characters like, say, Green Arrow with an array of many different trick arrows -- because each of those different effects will be essentially useless compared to a more single-focus character - i.e. someone who just shoots one type of arrow.

And I pointed out that something else already exists within the system that simulated such a thing more consistently within the existing rules. Variable Advantage. Which can more easily represent a suite of custom arrows. Like in your example. Only that it is actually priced fairly.

QuoteCalling it cheating is emotional bullshit. Multipower is defined in the rules. Lots of people play with it and have fun. The question is what is it's effect. I'd say that it doesn't produce overpowered characters. It allows for more flexible characters who can do more variety of effects, and those characters are reasonably priced compared to single-focus characters.

No. It's not. It's an accurate description of that element which contradicts the entirety of the rest of the game system. The only excuse to use one is saving points. Which the Meta-Rules already state is not an acceptable excuse.

QuoteIf you're perfectly satisfied with how ICONS and GURPS do superheroes, then just play those games. If you want to propose changes to the Hero System, though, you have to show how your changed system is better than the basic system. And I think your change would just result in more single-focus PCs, because characters with more range of effects will be much more mis-priced.

I've already shown an alternative that already exists within the system. I have illustrated it several times. It does work. And it is priced far more fairly than a Multipower ever will be.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102439One thing you're ignoring in the costing is that one of the inherent limitations of the multipower is that you can't actually use all of the powers at the same time. You pay extra for flexibility, but that flexibility is NOT worth the value of an entire separate power.

As it stands, the guy with the multipower is paying 10% more to be able to use either a fire blast (say with the penetrating advantage) or a cold blast (say linked to a drain of movement) on a given turn (the flexibility is a +1/10 advantage).

It also, as demonstrated above, allows for the grouping of more varied effects to fit a theme. My favorite superhero character who started in Champions, but migrated to Mutants & Masterminds is a classic Super Strength hero, but he's learned to use his strength to perform many tricks over the years such as a sweeping strike to use against speedsters (area effect damage with a limit of requiring a physical object like a lamppost to make it) or a foot stomp to knock everyone off their feet (a burst knockdown attack), the "big wrap up" (snare attack requiring improvised materials to use), "bunker buster" (burrowing movement leaving a large tunnel) or "shore it up" (a transform that allows local material to be used to reinforce a structure in danger of collapsing). There's also super breath to push people back and blow out fires or the hand clap that stuns and deafens. He also has one that just extra strength with a limitation that it can only be used for lifting things.

I'm never going to using more than one of those effects at a time, but if I bought all of those different effects individually, they'd be at such low levels as to be useless. Instead, I'm paying 90 points to get eight 50 point effects usable one at a time. Someone not using a multipower can get a single 90 point ability for the same price (i.e. 80% more potent than any one of my abilities; hopefully I can make up for that with versatility of my many strength tricks).

The non-ultra multipower slots also allows for things like a Green Lantern Ring or power armor with a limited power output where it can produce a number of effects, but only has a limited power supply to split between them (so it could sacrifice some shields for more firepower or route all power to the engines for maximum speed). It can't operate all of the things at full power at once so in terms of points it shouldn't cost as much as each at full power individually. Instead you effectively pay for the pool and then 20% for each option you can put those points into. At five abilities you're paying 100 points to use 50 points worth of abilities at a time.

Also, at least for Mutants & Masterminds, is literally built into the assumptions of the system so your claim that this somehow unbalances them is specious at best. M&M takes the time to explain that you are expected to use alternate powers (their version of the multi-power) for things like attacks because the added flexibility in attack choices isn't worth nearly as much as raw power increases are because you can only use one at a time and the prices for things are scaled with the assumption everyone will be using alternate powers everywhere it's practical.

Indeed, the previously mentioned super strength hero actually had to drop half his strength tricks in the conversion (even though they're far less expensive in M&M than multipowers are in HERO) because of the increased cost of other elements like skills (and the removal of point granting flaws keeping me to a strict budget instead of playing the "game the flaws for extra build points" mini-game). Fortunately, M&M also includes a baked in power-stunting system so I only need my most common strength tricks (extra lifting, sweeping strike, super breath and "the big wrap up") and the rest I can stunt with Hero Points or fatigue if I really need them.

Basically, I wholeheartedly disagree with your premise and, indeed, think Champions and M&M basically couldn't begin to emulate the superhero genre effectively without a multi-power type structure.

So it's not good to build a Rimborian either? (All the powers of Superman but can use only one at the time at the same level as Supes)

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102450So it's not good to build a Rimborian either? (All the powers of Superman but can use only one at the time at the same level as Supes)

Not all of the powers of Superman would be in the Multipower. Only the offensive ones.

Movement and Defensive powers would be outside of it.

Historically, an Elemental Control would have been used in concert with a Multipower for maximum cost savings.

I'm not new to the Hero System. I've been dealing with it since 1987.

Dude. Just don't allow MPs or VPs. Easy peasy. I imagine the game would work just fine without them. You may have to up the point totals in some supers games to accommodate all the desired archetypes.

I can't imagine no MPs or VPs affecting Heroic level games at all.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102451Not all of the powers of Superman would be in the Multipower. Only the offensive ones.

Movement and Defensive powers would be outside of it.

But if you can build Supes without it and I do it with it, my version ends up weaker. How is that cheating on any shape or form?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102453But if you can build Supes without it and I do it with it, my version ends up weaker. How is that cheating on any shape or form?

You would be hard-pressed to make a weaker version with a Multipower. Very hard-pressed. The difference in the use of a Multipower makes is indeed that extreme.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102377I'm going to warn everybody from the outset. This is going to be a controversial topic with Hero System fans. Because it takes a direct critical view of what some people consider a pillar of the system. It's a full-on roasting of that subject. But I believe it is well deserved.
.

Ever Tried to play GURPS?

- Ed C.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102454You would be hard-pressed to make a weaker version with a Multipower. Very hard-pressed. The difference in the use of a Multipower makes is indeed that extreme.

The powers are weaker as already proven, and a MP Supes wouldn't be able to use them at the same time, while a non MP Supes has the powers at full force and can use them at the same time.

The MP version looks much weaker than the non MP, to anyone without an axe to grind. I'm not even that big of a fan of Hero, especially their 2 pounds of book is one of my gripes. But you're saying that something that would make a weaker Superman is cheating in favor of the weaker Superman. We have a saying here "No me ayudes compadre!" I don't know the idiom in english to say the same but it's kinda like "with friends like these ..."

Quote from: Koltar;1102455Ever Tried to play GURPS?

- Ed C.

Yes. I have. I own both GURPS 3rd and 4th Edition.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102457The powers are weaker as already proven, and a MP Supes wouldn't be able to use them at the same time, while a non MP Supes has the powers at full force and can use them at the same time.

That's already an existing feature of the game system itself. Nobody can use all of their powers at the same time as defined by the rules for actions. They are limited to doing one thing at a time. Unless they have powers that are Linked.

QuoteThe MP version looks much weaker than the non MP, to anyone without an axe to grind. I'm not even that big of a fan of Hero, especially their 2 pounds of book is one of my gripes. But you're saying that something that would make a weaker Superman is cheating in favor of the weaker Superman. We have a saying here "No me ayudes compadre!" I don't know the idiom in english to say the same but it's kinda like "with friends like these ..."

It's not two pounds of book anymore. The two Hero System Rulebooks together are 8 pounds. And that's not even counting the Champions genre book or the two Advanced Rulebooks.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102449And I pointed out that something else already exists within the system that simulated such a thing more consistently within the existing rules. Variable Advantage. Which can more easily represent a suite of custom arrows. Like in your example. Only that it is actually priced fairly.

Variable Advantage can't turn a Energy Blast into a Force Field or Entangle or Telekinesis though. All of which a character like say, Invisible Woman, can do with her force field powers, but not all at the same time. All Variable Advantage would be good for is a Cyclops type who uses blast powers in different ways.

If the only thing you can think of using multi-powers for is different variations on Energy Blast then I'm just going to say, go play a superhero game you enjoy because an Effects-based system like HERO or M&M isn't for you (and it sounds like you're just butthurt you built a crap character in a Champions game and instead of learning from it are bitching that the game is unfair).

I'll tell you another place where Multi-power is absolutely needed for genre emulation... Spellcasting. Spellcasting is invariably built as a multi-power with each spell as a slot in their fantasy setting books (and for mystical superheroes as well) with the primary limiting factors, as always for HERO being the action and END costs for using the action.

Also, you may call it a cheat, M&M's core rules says "everyone should use Alternate Effects for your attacks or you're going to run out of power points before you have a functional character (i.e. one that hits the expected attack/damage and defense values for the campaign's power level)."

How can it be a cheat if the system is literally TELLING YOU TO USE IT (all their example characters use it too and they even have "power profiles" for specific power sets to give them to you pre-built). There is no "meta-rule" on spending points in M&M and if there is it's actually, "in an effects-based game you should never OVERPAY for anything (i.e. find the cheapest way to do what you want and use that)."

The M&M system is literally built around using Alternate Powers because it adjusted all the other point costs to take into account that out of 150 build points (for a default PL 10 game) you're only going to be spending about 50-60 on actual powers where a basic ranged blast is going to cost you 25 all by itself (10 ranks at 2/rank +5 for accuracy to hit the PL attack/damage tradeoff caps). That's before actually interesting extras. The rest will be needed for ability scores, skills and other sundries.

And again, in my actual example of its use in actual play to simulate Super Strength Tricks (i.e. things characters with Super strength do on a regular basis, but which are separate effects under HERO or M&M rulesets) I have effects that are Entangles, Flashes, Move Objects, Burrowing movement, a Transform that you could NOT lump under a "variable advantage" for Strength.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102464(and it sounds like you're just butthurt you built a crap character in a Champions game and instead of learning from it are bitching that the game is unfair).

No. I just have seen decades of the Multipower abused to gain unfair advantage in a whole host of campaigns. Decades of players gaming the system. Instead of actually being there to participate in the campaign that the GMs put so much hard work to prepare.

Unappreciative shitheads whose antics were always disruptive to the game environment.

Just 2 pages into this thread and my brain went...yeah, this is why I don't play Champions anymore. I really can't get excited about this level of complexity anymore. I ran Champions at a convention with pre-made characters 6 years ago and two players left because I didn't min/max to squeeze every point. It was a faux X-men team and I just wanted the PCs to be flavorful, do their thing and be easy to figure out for newbs.

As a Champions GM back in the early editions, I didn't have big problems with Multipower in actual play IF the player worked it into the hero's theme. The far bigger problem I encountered was player dorks who wanked with the system to get scads of 1-2 use items for pennies of cost and theme-be-damned.

However, I've gamed with GMs who banned both MP and EC because of player abuse. One thing I've noted about the Hero system is the complaints various people have depends more on bad behavior within their group than the actual rules.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102459It's not two pounds of book anymore. The two Hero System Rulebooks together are 8 pounds. And that's not even counting the Champions genre book or the two Advanced Rulebooks.

Fuck me! How many pages? How many of the text could be shaved of without losing the essence? Yeah, that's so not for me! I'll stay with older Champions versions, the ones with the rules in it.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1102468Just 2 pages into this thread and my brain went...yeah, this is why I don't play Champions anymore. I really can't get excited about this level of complexity anymore. I ran Champions at a convention with pre-made characters 6 years ago and two players left because I didn't min/max to squeeze every point. It was a faux X-men team and I just wanted the PCs to be flavorful, do their thing and be easy to figure out for newbs.

I find min-maxing to be absolutely exhausting. Much more when it is forced upon me as part of an arms race. I don't like having my games turned into a competition with other players to see whose character is better. All I want to do is make and play interesting distinctive characters. Both as a player and as a GM. The arms race destroys my enthusiasm for actually playing.

QuoteAs a Champions GM back in the early editions, I didn't have big problems with Multipower in actual play IF the player worked it into the hero's theme. The far bigger problem I encountered was player dorks who wanked with the system to get scads of 1-2 use items for pennies of cost and theme-be-damned.

My problem too was with players who did the wankery. They weren't there to actually play the campaign. They were there to exploit the system in any way they could imagine. Which sucked the fun out of the experience for me.

QuoteHowever, I've gamed with GMs who banned both MP and EC because of player abuse. One thing I've noted about the Hero system is the complaints various people have depends more on bad behavior within their group than the actual rules.

It doesn't help at all when a part of the game system actually encourages the abuse. And generally makes itself a persistent pain in the backside.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102469Fuck me! How many pages? How many of the text could be shaved of without losing the essence? Yeah, that's so not for me! I'll stay with older Champions versions, the ones with the rules in it.

Nearly a thousand pages. Give or take.

They shaved it down considerably with Champions Complete. But even there, it lost some of its utility in translation.

I have the completely unabridged version of Hero System 6th Edition.

Quote from: Koltar;1102455Ever Tried to play GURPS?

I've never played GURPS Supers. I have no idea how (or if) works, but I'm quite interested. My GURPS experience was mostly fantasy, Traveller and Star Trek.

Please start a thread about GURPS Supers and your thoughts!

Quote from: Spinachcat;1102468Just 2 pages into this thread and my brain went...yeah, this is why I don't play Champions anymore. I really can't get excited about this level of complexity anymore. I ran Champions at a convention with pre-made characters 6 years ago and two players left because I didn't min/max to squeeze every point. It was a faux X-men team and I just wanted the PCs to be flavorful, do their thing and be easy to figure out for newbs.

As a Champions GM back in the early editions, I didn't have big problems with Multipower in actual play IF the player worked it into the hero's theme. The far bigger problem I encountered was player dorks who wanked with the system to get scads of 1-2 use items for pennies of cost and theme-be-damned.

I am in the same boat. I liked the Hero System back in the day -- it was my go-to system for over a decade, but I haven't played in many years. These days the learning curve is too much for nearly anyone I play with. Plus the core mechanics remain clunky.

What I love about the Hero System is the variety of characters that it allows. In my experience - there are plenty of workable, balanced characters that use Multipower, and they would not be possible without it. Basically, anyone with a variety of attacks - which is an awful lot of characters.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1102468However, I've gamed with GMs who banned both MP and EC because of player abuse. One thing I've noted about the Hero system is the complaints various people have depends more on bad behavior within their group than the actual rules.

Yeah. Hero System does seem to attract a lot of people interested in abusing and fiddling with the system as a goal in itself. I think there are some things to be balanced in the rules, but you still need a GM covering common sense.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102467No. I just have seen decades of the Multipower abused to gain unfair advantage in a whole host of campaigns. Decades of players gaming the system. Instead of actually being there to participate in the campaign that the GMs put so much hard work to prepare.

Unappreciative shitheads whose antics were always disruptive to the game environment.

This is a player issue, and based on other posts from you, this is a recurring problem not tied to a specific system. Maybe you need to find better players.  


I've been playing Champions / HERO since 1981. Multi-Power has never been a significant problem in a game I've played in, and allows for interesting characters that would otherwise be very expensive / inefficient. I've also never had an issue with Killing Attacks that some squawk about, personally I find the normal attack / KA divide one of the games strengths, not a flaw. Can these rules be abused? Certainly, HERO leaves a lot of room in the rules for interpretation and jerkoff players will try to abuse them.


The result is HERO requires a strong GM who knows the rules and will not hesitate to smack down powergamers and rules lawyers or those players will find a way to twist the rules and ruin it for the players there to play a game, not game the rules. HERO requires that a GM will enforce the "a disadvantage that is not a disadvantage is worth no points" rule.

It seems some people here have a common problem many Hero System fans have. They can't stand any kind of legitimate criticism of the Hero System at all. Right or wrong. And they make things personal. Engage in personal swipes and attacks. Rather than keeping the conversation civil.

I'm not playing that game. And I'm not going to surrender this thread to the unruly.

The majority of posters here have been absolutely great. I have nothing but nice things to say about them. But there are always that special few that feel they can cross any line and piss in my drink. And I'm having none of that.

if necessary. I will ask for help from the staff.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102480The result is HERO requires a strong GM who knows the rules and will not hesitate to smack down powergamers and rules lawyers or those players will find a way to twist the rules and ruin it for the players there to play a game, not game the rules. HERO requires that a GM will enforce the "a disadvantage that is not a disadvantage is worth no points" rule.

For a long time? I was a wall. I was the tough GM that didn't put up with any crap from any player. I had a near invulnerability complex as a GM. I did my best and was proud of it. And I was always open-minded. But kept my eye on what was best for the group collectively. I was a GMing machine. I loved what I was doing and was good at it.

Then I got broken. My confidence went away. I actually got terrified of sitting in the GM's chair for about three years. And was never the same again afterward.

But regardless of that? I did my best to return to GMing. But I never recaptured the magic and confidence I had with it. And I fell flat on my face during trying. A lot.

The only time my fearless GM side ever reappeared was when I was running games of Nightbane and Beyond The Supernatural. I had discovered I have a real talent for portraying an action based horror atmosphere with comedic elements. My horror games felt like the Evil Dead movies before I actually got those movies on home video.

But the latest thing? A couple of bad players finally made me have enough. I went out and started looking for game systems that matched my personal creative style.  Which supported the stories I sought to tell and play. And that didn't feel like a chore to set up.

It's been decades since I had that feeling with the Hero System. Where it brought me joy instead of sorrow. Because. Like others have said. It simply got too much for me.

I own my personal flaws. I don't act ashamed of them or try to hide them.

Regarding the Multipower issue - going back to my example of Captain Powerful vs Captain Flexible. They all spend the same points on their attacks.

Captain Powerful has one powerful attack - a 15d6 force blast.

Captain Flexible A (multipower) has five different moderate attacks: a 10d6 force blast, a 5d6 entangle, etc.

Captain Flexible B (no multipower) has five different very weak attacks: a 3d6 force blast, a 1.5d6 entangle, etc.


You're correct that multipower makes Captain Flexible A much more effective than Captain Flexible B. Your claim, as I understand it, is that this is cheating and makes Captain Flexible A too powerful. But I think that Captain Flexible A is actually reasonable balanced with Captain Powerful. The problem isn't that Captain Flexible A is too powerful. It's that Captain Flexible B is too weak. I do have a bunch of issues with the Hero System - I'm not defending it blindly. But on the issue of Multipower, I think it fills a useful purpose.

Well, I don't mind your opinion Darrin. I think it's good to question things. Also, it can inspire clones and creator's own ideas. :-)

Many games like HERO can be tweaked. There's two advanced players guides for 6e! Again, I believe you could skip MPs and VPs, I believe they are left out of HERO basic...

People can get touchy about their fave system because it feels like maybe that's going to convince someone not to play or whatever. People get passionate about shit they love! You certainly inspired some convo!

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102482For a long time? I was a wall. I was the tough GM that didn't put up with any crap from any player. I had a near invulnerability complex as a GM. I did my best and was proud of it. And I was always open-minded. But kept my eye on what was best for the group collectively. I was a GMing machine. I loved what I was doing and was good at it.

Then I got broken. My confidence went away. I actually got terrified of sitting in the GM's chair for about three years. And was never the same again afterward.

But regardless of that? I did my best to return to GMing. But I never recaptured the magic and confidence I had with it. And I fell flat on my face during trying. A lot.

The only time my fearless GM side ever reappeared was when I was running games of Nightbane and Beyond The Supernatural. I had discovered I have a real talent for portraying an action based horror atmosphere with comedic elements. My horror games felt like the Evil Dead movies before I actually got those movies on home video.

But the latest thing? A couple of bad players finally made me have enough. I went out and started looking for game systems that matched my personal creative style.  Which supported the stories I sought to tell and play. And that didn't feel like a chore to set up.

It's been decades since I had that feeling with the Hero System. Where it brought me joy instead of sorrow. Because. Like others have said. It simply got too much for me.

I own my personal flaws. I don't act ashamed of them or try to hide them.

My comments about your players was not meant to be an attack against you, simply you seem to have had a run of bad players. My experience has been that no amount of rule tweaking can resolve bad players. They are like nuclear war, the only way to win is not to play (with them).

HERO has issues, but most of the alleged fixes tend to be worse than just applying some common sense. The issue with killing attacks tends to be people gaming them to create a power that they were not meant to represent. The issue you seem to have with multi-power seems to be one of abuse rather than using the rule as it was intended.

I also strongly disagree with your assessment that jhkims Captain Flexible with a multipower is OP vs Captain Powerful. Captain Powerful would most likely win a 1-1 fight every time. If that is the case, and based on other comments you seem to agree with that assessment, then I'm having trouble seeing MP as OP?

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102502My comments about your players was not meant to be an attack against you, simply you seem to have had a run of bad players. My experience has been that no amount of rule tweaking can resolve bad players. They are like nuclear war, the only way to win is not to play (with them).

I recently spoke to the GM of one of my first most serious Champions campaigns. From way over 20 years ago. In fact, I sold him a spare copy of the 4th Edition Champions rulebook that got him to start GMing in the first place.

What did he tell me? And I'm never going to forget this. That I created the only true heroic character of the group. The other characters had players who were too busy trying to one-up the other players. Or who were jealous of the characters that actually did things within the group. They weren't playing their characters with the mindset of a hero. It was just sad and bad.

QuoteHERO has issues, but most of the alleged fixes tend to be worse than just applying some common sense. The issue with killing attacks tends to be people gaming them to create a power that they were not meant to represent. The issue you seem to have with multi-power seems to be one of abuse rather than using the rule as it was intended.

6th Edition made a lot of changes. Including the elimination of the Stun Lotto phenomenon for killing attacks. Which was a straight-up reduction of its maximum possible Stun Multiplier.

Oh, Multipower abuse is certainly the primary issue I brought up in this thread. But it is certainly not my only bone of contention with the system.

One of my biggest happens to be SPD inflation. Players jacking up their SPD scores for no good conceptual reason. But instead just to make it so their character goes more often per turn. This throws off the entire balance of the game. And forces the GM into yet another arms race with the builds of the NPCs to compensate for it.

Human maximum SPD since 1st edition of the game has always been 4. This means it is the max human potential. Captain America and Olympic athlete level. Yet how many characters can conceptually justify having that level or more? A lot fewer than you think. And a GM should absolutely rein that in. But it doesn't happen, in more cases than not.

Absolutely infuriating!

QuoteI also strongly disagree with your assessment that jhkims Captain Flexible with a multipower is OP vs Captain Powerful. Captain Powerful would most likely win a 1-1 fight every time. If that is the case, and based on other comments you seem to agree with that assessment, then I'm having trouble seeing MP as OP?

I would contend that it isn't raw might that makes a good hero. It's their heart. And the players who have been seeking exploits within the game like with the Multipower seem to always forget that part of the heroic condition. All they think of is raw might. They think that is the most important thing. When they are not getting in their character's headspace at all.

It's what a character does that makes all the difference. Not how powerful they are.

I think jhkims examples are flawed. Because they only fixate on raw might. And completely ignore the other factors that make a character a hero. Instead of just a superpowered bully.

Getting players into the setting's fictional headspace vs. the demands of the RAW (rules as written) arms race is why I prefer levels vs. point-buy games: one immediately starts with funneling parameters to fight the conceptual battle in players' minds before play. Point-buy, in being broad and flexible, ends up with more GM overhead to curtail the system to fit the fiction AND THEN begins the conceptual battle with player expectations. That and points are meaningless outside its context, so that's just more fine-tuning work hidden under the guise of "publisher RAW balance."

And Publisher RAW Balance is a shibboleth all games suffer from. But it is a flawed assuption I see fans of higher compexity games suffer in greater proportion due to the tighter held delusion that abstractions, if "realistic enough," will one day achieving playable modeling at the table. We have video game physics for that now, and no one wants to do matrices and derivatives by hand for fun. :p ("The bad news is your falling, the good news, there is no ground." - some Buddhist monk)

In summary, I feel your pain, Darrin.  :( You are fighting the gameable system AND the players that love that power usurpation from the GM's Setting. Sounds like a steeper uphill battle than reskinning a simpler system and telling the knuckleheads to knock it off. :)

I say Treasure your well-earned compliments and past memories and move on from frustration. Let the inmates savor their rule of their asylum. :p

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102514Getting players into the setting's fictional headspace vs. the demands of the RAW (rules as written) arms race is why I prefer levels vs. point-buy games:

Yeah - I love point-buy in theory. But between the added complexity, extreme ceiling/floor distance, and no niche protection, I prefer class/level systems. (Tons seem to scoff at niche protection, but it helps avoid these issues so that you aren't directly competing with the other players at the table.)

I do like customization, but in practice to stay relevant, point-buy systems don't really have all that many viable options. It's like MTG decks. Sure, you could theoretically put any 60 cards together, but not and still be viable. Everyone will have 20-25 land to start, and as you get into it you discover that each expansion only really has a dozen or so truly viable decks, with only minor variation to put your stamp on it. And even that many is only due to the 5 colors (the CCG equivalent of classes).

I tend to prefer the class/point-buy hybrid systems, where the class aims your point-buy. I think that it allows for a greater real variety of builds than pure point-buy, and if the classes are different enough there isn't as much player competition.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102469Fuck me! How many pages? How many of the text could be shaved of without losing the essence? Yeah, that's so not for me! I'll stay with older Champions versions, the ones with the rules in it.

If you want something newer which also uses point-builds, but is a LOT easier (extras/flaws are +/-X per rank of power instead of x1/4, x1/2, etc.) check out M&M 3e. It has its own online SRD (d20HeroSRD) and the only book you ever truly need as a player or GM (Hero's Handbook) if you want a hard copy or PDF version is just 232 pages including the character sheet.

If anything Multi-power should be kept (perhaps with some of the ultra options trimmed out), and then Variable Power Pools and Elemental Controls should be dropped.  The latter two have their place, but they are so clunky in practice that they really increase the learning curve of the system.

A standard Multi-power isn't any more abusive than a GM that accidentally allows too much Flash in a game with inadequate defenses against it or other such tricks.  At least since 4th ed, it's been standard practice to say that the GM should put limits on Active Points, as well as low and top end attacks, defenses, SPD, etc.  That was something that grew directly out of experience with earlier versions, too.

As for some kind of internal logic of Hero System that is being abused by the multi-powers--that's just Ivory Tower wankery.  Free clue--Hero System constantly violates all kinds of internal logic in order to make a game that kind of works.  If they didn't, it would be unplayable--especially on the lower and upper ends of power levels.  On the list of things needing a fix in Hero System, the multi-power is somewhere outside the first 50.  

I don't expect my post to make any impression in your mind.  It's not really for you.

Yes, Caron's Little Helper, our CCG experience helps us pierce the veil that "number of options" assumes "equivalently viable options." Breadth is not achieved by quantity. :) And as much as we could expand on that point-buy:CCG metaphoric relationship, perhaps we should let Darrin's topic progress without too much more tangent. :o

Chris24601, it is very kind to offer an alternative, especially one that is five times smaller. :p I myself am not a Supers player, but I have heard similar good things about Mutants & Masterminds in general. :)

And Steve Mitchell, it sounds like Hero has a lot of dials and levers, like a typical toolkit system. But what would you recommend to make Hero manageable and relatable to new players at this point? Is there a cheatsheet for "How to Emulate XYZ Genre Conventions"? :( It sounds like an apocalypse of (gamist? simulationist?) fans 'chasing the dragon' of "realism," (like Kenny 'chasing the rockin' tits' of Heavy Metal through cat-piss abuse :D).

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102510I would contend that it isn't raw might that makes a good hero. It's their heart. And the players who have been seeking exploits within the game like with the Multipower seem to always forget that part of the heroic condition. All they think of is raw might. They think that is the most important thing. When they are not getting in their character's headspace at all.

It's what a character does that makes all the difference. Not how powerful they are.

I think jhkims examples are flawed. Because they only fixate on raw might. And completely ignore the other factors that make a character a hero. Instead of just a superpowered bully.

You're shifting goal-posts. It's like you're assuming the only possible reason a person would use Multipower is because they are a power-gamer who doesn't know the true beating heart of real role playing, looking to shit all over any game they get into. Because this discussion was about a rule change, it can't get at ineffable values about "what makes a true hero" and all of this. Removing Multipower also isn't going to magically change power-gamers into the type of players you're looking for. The rules for power construction are about constructing powers, not about eliciting proper, deeply understood heroic play. So, any discussion of a change to those rules is going to be about how they impact the power side of generating characters, whether it makes certain power concepts possible, etc. A character's suite of powers, their might and the hook behind why they are like that and how they work, etc. is all on an independent axis from the kind of heroic play you are talking about. A player could use multipower in support of a solid concept or a raw power fantasy one. A player could not use multipower and still be everything you don't like in a player. When you say jhkim's examples are flawed because they only fixate on raw might... umm, you were discussing a rule that relates to the relative might of various character concepts, so that was just unavoidable. Then... the "just a superpowered bully" thing, I dunno, it just strikes me as like, talking about 401k retirement contributions then when someone considers a scenario going "Retirement isn't all about money, and his example is fixated on money." I mean, that's true, but you're the one who brought up the 401k.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102533And Steve Mitchell, it sounds like Hero has a lot of dials and levers, like a typical toolkit system. But what would you recommend to make Hero manageable and relatable to new players at this point? Is there a cheatsheet for "How to Emulate XYZ Genre Conventions"? :( It sounds like an apocalypse of (gamist? simulationist?) fans 'chasing the dragon' of "realism," (like Kenny 'chasing the rockin' tits' of Heavy Metal through cat-piss abuse :D).

Well, I don't play Hero anymore because I got tired of fiddling with the dials and levers.  Also, Hero handles a lot of possibilities for emulation that don't happen to interest me that much.  Thus, it is kind of overkill for the usual game I want to run.  But I did run it and tinker with it exhaustively for a decade.  So those caveats out of the way:

Honestly, at this point the best way for a new group to start would be to play with an experienced GM, same as with most games.  I've introduced somewhere over 100 players to Hero, most of them with no prior RPG experience at all, and it went just fine because I knew what I was doing.  It's also one of the few games where I got to play it before I ran it, which helped immensely.  

Barring that, since out of the box it is a toolkit to make a game, not a complete game, I'd say the next best option would be to find someone online who really enjoys the system, and is willing to use it to put together the start of game the new GM and new players say they want.  Some structure, limits, and a few examples that fit the goal of that new group would go a long way to getting started.  And because of the way the abilities are built, the group wouldn't be locked into what this outside person provided, or even missing out on the learning opportunities.  Of course, that's difficult because way too many of the Hero fans can't listen to what someone else wants, and will instead try to do it the way they'd want it.

People have tried to provide canned starter options for Hero, but that misses the point.  The only reason to use it is because you've got some definite goal in mind.  There has to be some back and forth with getting the toolkit to approximate that goal.  Once you do, the system runs easily.  (With a few house rules, it runs even better than many other systems, though the house rules aren't necessary to make it work well.)

The only other option is start with your group and the understanding that the learning curve is unusually front-loaded and steep, but trust that it levels out into something much better once you surmount it.  It's an investment of time and energy that has a payoff--for people that have that odd game they want to run that needs that kind of control.

Finally, since you are such a 2E fan, I should note that I ran a lot of D&D 2E adventures converted to Fantasy Hero, and it was a blast.  Picking a 2E setting that you like, then using that to guide your Hero limits, but not religiously so, produces a very different experience.  (Just having more focused, limited, but still high-powered magic, alongside much more capable and versatile skill characters, makes for a very different 2E Forgotten Realms campaign, for example.)

Quote from: Spinachcat;1102468Just 2 pages into this thread and my brain went...yeah, this is why I don't play Champions anymore. I really can't get excited about this level of complexity anymore. I ran Champions at a convention with pre-made characters 6 years ago and two players left because I didn't min/max to squeeze every point. It was a faux X-men team and I just wanted the PCs to be flavorful, do their thing and be easy to figure out for newbs.

As a Champions GM back in the early editions, I didn't have big problems with Multipower in actual play IF the player worked it into the hero's theme. The far bigger problem I encountered was player dorks who wanked with the system to get scads of 1-2 use items for pennies of cost and theme-be-damned.

However, I've gamed with GMs who banned both MP and EC because of player abuse. One thing I've noted about the Hero system is the complaints various people have depends more on bad behavior within their group than the actual rules.

Ugh. As a regular HERO GM, bad behavior is endemic in the community. Nowadays I push hard against tone sliders and point optimizers.

Anywho, I understand what DK is saying and my experiences have been similar.

MP/VPP abuse? Check.
Only one PC actually heroic? Check.
SPD Inflation? Check.
Math games? Check.

I nowadays put less value on the number of bottoms in seats and I'm more happier for it.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102533Chris24601, it is very kind to offer an alternative, especially one that is five times smaller. :p I myself am not a Supers player, but I have heard similar good things about Mutants & Masterminds in general. :)

One other advantage of M&M is that, because it is based on the d20 system, it has a degree of familiarity to it which makes a lot of the portions used in character creation more a list of options where you only need to read the ones you find relevant instead of needing to actually read the entire book.

One thing that is occasionally hard to grok at first if you're coming from a more fluff-integrated system though is that M&M character building is 100% Effect-based. Meaning that character building is all about finding the most effective crunch to match your fluff and that things like ability scores only matter to the extent they are convenient groupings of traits (you can just as easily buy up the individual traits for the same overall cost as buying the ability score).

Which is also why the powers are extremely generic; what in HERO are entangles, mind control, flashes and a host of other powers are instead just "Affliction." Instead of Energy Blast, Ranged Killing Attack, Melee Killing Attack and whatever they called the non-killing melee damage attack... there's just "Damage" (with ranged as an extra for it). Instead of natural armor and force fields as separate powers there's just "Protection" (with having it shut off when you're stunned as a flaw).

You get the idea.

And yeah, the use of Arrays for powers is discussed as something that is most certainly expected. Though it does point out that because of their power stunt rules you don't actually NEED an alternate power for every last variation, just the most common ones (hence my build going from eight to four alternate powers when we changed to M&M from HERO; the latter expected you to precisely build every option; M&M says, burn a hero point in play for an alternate power use of a power you do have. So if I really needed to take out a bunch of evil robots at a distance my super strength hero could burn a hero point and add an alternate power... let's call it "nailed it";  i.e. a ranged area attack (fluff is he's grabbing a bucket of nails from the construction site and hurling handfuls of them with his super strength like a scattergun) to his array during the encounter.

Only if I actually start using a particular trick on a regular basis would I need to look at actually adding it to my strength tricks array (at a cost of 1 PP; which is the typical session reward recommended... so use a new trick in session and, if it's something you think you'll use a lot, spend the PP you gain to add it as a regular trick).

Which is another way that Multi-powers/Arrays are useful in terms of world building while keeping the rewards per session at a level where the typical slow growth you see in comics is also in effect. If I had to pay full price (30 PP) for that scattergun nail trick I'd either need to spend 30 sessions to gain that trick or the session rewards would need to be 10-15 PP per session so you could get the trick in a reasonable timeframe... except that 10 PP is enough to add 20 ranks to your skills or improve an ability score by 5 ranks (or adding +10 to an ability score in D&D).

Instead, alternate effects at 1 PP mean that the typical 1 PP/session award lets you; add +1 to 2 skills, increase a non-capped defense by 1, add an advantage (i.e. a feat) or alternate effect for an existing power (or improve a very inexpensive power by one rank), or bank it for next session to improve an ability score or more expensive power by one rank (or add a new power).

It's sort of the sweet spot in terms of progression feeling meaningful without being either glacial (1 pp without arrays) or exponential (10+ pp per session without arrays).

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102443ICONS does it effectively without using any type of structure like that. So does GURPS. And they simulate superhero comics just fine. So yes. I disagree strongly with you.

Hang on now, GURPS has Alternate Abilities/Alternate Attacks which work on some level just like Multipowers.  Pay for the most expensive power then pay 1/5 for any other exclusive abilities.

Plus, as much as I love GURPS it's not a great system for superheros above street-level.  Doing Batman's OK but trying to stat up Superman is a nightmare.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102396The Multipower. What I consider the biggest cheat in the entire Hero System's history. Which also became the foundation in which another Power Framework called the Variable Power Pool was based upon.

....
The Multipower is doesn't limit powers significantly at all. It's literally giving some huge discounts without really doing anything but adding extra complexity to the character build.

Baloney

Multipower is a way to reserve a portion of your points and switch them between different powers. Instead of paying 50 point for a 10d6 energy black. You can now switch that out for other similarly priced  or lesser cost powers. However in any given phase that block of point only represents a single power that you spend 50 or less points on.

And there is a cost for the flexibility in that you have to pay for slots.

In contrast variable advantage which you advocates in its place doesn't chance the base power. It just changes the advantages that apply to the base power. So does a poor job of representing Green Lantern's Ring or Batman's utility belt.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102443ICONS does it effectively without using any type of structure like that. So does GURPS. And they simulate superhero comics just fine. So yes. I disagree strongly with you.

ICONS is a "GM May I?" system with vague mechanics (the full description of the leaping power is "You can jump across great distances. Leaping 7 can take you out to visual range in a single bound, and levels beyond that can cover miles in a single leap!" That is the full extent of the power and guidance for it) and entirely pre-built powers where any sort of multi-power is pre-built into the effect (akin to Heroes Unlimited's major powers).

Anything beyond the most basic uses of an ability is entirely GM fiat (basically its D&D Fighter: The RPG).

It's also a system where the default for chargen is "random rolls for everything, even origin and powers" where actually getting to build your character to concept requires GM permission. Its pushing of "Aspects, Tags and Compels" (basically story-game meta-currency crap) is also a turn off.

Hard pass on ICONS.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102514Getting players into the setting's fictional headspace vs. the demands of the RAW (rules as written) arms race is why I prefer levels vs. point-buy games: one immediately starts with funneling parameters to fight the conceptual battle in players' minds before play. Point-buy, in being broad and flexible, ends up with more GM overhead to curtail the system to fit the fiction AND THEN begins the conceptual battle with player expectations. That and points are meaningless outside its context, so that's just more fine-tuning work hidden under the guise of "publisher RAW balance."

And Publisher RAW Balance is a shibboleth all games suffer from. But it is a flawed assuption I see fans of higher compexity games suffer in greater proportion due to the tighter held delusion that abstractions, if "realistic enough," will one day achieving playable modeling at the table. We have video game physics for that now, and no one wants to do matrices and derivatives by hand for fun. :p ("The bad news is your falling, the good news, there is no ground." - some Buddhist monk)

In summary, I feel your pain, Darrin.  :( You are fighting the gameable system AND the players that love that power usurpation from the GM's Setting. Sounds like a steeper uphill battle than reskinning a simpler system and telling the knuckleheads to knock it off. :)

I say Treasure your well-earned compliments and past memories and move on from frustration. Let the inmates savor their rule of their asylum. :p

It's good advice.

Part of why I post threads like these is to work through some unresolved frustration.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102510That I created the only true heroic character of the group. The other characters had players who were too busy trying to one-up the other players. Or who were jealous of the characters that actually did things within the group. They weren't playing their characters with the mindset of a hero. It was just sad and bad.

This is an issue with every point based system I've tried. Point based systems are great to allow people to make PCs they want to play, but are also very easily corrupted by "maximum efficiency" players. Not a unique situation, you see the same kind of complaints with feats in the various forms of D&D / d20. There are some players who don't care about making an interesting character, they just want the best mix of abilities. You even saw them in AD&D, often playing a high elf archer (not that all elf players or even elf archer players fall into this category).

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;11025106th Edition made a lot of changes. Including the elimination of the Stun Lotto phenomenon for killing attacks. Which was a straight-up reduction of its maximum possible Stun Multiplier.

What is this 6th edition you speak of?  That sounds silly, like saying there were sequels to Highlander:p

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102510Human maximum SPD since 1st edition of the game has always been 4. This means it is the max human potential. Captain America and Olympic athlete level. Yet how many characters can conceptually justify having that level or more? A lot fewer than you think. And a GM should absolutely rein that in. But it doesn't happen, in more cases than not.

Absolutely infuriating!

From personal experience actually using one of the other frequent "unnecessary" rules, Endurance is a great way to mitigate Speed inflation. Making high speed players track endurance often found them no faster than slower PCs because they had to use many of their extra moves recovering END. If they were smart they put a lot of points into buying Reduced END or No END on their powers, or they seriously bulked up their END and REC stats, which get expensive fast, and when added to the high cost of SPD, seriously ate into the points they could use on other powers / stats.

At lower Speeds END is pretty much a doesn't matter stat (unless bought down), but we found strict enforcement quickly reined in speedsters. Even in high powered Supers games we rarely saw SPD above 6, and in Heroic games SPD 3 and 4 were the max. Only one player I can recall tried building a thief PC with a SPD 5 and he was so ineffective he soon begged to be allowed to reallocate the points and reduced to a SPD of 4.  

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102510I would contend that it isn't raw might that makes a good hero. It's their heart. And the players who have been seeking exploits within the game like with the Multipower seem to always forget that part of the heroic condition. All they think of is raw might. They think that is the most important thing. When they are not getting in their character's headspace at all.

It's what a character does that makes all the difference. Not how powerful they are.

I think jhkims examples are flawed. Because they only fixate on raw might. And completely ignore the other factors that make a character a hero. Instead of just a superpowered bully.

Again massive difference of opinion. I see MP as encouraging more broad based heroic characters, not encouraging super powered bullies. The most efficient way to created a combat monster is with straight powers. I've found MP tends to help one create flexible heroes with more than just brute force powers. For raw power a straight attack will always be more efficient. It is nearly impossible to build a jack of all trades Batman utility belt type character without the use of MP. VPP or EC will not work for that kind of character.  

Quote from: estar;1102562Baloney

Multipower is a way to reserve a portion of your points and switch them between different powers. Instead of paying 50 point for a 10d6 energy black. You can now switch that out for other similarly priced  or lesser cost powers. However in any given phase that block of point only represents a single power that you spend 50 or less points on.

And there is a cost for the flexibility in that you have to pay for slots.

In contrast variable advantage which you advocates in its place doesn't chance the base power. It just changes the advantages that apply to the base power. So does a poor job of representing Green Lantern's Ring or Batman's utility belt.

Exactly, without MP it is not possible to have characters like that on somewhat equal footing to focused characters like the Hulk or Cyclops if they are all built on the same number of points. Granting some players more points to work with that other based around character concept seems like a recipe for a disaster of a game.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102525If you want something newer which also uses point-builds, but is a LOT easier (extras/flaws are +/-X per rank of power instead of x1/4, x1/2, etc.) check out M&M 3e. It has its own online SRD (d20HeroSRD) and the only book you ever truly need as a player or GM (Hero's Handbook) if you want a hard copy or PDF version is just 232 pages including the character sheet.

Will check out the SRD and see if it floats my boat. If so then the book goes to my wish list for when I have the money/permission from the wife to buy yet another book! :D

The thread so far is interesting...

Summary:

Let me say something I know is not going to be popular.
Say something that most people find is not true.
Refuse to engage in the examples that people provide showing how it is not true.
Get angry at everyone for disagreeing with something that was known to be unpopular.
Realize that it isn't a system issue and that it has something to do with people being jerks, refuse to retract original claim.


I'm very curious - I think Captain Flexible is a good example of Multi-Power.  Is that character more powerful than someone who didn't use Multi-Power?  I don't think so.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102568ICONS is a "GM May I?" system with vague mechanics (the full description of the leaping power is "You can jump across great distances. Leaping 7 can take you out to visual range in a single bound, and levels beyond that can cover miles in a single leap!" That is the full extent of the power and guidance for it) and entirely pre-built powers where any sort of multi-power is pre-built into the effect (akin to Heroes Unlimited's major powers).

Anything beyond the most basic uses of an ability is entirely GM fiat (basically its D&D Fighter: The RPG).

It's also a system where the default for chargen is "random rolls for everything, even origin and powers" where actually getting to build your character to concept requires GM permission. Its pushing of "Aspects, Tags and Compels" (basically story-game meta-currency crap) is also a turn off.

Hard pass on ICONS.

The point-based character generation was expanded in ICONS Origins. Which makes it a truly viable option.

And all RPG systems are "GM May I?" The GM is the final arbiter of the rules. The rulebook isn't.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102581The point-based character generation was expanded in ICONS Origins. Which makes it a truly viable option.

And all RPG systems are "GM May I?" The GM is the final arbiter of the rules. The rulebook isn't.

Right, but there's a notable difference between...

A) The GM is in charge of a system where players may make reasonable inferences as to the outcome of their actions because of codified mechanics (i.e. if something doesn't go as expected there's an in-game reason for it.

B) The GM is in charge of a system where the players have to guess based on the GM's mood and what he ate before coming to game whether a given action will even be allowed because the mechanics are so vague.

M&M is the former (Players can have a reasonable expectation of what their powers can actually do; how far they can leap, how fast they can move, the size of the shell that will just bounce off their nigh impervious skin, what the power of their effects are in relation to real world phenomena, etc. and what the effectiveness of their alternate power effects will be; I know my super strong lungs can push 25 tons up to 30' with a single breath.

ICONS is the latter ("I know I blew out a house fire using my super strong lungs last session, but the the GM ate a bad taco earlier so he might not even let me use a super breath to disperse the gas cloud this time.").

Frankly with the use of Aspects, Tags and Compels as narrative prompts and means of gaining narrative meta-currency it makes me think if you're into ICONS you should probably just use FATE with a Superhero setting and be done with it.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102582Frankly with the use of Aspects, Tags and Compels as narrative prompts and means of gaining narrative meta-currency it makes me think if you're into ICONS you should probably just use FATE with a Superhero setting and be done with it.

That's because ICONS is FATE. Just a slightly different implementation of it. Just with a few different terms tacked to it. It's really effectively the same game engine.

You don't like FATE? That's fine. You should use the game system that makes you most comfortable.

As for Mutants & Masterminds. I have all versions of that game system. I like it better than the Hero System overall. But I also feel that for most applications it's just too heavy of a game system for my purposes. Too exhausting to use.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102510I would contend that it isn't raw might that makes a good hero. It's their heart. And the players who have been seeking exploits within the game like with the Multipower seem to always forget that part of the heroic condition. All they think of is raw might. They think that is the most important thing. When they are not getting in their character's headspace at all.

It's what a character does that makes all the difference. Not how powerful they are.

I think jhkims examples are flawed. Because they only fixate on raw might. And completely ignore the other factors that make a character a hero. Instead of just a superpowered bully.

Darrin, I think your main issue is with something other than the mechanics of Multipower. Regarding my example: obviously, it's just a simplified example of power costs - not personalities. It is representative of the most common use of Multipower in published characters, as far as I've seen.

My main period of Hero System play was in college and grad school, and I had pretty great groups of players during that time. However, I sympathize that you've had players engaging in bad behavior. I've definitely seen such players, such as at cons or hearing from friends. It sucks if you're swamped in such players.

I think the best deterrent for such behavior isn't changing the rules. Eliminating Multipower just means they'll optimize differently. Instead, I'd suggest a mix of both rules and GM discretion to design characters who are equal. As a Hero System GM, I tended to do this by giving advice and leeway to non-optimized characters. i.e. A player who optimized the hell out of their character found that the newbie player's PC was just as good because I helped them and gave them breaks. Focusing too much on fixing up the rules is counter-productive as far as reigning in rules lawyers, in my experience.

Quote from: jhkim;1102587Darrin, I think your main issue is with something other than the mechanics of Multipower. Regarding my example: obviously, it's just a simplified example of power costs - not personalities. It is representative of the most common use of Multipower in published characters, as far as I've seen.

My main period of Hero System play was in college and grad school, and I had pretty great groups of players during that time. However, I sympathize that you've had players engaging in bad behavior. I've definitely seen such players, such as at cons or hearing from friends. It sucks if you're swamped in such players.

I think the best deterrent for such behavior isn't changing the rules. Eliminating Multipower just means they'll optimize differently. Instead, I'd suggest a mix of both rules and GM discretion to design characters who are equal. As a Hero System GM, I tended to do this by giving advice and leeway to non-optimized characters. i.e. A player who optimized the hell out of their character found that the newbie player's PC was just as good because I helped them and gave them breaks. Focusing too much on fixing up the rules is counter-productive as far as reigning in rules lawyers, in my experience.

The only way to stamp out the min-maxing and rules-lawyering in Hero is for the GM to build all of the characters themselves. That's really the only solution that I find truly eliminates the issue.

But doing that makes the min-maxers whine endlessly. And it puts an additional workload on the GM. When the GM's time is limited, to begin with. And with a heavy system like Hero, any additional workload can be crushing for the GM.

One of the last bad players I had with Hero, was a total mix-maxer and exploiter. His antics forced the GMs to deal with him and make him the center of attention. And resulted in vital time being taken away from the development of the story elements and actual adventures for the game. In the end, the situation became absolutely crushing and unable to be resolved. And the game was shut down.

After that. I went looking for game systems that had far less of a workload being put on the GM. Enough was enough.

I also expanded a personal limit in gaming period. I don't play with players that I can't trust. At all. Ever.

As you can imagine. That sort of kills most online gaming options.

Hero System is a lot of work on the GM.  That's true.  But that's because it comes with a lot of flexibility and power.  If the flexibility and power isn't worth the work, then of course you should avoid it.  That has nothing whatsoever to do with bad players or good players.  There's no amount of work you can put into any system that will fix bad players.  If they can be reasoned with, you might be able to guide them into being less bad players, but that's outside the system.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102585That's because ICONS is FATE. Just a slightly different implementation of it. Just with a few different terms tacked to it. It's really effectively the same game engine.

You don't like FATE? That's fine. You should use the game system that makes you most comfortable.

I'd honestly never even looked at FATE because I loathe vague storygame stuff. If ICONS is FATE then I see I'd made the right call because I found nothing appealing in its mechanics as presented in its SRD.

M&M 3e* is about the right level of crunch/character building detail for me in a superhero game (less than HERO/GURPS, but way crunchier than ICONS). Once you have an actual concept and if you know where in the book to look for things you can build a PC in 15-20 minutes. If you have the rank measures table (I made a printout) you can pretty much design opponents on the fly (being d20-based helps a LOT for this).

The PL caps/trade-offs also mean that even pretty unoptimized PCs aren't completely outclassed (you'll hit the defense caps after only 1/3 of your budget and can get a capped close damage attack for just 10% of your budget... even if you spent twice as much as needed to hit the caps you'd still have 20 points left over from a 150 PP build for other stuff).

Likewise, the places you're most likely to fall short accidentally can be fixed pretty quickly with session rewards (1 PP per point in a short defense/save, 1 PP per 2 points if your attack bonus is too low, and there's a couple of 1 PP advantages that can patch over damage being too low by trading accuracy or defense for damage until you can buy it up properly).

About the only house rule we use is one that swaps out Toughness saves for a hp/DR system and actually makes it a little closer to HERO and combat a bit less swingy overall.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1102599Hero System is a lot of work on the GM.  That's true.  But that's because it comes with a lot of flexibility and power.  If the flexibility and power isn't worth the work, then of course you should avoid it.  That has nothing whatsoever to do with bad players or good players.  There's no amount of work you can put into any system that will fix bad players.  If they can be reasoned with, you might be able to guide them into being less bad players, but that's outside the system.

I chose ICONS because of its relative simplicity in character generation. And lack of areas open for exploitation. I feel that it lets me concentrate on making a really fun game. Instead of having my time devoured by character generation minutia. It's a flexible system. But doesn't go to the depth of detail Hero does.

As for the Aspects, Compels, and other aspects of FATE? I like emphasizing story elements more than I was capable of with Hero. I like the fact that those things cause players to be more interactive and invested with the campaign's environment.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102595The only way to stamp out the min-maxing and rules-lawyering in Hero is for the GM to build all of the characters themselves. That's really the only solution that I find truly eliminates the issue.

That's a cure worse than the disease.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1102609That's a cure worse than the disease.

Given how many campaigns I have seen utterly crushed by min-maxers? I believe it is a completely justified measure to take.

There are plenty of convention games run by Hero System GMs who only allow pregenerated characters. And that works fine for them. It gets rid of the nonsense completely in the convention environment.

While I understand the frustration with the point-buy woes, I guess I can say I've just never experienced it in a real-world context with GURPS (which offers a similar range of potential exploits) for threeish reasons:

1. I don't game with munchkins or people who like to min-max; I game with people I can trust to build well-rounded, grounded characters without intentional exploits and just generally game in good faith.

2. I look over the characters before I approve them, give feedback and have any necessary changes made by the players.

3. I don't run games at conventions or for randoms.

I've used several alternative chargen methods as well such as point buckets, pointless generation using packages, up to and including totally 'balance free' (as in, no points, pitch me your character concepts and if I approve and everyone has their niche and is happy with their perceived place in the group then the players build totally to concept regardless of cost). I've never had an issue with that style of chargen either. (I think point balance is generally a myth anyway; the illusion of it, maybe)

But like I said, I do understand the frustration. For my tables and myself I suppose it's just more or less a non-issue.

Edit: GURPS' Templates are also helpful in this regard, with the biggest benefit being that players' decision trees during chargen are massively streamlined (in addition to sidestepping the char-op problem nicely).

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1102609That's a cure worse than the disease.

Agreed.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102611Given how many campaigns I have seen utterly crushed by min-maxers? I believe it is a completely justified measure to take.

There are plenty of convention games run by Hero System GMs who only allow pregenerated characters. And that works fine for them. It gets rid of the nonsense completely in the convention environment.

Yeah but playing pre-gens is never as good in non-convention play than making your own PC. Hence the fact that "convention games" are their own thing. What you're alluding to here is having some kind of system that magically keeps players from doing stuff the GM doesn't want.

There is no such system. Supers games do require a disciplined GM to run because the conceits of a Supers game *really* push the envelope of power that players normally don't get to in other genres.

While I don't play "Hero System" - I do run a *lot* of Supers campaigns. The mechanical requirements for "balance" is extremely difficult for any game unless it's specifically designed for "tiered play". The assumptions I have, reading this thread are that the point-totals for Hero should approximate the power-level of the PCs right? Much like they do in M&M (which I'm much more familiar with).

If you think the Multi-Power ability is so overpowered - why not remove it? My casual view of it seems to indicate it exists for people like Green Lantern - not Superman? Surely there's a better way to skin that cat in the system? M&M, FASERIP, Icons etc. don't have these problems, at least not to the case that a GM can't easily fix. But if you're looking for a system that does it on its own? That's never going to happen.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1102613While I understand the frustration with the point-buy woes, I guess I can say I've just never experienced it in a real-world context with GURPS (which offers a similar range of potential exploits) for threeish reasons:

1. I don't game with munchkins or people who like to min-max; I game with people I can trust to build well-rounded, grounded characters without intentional exploits and just generally game in good faith.

2. I look over the characters before I approve them, give feedback and have any necessary changes made by the players.

3. I don't run games at conventions or for randoms.

I've used several alternative chargen methods as well such as point buckets, pointless generation using packages, up to and including totally 'balance free' (as in, no points, pitch me your character concepts and if I approve and everyone has their niche and is happy with their perceived place in the group then the players build totally to concept regardless of cost). I've never had an issue with that style of chargen either. (I think point balance is generally a myth anyway; the illusion of it, maybe)

But like I said, I do understand the frustration. For my tables and myself I suppose it's just more or less a non-issue.

Edit: GURPS' Templates are also helpful in this regard, with the biggest benefit being that players' decision trees during chargen are massively streamlined (in addition to sidestepping the char-op problem nicely).

I'm not sure how GURPS 4E Powers worked, but as I recall the 3E Supers supplement like most of GURPS just listed abilities with costs. It didn't have quite the same degree of make your own powers as you see in HERO. That limits the amount of BS players can pull, but also limits the variety of options. One of the reasons I feel GURPS 3E was better at lower level supers, and HERO better at the high end.

I know 4E made changes to address this but as I have not found 4E particularly engaging (too much invested in 3E) and not a being a huge fan of supers I haven't delved into that beyond 4E fans saying it works much better for high end Supers than 3E did. If 4E doesn't have something like the power advantage / limitation similar to HERO then I imagine it still avoids some of the worst behavior, and still lacks the level of flexibility found in HERO.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102622I'm not sure how GURPS 4E Powers worked, but as I recall the 3E Supers supplement like most of GURPS just listed abilities with costs. It didn't have quite the same degree of make your own powers as you see in HERO. That limits the amount of BS players can pull, but also limits the variety of options. One of the reasons I feel GURPS 3E was better at lower level supers, and HERO better at the high end.

GURPS 4E has been redesigned to have a building-block like system much closer to HERO. I would still favor GURPS at the lower end and HERO at the higher end, but GURPS has largely gotten much better and more usable/customizable in that respect. Particularly with the Powers book (there's also a 4E Supers book, but Powers is the one you really want for building... erm, powers).

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102622I know 4E made changes to address this but as I have not found 4E particularly engaging (too much invested in 3E) and not a being a huge fan of supers I haven't delved into that beyond 4E fans saying it works much better for high end Supers than 3E did. If 4E doesn't have something like the power advantage / limitation similar to HERO then I imagine it still avoids some of the worst behavior, and still lacks the level of flexibility found in HERO.

Yep, scaling and power construction / customization is far more flexible in 4E. It has a very robust enhancement / limitation system and a wide variety of core building blocks to choose from (most 3e powers and advantages have been split out into core components for ease of manufacture, although a couple relics do still exist).

It's not quite as flexible as HERO in some ways (it still doesn't scale as gracefully on the high end, and there are a few minor compartmentalization oddities here and there), but it's obvious it was built ground-up with a close eye on HERO's power methodology.

Edit: If you'd like examples of 4E power build exploitation, there are a bunch on the SJgames forums built up over the years as thought exercises...
http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?p=239055

Read through the whole thread.  I've owned HERO system 5e (regular and FRed) but never actually played them, but I have played a lot of M&M (particularly 2e and 3e).  Honestly, I've never had a problem with Alternate Effects (their version of the Multipower), but then again, M&M combat is simpler than HERO's combat (every character gets one turn per round and no END pool to track).

Those systems do tend to incentivize the min-maxers and powergamers, though those types of players will behave that way regardless of the system you use.  The more out-of-their-control character creation is, the less they can muck about, and randomize charts structured in a particular order seems to be one of the most effective ways for the system to rein in the min-maxers and powergamers.  It also has the byproduct of providing more focused and quicker character creation.  One game currently in development, Sentinel Comics RPG, has this kind of character creation as an option.

Other than that, I wouldn't play with people who just don't give a shit about creating their character to their concept, or make stupid-ass concepts to justify their disruptive characters.  Adopting a more guided character creation process for one's favorite point-buy system may be a useful tool.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1102599Hero System is a lot of work on the GM.  That's true.  But that's because it comes with a lot of flexibility and power.  If the flexibility and power isn't worth the work, then of course you should avoid it.  That has nothing whatsoever to do with bad players or good players.  There's no amount of work you can put into any system that will fix bad players.  If they can be reasoned with, you might be able to guide them into being less bad players, but that's outside the system.

One of the players that caused my last Champions campaign to detonate didn't even make new characters. He always brought in old ones from past campaigns. And would see if the current GM would put up with them and his bullshit. Since I played in other campaigns with that player. I recognized the characters. And I frankly took offense that he refused to even try to make something new for the new campaign. And yes, I was a GM. And yes, this was the very same ruthless min-maxer who had a hand in the game's detonation.

Quote from: tenbones;1102619Agreed.While I don't play "Hero System" - I do run a *lot* of Supers campaigns. The mechanical requirements for "balance" is extremely difficult for any game unless it's specifically designed for "tiered play". The assumptions I have, reading this thread are that the point-totals for Hero should approximate the power-level of the PCs right? Much like they do in M&M (which I'm much more familiar with).

No. It doesn't  That's never been a feature of the Hero System. It puts the ball completely in the GM's court for that. And with structures like the Multipower in play, it makes determining a character's true power level extremely murky.

QuoteIf you think the Multi-Power ability is so overpowered - why not remove it? My casual view of it seems to indicate it exists for people like Green Lantern - not Superman? Surely there's a better way to skin that cat in the system? M&M, FASERIP, Icons etc. don't have these problems, at least not to the case that a GM can't easily fix. But if you're looking for a system that does it on its own? That's never going to happen.

In my view? There is. Others in this thread won't agree though.

Removing the Multipower and all of its derivations would make the system more balanced. And make things a lot easier when it comes to determining the overall character power level.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102631One of the players that caused my last Champions campaign to detonate didn't even make new characters. He always brought in old ones from past campaigns. And would see if the current GM would put up with them and his bullshit. Since I played in other campaigns with that player. I recognized the characters. And I frankly took offense that he refused to even try to make something new for the new campaign. And yes, I was a GM. And yes, this was the very same ruthless min-maxer who had a hand in the game's detonation.

This truly is not meant to be snide or overly critical... but why in the hell would you ever allow that? In any system?

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102417I've played classic Tunnels & Trolls. That game has nothing compared to this particular abomination. Those rules are actually consistent.

This thing? It comes up in literally every character made. And is the cause of endless at the table arguments and headaches for the GM. Which detracts from actually having fun with the game.

"For you."

The only discussions we've ever had about that framework is a gentleman's agreement over number of Real points spent for the multipower.  Case in point: 20 point multipower, no building 137 point powers.  I cite 137 points because I quite accidentally built a kung fu superhero who could throw out ungodly damage with like 2x armor piercing, 2d6-1 HKA, etc. etc.  Again, entirely accidental but it happened.  I just wasn't watching the numbers.  We had a good laugh at it, I rebuilt the power into something that couldn't jackhammer a hole through a neutron star, and we continued on.  

I guess what I'm saying is: in 30+ years of playing hero system with the group that I do, Multipower has never, ever, ever been a problem save that one time, when a tired me forgot to move the decimal place.

Quotemake the system more balanced

AH!  Found the problem.  The problem is you're seeking balance in a system that can't be.

Two 200 point characters are in no way a match for a single 400 point character, by default.  Hell, two two-hundred point characters can be grossly mismatched against each other.  Seeking balance as the ultimate goal is a fool's errand.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1102633This truly is not meant to be snide or overly critical... but why in the hell would you ever allow that? In any system?

I was part of a two GM team in a game played online. The other GM was far less capable of rejecting the BS than I was. I played "bad cop" until it finally became too much. And I quit.

The other GM wasn't willing to continue without me. And the game closed in less than a day.

Desperation to find someone, anyone to actually be in a game does a lot of bad things to gamers. Especially online.

I'm not trying to excuse it. Simply explain the situation.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102636I was part of a two GM team in a game played online. The other GM was far less capable of rejecting the BS than I was. I played "bad cop" until it finally became too much. And I quit.

The other GM wasn't willing to continue without me. And the game closed in less than a day.

Desperation to find someone, anyone to actually be in a game does a lot of bad things to gamers. Especially online.

I'm not trying to excuse it. Simply explain the situation.

Ah, that makes more sense. I have never been in a multi-GM scenario but I can certainly understand how that could cause a potential rift to abuses and misunderstandings. Hard to put out a fire when the fire extinguisher you grab turns out to shoot thermite.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102611Given how many campaigns I have seen utterly crushed by min-maxers? I believe it is a completely justified measure to take.

There are plenty of convention games run by Hero System GMs who only allow pregenerated characters. And that works fine for them. It gets rid of the nonsense completely in the convention environment.

I tend to run all my convention games with pregenerated characters regardless of system, so that I can be prepared for what to run and can be familiar with them.

But honestly, this really depends on the players and the social dynamic. In my experience, I never really had a problem with it. Sometimes a player would suggest a character that was too powerful, and I would tell them no. More often, though, I corrected by someone bringing in a character who was too weak - and I'd suggest changes or give them perks to make them more balanced with the group.

The main thing I miss about Hero System games is the variety of characters that we would get. Hero System isn't infinitely flexible, but it can do a huge range. I've had characters like a Time Lord with a dimension-hopping mirror ("The Alchemist"), a tiny starship the size of a dinner plate, someone who channeled social archetypes, a galaxy-hopping teleporter, and a teenage girl who created semi-real illusions. In more rules-light systems, these concepts are usually reduced to fluff over the same mechanical base, or are simply not possible.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1102638Ah, that makes more sense. I have never been in a multi-GM scenario but I can certainly understand how that could cause a potential rift to abuses and misunderstandings. Hard to put out a fire when the fire extinguisher you grab turns out to shoot thermite.

Oh, my reaction to the situation was much worse than I told you about here. I even destroyed all of my entries in the campaign wiki that was supposed to be constantly read by the players. This included new articles, profiles on world and political powers. Which I had worked on almost nightly to try to give the campaign world the sense of being a living breathing thing.

It was quite an irrational thing to do. But I completely lost my cool because of the frustration that was built up. And it's something I deeply regret in retrospect.

Another avenue of this discussion that's worth noting in the "PCs aren't making heroes, but super-powered bullies" vein is that the whole genre of comic superheroes is so broad that where the line between heroes and bullies falls is rather dependent upon the particular heroes and era you prefer.

In the campaign with my aforementioned super-strength hero I play him in the vein of the classic no-killing, truth, justice and the American Way type, but at one point another player made her character into essentially a female version of the Punisher and another made one who's basically an Avenging Angel on Earth to fight a secret war against Satan's legions and another  does do hero stuff, but only if dragged into it because they're all about their PC's family adventures (she's got a non-powered husband and kids who help her maintain her secret base that is more a zoo than a base... she's basically a G-rated superhero with animal shape-shifting powers that are more important for including "here's some cool facts about the animal kingdom" exposition segments into the show than actually fighting super-villains).

All four are valid comic book protagonists, but the focus of each is so different it's difficult to overlap it much and we've got the same dichotomy where the Joker runs free in a world where Superman exists so that Ballista can have her arch-nemesis committing heinous acts (his "super-power" is being really good with knives) while Paragon (who's powerset is "as fast as a speeding bullet, as powerful as a locamotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound and impervious to anything less than an exploding shell.") isn't allowed to interfere for "reasons."*

There's also the issue of the "never kills" and "always goes for the kill" heroes in the same campaign. My PC has probably used his Interpose skill more often saving the lives of bad guys (often mooks) in Ballista's sights than in actually protecting my allies. And of course "let's turn them over to the proper authorities" vs. "let's torture them information." Sometimes the GM has literally thrown in a threat to the city just so Paragon would be too busy to stop Ballista from "doing her thing."

* The real problem is the nemesis as Ballista's player defined them in her backstory wasn't some behind the scenes mastermind the law couldn't touch (like a Kingpin or Lex Luthor), but that he was a lead-from-the-front gang warlord type who's only free because the police are too scared of him and his men to go into his no-man's land territory to try and get him.

Anyway, the point is there's way bigger problems than multi-powers in most superhero campaigns even if everyone is staying true to a genre so broad that The Punisher and Superman are both considered to be part of it.

Quote from: jhkim;1102416The Multipower is an imperfect way to address the problem that one big effect is worth more than a choice of several small effect. To take an example:  

Captain Power has a single 15d6 force blast. That's 75 points.

Captain Flexible has five different powers: a 3d6 force blast, a 2d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 1.5d6 ego attack, a 1.5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 2d6 no-endurance attack. Each of these is 15 points for a total of 75 points.


These are the same cost, but the 15d6 attack is vastly more effective. No one is going to want Captain Flexible on their team, doing almost no damage in five different ways. I would argue that the multipower cost scheme is a more reasonable price for flexibility. With a multipower, Captain Flexible could have slots with a 10d6 force blast, a 6d6 armor-piercing ice blast, a 5d6 ego attack, a 5d6 gas attack (no normal defense), and a 6d6 no-endurance attack. I think that's a more reasonable peer for Captain Power.

The Multipower construct limits the character's ability to use more than one Power at a time, excluding among other options Multi -Attack. If it has non offensive powers in it, such as defenses, etc,you're stuck without them until your next Phase once you perform a Phase ending action. Finallym your characters powers are much easier to monkey with as Adjustment target the base Multipoer. So if you have 5 50 point powers, it doesn't 250 Drain results to shut them all down, just 50.

This has been gone over and over again for literally years.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102641It was quite an irrational thing to do. But I completely lost my cool because of the frustration that was built up. And it's something I deeply regret in retrospect.

I wouldn't describe it as irrational. Crime of passion perhaps. This is why I very carefully select my stable of players, though. GMing is enough effort and care on my part already. I need no additional wrinkles, and I will not tolerate troublemakers. I game and run games for fun, not doing accounting for others bullshit. On that account I would say you were right for leaving them in the dust.

Quote from: CarlD.;1102643The Multipower construct limits the character's ability to use more than one Power at a time, excluding among other options Multi -Attack. If it has non offensive powers in it, such as defenses, etc,you're stuck without them until your next Phase once you perform a Phase ending action. Finallym your characters powers are much easier to monkey with as Adjustment target the base Multipoer. So if you have 5 50 point powers, it doesn't 250 Drain results to shut them all down, just 50.

This has been gone over and over again for literally years.

They took out the adjustment powers automatic limit on Power Frameworks in 6th edition. And literally made it an additional limitation. So that adjustment powers do not affect the frameworks that way as a default.

Did I mention? 6th Edition made literally everything about the game system more complicated.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1102579The thread so far is interesting...

Summary:

Let me say something I know is not going to be popular.
Say something that most people find is not true.
Refuse to engage in the examples that people provide showing how it is not true.
Get angry at everyone for disagreeing with something that was known to be unpopular.
Realize that it isn't a system issue and that it has something to do with people being jerks, refuse to retract original claim.

Aka: The Darrin Kelly Special. He's had a bug up his ass about Hero System for years and this is fairly regular dead horse to him to flail and deeply representative of allot of threads he start on HS or otherwise. Suggestions to just find a new game and more aligned players will generally be ignored or some thin 'explanation' for why not thrown up.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1102644I wouldn't describe it as irrational. Crime of passion perhaps. This is why I very carefully select my stable of players, though. GMing is enough effort and care on my part already. I need no additional wrinkles, and I will not tolerate troublemakers. I game and run games for fun, not doing accounting for others bullshit. On that account I would say you were right for leaving them in the dust.

You know how they say success is the best type of revenge?

Together with my partners. We have written nine all ages graphic novels and four prose novels. Based on characters and concepts I salvaged from the ruins of that campaign. The characters and cultures are better defined. More based on original material. And just better in every way. And we have built our own fanbase.

So what do I have to say to those two selfish destructive players? It's their loss. They were too short-sighted to even pay attention to the campaign world or the other characters in it. They were too focused on themselves and their own wankery. Instead of actually contributing.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102642Another avenue of this discussion that's worth noting in the "PCs aren't making heroes, but super-powered bullies"

They're playing the Supes  from Garth Ennis' The Boys and the GM doesn't want that? Say No. Changing the system, what ever system won't stop them, all systems can be gamed and massaged even totally random (just keep rolling until you get what you want). Hero System isn't perfect or for everyone, but this seems to be a case of blaming the tools for the shady choices of the workers.

Quote from: CarlD.;1102649They're playing the Supes  from Garth Ennis' The Boys and you don't want that? Say so. Changing what ever system won't stop them, all systems can be gamed and massaged even totally random (just keep rolling until you get what you want). Hero System isn't perfect or for everyone, but this seems to be a case of blaming the tools for the shady choices of the workers.

Yeah, my point is mainly that one person's "super-powered bully" is another's superhero... See people who think Deadpool is a superhero and not a villain protagonist... or people who think Carol Danvers is a superhero and not a fascist supervillain.

None of these are problems caused by the existence of Multi-powers.

Honestly, I wouldn't even BE in this discussion if not for the fact that DK insisted on dragging in M&M's use of arrays under the same umbrella even though M&M absolutely does NOT share HERO System's "must use the most expensive method possible" pretense to hang the argument for why Multi-powers go against the spirit of the game on.

M&M instead says "use the least expensive means you can find to emulate the powers you want and arrays are a standard way to set up having multiple different attack types." It even adds in that you might not even need to pay points for some of them at all (as in 0 PP) simply because really rarely used ones can instead just be acquired using the power stunting system in the game.

Bitching that M&M's arrays are breaking the rules is like claiming D&D's magic system being Vancian is breaking the rules when both are part of the foundations of their power/magic systems.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102469Fuck me! How many pages? How many of the text could be shaved of without losing the essence? Yeah, that's so not for me! I'll stay with older Champions versions, the ones with the rules in it.

Champions Complete. The entire game in 240 pages for $10.00. That's all you need. We've been playing Hero for three years on a regular basis with nothing but CC and Hero Builder (the computer character creation program.) Our GM has the 8 pounds of books, sitting on the shelf. Never used.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102574Will check out the SRD and see if it floats my boat. If so then the book goes to my wish list for when I have the money/permission from the wife to buy yet another book! :D

MM3 is a great system, but our assessment was it was almost as complex as Hero and provided the about the same results, so we went back.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102646They took out the adjustment powers automatic limit on Power Frameworks in 6th edition. And literally made it an additional limitation. So that adjustment powers do not affect the frameworks that way as a default.

Did I mention? 6th Edition made literally everything about the game system more complicated.

On this we agree. HERO 4E was 220 pages, 6E "simplified" the game by adding about 800 pages... and removed the soul of the game while they were at it. :confused:

Quote from: Aglondir;1102654MM3 is a great system, but our assessment was it was almost as complex as Hero and provided the about the same results, so we went back.

Whereas our group found M&M 3e is a step down in complexity from M&M 2e and quite a few steps below HERO. It's closer during the character creation process, but falls off precipitously in actual play.

I can mainly attribute this to a number of interrelated factors; 1) No Endurance tracking, 2) no SPD phases, 3) familiarity with d20-system derived mechanics (roll + modifier vs. DC; high roll is always good), 4) no bucketfuls of dice you have to read two ways for damage resolution and, related to that, 5) one health track instead of two (BODY and STUN).

A major unrelated one on the GM side is... No bonus build points for non-mechanical complications (i.e. DNPC's, Hunteds, Secret/Public Identities, etc.) or the associated headaches of managing that; no players trying to min-max their flaws for maximum gain at minimum cost and, particularly, none of what I call Supporting Characters Pile-ups* or the player trying to hog the limelight by leveraging multiple high occurrence DNPCs and Hunteds to keep the story always about what's going on with them**

There are other factors, like not even pretending you need a battle map and general over complexity of rules (ex. turning rules for flight, non-combat movement vs. combat movement [an artifact of trying to keep combat on a single tabletop map], etc. ... there's a reason everyone I've ever played Champions with has compared its task resolution negatively to BattleTech), but just the stuff above was more than enough for the people I play with to pick M&M 3e over HERO (even 4e) every time.

* A Supporting Character Pile-up is where the rolls the GM is supposed to be making for every session regarding those DNPCs/Hunteds indicated that multiple of each should be coming into play in the same session. The problem being that you either use them as rolled, which can completely derail the entire session with unrelated elements, or (which I think many players kinda bank on) you ignore them because they're too much of a hassle and let the PCs clever enough to put most of their flaws into those sort of categories have free build points relative to the other players (who took more physical flaws that actually impact them without derailing whole sessions) without having to pay for them.

** I once had a fellow player try to present a PC in HERO who had five DNPCs (slightly less powerful, useful non-combat positions and skills; very frequent; 10 pt. each), five hunteds (less powerful; mildly punish; very frequent; 10 pt. each) and TEN rivals (romantic and professional; less powerful/inferior). I'm not entirely sure whether they were hoping for their 20 member supporting cast to keep the sessions always focused on their issues or if they were banking on that may rolls for involvement meaning they're de facto never going to be able to all be employed at once because the GM's immediate reaction was "not just 'no', HELL NO!" Regardless, M&M 3e's complication system means PCs get rewarded when they come up (Hero Points) AND when they don't (no complications that session), but they don't get any extra build points out of it so whoever is GMing doesn't have to decide if a particular complication is actually worth the points the player thinks it should be.

Psst! The biggest secret to rein in flaws/disadvantage/etc. negative point choices is reserve them as rewards. ;)

In fact, you can attach the XP system dirctly to Flaws, so that as PCs progress they become more flawed, more "complex." So no flaws until you earn them through play. Hey, it's how every major superhero became what they are, (with their tortured melodramas, roster of villains, and vast supporting cast,) by adding them slowly over time. :p

Just a thought! :) No longer just starting points for power, but a play reward goal that has to be built up through play.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102688Psst! The biggest secret to rein in flaws/disadvantage/etc. negative point choices is reserve them as rewards. ;)

In fact, you can attach the XP system dirctly to Flaws, so that as PCs progress they become more flawed, more "complex." So no flaws until you earn them through play. Hey, it's how every major superhero became what they are, (with their tortured melodramas, roster of villains, and vast supporting cast,) by adding them slowly over time. :p

Just a thought! :) No longer just starting points for power, but a play reward goal that has to be built up through play.

That's pretty much M&M's approach. Complications aren't worth any build points, but give a reward (Hero Points) whenever they actually come up.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102686but just the stuff above was more than enough for the people I play with to pick M&M 3e over HERO (even 4e) every time.

I happen to agree with those that prefer M&M3e to HERO (of any edition), so shouldn't this be a discussion of removing arrays/alternate effects from M&M3e then?

Quote from: Chris24601;1102439One thing you're ignoring in the costing is that one of the inherent limitations of the multipower is that you can't actually use all of the powers at the same time. You pay extra for flexibility, but that flexibility is NOT worth the value of an entire separate power.

Exactly correct...

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102595The only way to stamp out the min-maxing and rules-lawyering in Hero is for the GM to build all of the characters themselves. That's really the only solution that I find truly eliminates the issue.

But doing that makes the min-maxers whine endlessly. And it puts an additional workload on the GM. When the GM's time is limited, to begin with. And with a heavy system like Hero, any additional workload can be crushing for the GM.

If your biggest complaint about Champions is that min-maxers can abuse the system, then why the hell would you NOT do something that causes the min-maxers to be upset?

The idea that having the GM create characters will be "crushing for the GM" is just silly. You only make their characters once before the start of the campaign and then you're done. I can make a Champions character in a tiny fraction of the time that it would take for any of my players to do so. Me making them all saves significant time in setting up the game.

Seriously, if the idea that making 4-5 characters is too much to bear, how are you going to run a campaign when you will regularly need to make NPCs for the heroes to fight?

Quote from: HappyDaze;1102699I happen to agree with those that prefer M&M3e to HERO (of any edition), so shouldn't this be a discussion of removing arrays/alternate effects from M&M3e then?

Not my thread. DK is all about trashing HERO system apparently and tangentially brought in M&M by saying that it too was "afflicted" with the 'mathematical cheat' that is the concept of the multi-power.

My main dog in this fight is that he's fundamentally lying about M&M having the same general costing sensibilities as HERO. If you're going by strict statements of intent he ALMOST has a point in that the general rule behind point costs in HERO is that you should use the more expensive option when two or more ways of building something come up.

Except that the people who actually wrote the HERO system have always acknowledged that this rule is more about "characters shouldn't use cheesy loopholes to produce disproportionately strong characters" and Multi-power is, by definition, not a loophole but an actual rule structure based on the acknowledgement that flexibility is NOT worth the value of an entire separate power if you can't use both at the same time and their efforts to assign a fair price to that flexibility vs. someone building for raw power in a single area.

It's even LESS valid in the case of Mutants & Masterminds because it expressly DOESN'T have "must build the most expensive way possible" as a design parameter. Its parameter is to use the least expensive means you can find to achieve the effects you want because we use Power Level caps to rein in abusive builds instead of point limits (indeed, they even provide as a valid alternative character building rule of "unlimited power points" where you can spend any number of points to express your concept, but are still subject to the Power Level limits set by the GM.

Side-bar: this is actually used to hilarious effect in the DC Adventures version of the rules where Batman is a PL 12 hero, but has the points of a PL 19 one (note: Superman is only PL 15).

They also don't price things at all similarly to the HERO system; with far greater emphasis on points spent on ability scores, skills, advantages and defenses and comparatively less on powers (with the most basic melee range version of many power effects costing just 1 PP/rank* vs. ability scores costing 2 PP/rank).

* extras will increase this, but something like 5 PP/rank is in the neighborhood of turning everyone you can perceive into a statue type craziness.

There is some logic to OP's original statement.
But it falls to the Game master to make sure all slots fit the theme...
~~
and the GM's job also  make sure Superman doesn't start doing Batman's job (with new slot powers),
and that Green Lantern doesn't make everyone else on the team redundant.

Quote from: Antiquation!;11026132. I look over the characters before I approve them, give feedback and have any necessary changes made by the players.

One of our problems was with character complexity and late submissions. The player I mentioned always liked submitting at the last minute. And then expected to play it immediately. Without giving the GMs proper time to examine the character build fully before letting it into the wild. This took advantage of the GM who was my partner in this campaign. Because he wouldn't adequately examine the characters before letting them in.

Every character from this player submitted had some kind of exploitive BS hidden in a mountain of powers that took days to sift through and examine the connotations of. Every single one.

Chris24601:

You were the one who brought up0 M&M in this thread. I made no mention of it.

I went back and examined the messages of this thread thoroughly to confirm before I even wrote this message.

Also. Cut it the fuck out with the personal attacks!

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1102709If your biggest complaint about Champions is that min-maxers can abuse the system, then why the hell would you NOT do something that causes the min-maxers to be upset?

The idea that having the GM create characters will be "crushing for the GM" is just silly. You only make their characters once before the start of the campaign and then you're done. I can make a Champions character in a tiny fraction of the time that it would take for any of my players to do so. Me making them all saves significant time in setting up the game.

Seriously, if the idea that making 4-5 characters is too much to bear, how are you going to run a campaign when you will regularly need to make NPCs for the heroes to fight?

My issue would be dealing with the endless whining because the min-maxers would not be allowed to make their own characters. Not just building the characters and being done with it.

I use Hero Designer. The Hero System software for creating characters. But my personal style with it? I tend to make characters on the simple side. I don't go for every loophole and every possible exploit. I just try to make good playable interesting characters.

There have been plenty of times that I have supplied characters. And immediately had min-maxers look at the character and say "This character sucks" because I hadn't spent a week of work raping the system exclusively on that one character.

That's a lot of pent up and nourished anger over how somebody else played Green Lantern in your supes game.

Quote from: Bren;1102743That's a lot of pent up and nourished anger over how somebody else played Green Lantern in your supes game.

That's not even close to an accurate assessment of the situation.

So why change the game, why not just ban specific players from using their favorite abused rules. There seems to be a lot of baby in the bathwater.

I gotta say, and this is crude and everything, but I'd rather sit alone at home and practice punching myself in the nuts every Friday than play with Darrin's players. More realistically, I'd watch YouTube & play guitar or something. I just can't spend that much of my time with people that make me unhappy and actively try to fuck with my games, etc. That's not a friend. That's some weird co-dependent bundle of assholes kind of thing. I just won't have it in my life.

Admittedly, I currently am living in a time of plenty. 8-10 mature adults ready to go every week, in person. It is kind of unimaginable to me that we'd have someone run a game and have other players whine endlessly. If we did, well, the response is likely to be something like "That's fine, but this is what I'm running. Don't feel like you have to show up for anything you don't like." Like, currently we are kinda rotating 3/4 campaigns and I don't show up for one of 'em, because I'm not in a standard D&D playing mood, and not showing up is way more mature than showing up then shitting all over the campaign.

I know this post is maybe off-topic, but I'm just very sure that exploitable by power-gamers or not, disrespectful shitty players aren't worth playing with regardless of system. If people aren't showing up to game hoping to give everyone else there a good time, that great gaming night is just so unlikely to happen.

Quote from: NeonAce;1102754I gotta say, and this is crude and everything, but I'd rather sit alone at home and practice punching myself in the nuts every Friday than play with Darrin's players. More realistically, I'd watch YouTube & play guitar or something. I just can't spend that much of my time with people that make me unhappy and actively try to fuck with my games, etc. That's not a friend. That's some weird co-dependent bundle of assholes kind of thing. I just won't have it in my life.

Admittedly, I currently am living in a time of plenty. 8-10 mature adults ready to go every week, in person. It is kind of unimaginable to me that we'd have someone run a game and have other players whine endlessly. If we did, well, the response is likely to be something like "That's fine, but this is what I'm running. Don't feel like you have to show up for anything you don't like." Like, currently we are kinda rotating 3/4 campaigns and I don't show up for one of 'em, because I'm not in a standard D&D playing mood, and not showing up is way more mature than showing up then shitting all over the campaign.

I know this post is maybe off-topic, but I'm just very sure that exploitable by power-gamers or not, disrespectful shitty players aren't worth playing with regardless of system. If people aren't showing up to game hoping to give everyone else there a good time, that great gaming night is just so unlikely to happen.

I've become very picky with my gaming period since this and other online incidents. I only play RPGs with people I trust to treat me fairly. I've become pre-emptive about what games I attend and which players I play with now.

I haven't run a superhero game in about 4 or 5 years now. Because of the incidents that I outlined here. Even though I have people constantly requesting that I do so. My confidence to GM is sort of shot. For obvious reasons.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102753So why change the game, why not just ban specific players from using their favorite abused rules. There seems to be a lot of baby in the bathwater.

No gaming is better than bad gaming. That's what I decided with running superhero games.

I found a different outlet for my creative urges on that level. And it makes me happy in ways I can't describe.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102741You were the one who brought up0 M&M in this thread. I made no mention of it.

I went back and examined the messages of this thread thoroughly to confirm before I even wrote this message.

No, he wasn't. Here's post #8, written by you. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41096-My-shredding-of-a-pillar-of-the-Hero-System&p=1102409&viewfull=1#post1102409) First mention of both M&M and V&V in this thread. Or are you going to accuse him of hacking your account?

In your OP, you state that multipowers break the normal limitation parameters in their pricing, but . . . fail to acknowledge all of the inherent limitations. There are limitations, and they are being worked into the final cost. It's just that instead of having to work in all those highly specific limitations yourself for every single connected power(which would probably work out pretty close to the same anyway), the multipower does that for you. It's not much, but in a system that's already so complex it's nice to have a shortcut.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;1102762No, he wasn't. Here's post #8, written by you. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41096-My-shredding-of-a-pillar-of-the-Hero-System&p=1102409&viewfull=1#post1102409) First mention of both M&M and V&V in this thread. Or are you going to accuse him of hacking your account?

I stand corrected.

But it still does not excuse the outright diatribe of personal attacks he has been making toward me.

QuoteIn your OP, you state that multipowers break the normal limitation parameters in their pricing, but . . . fail to acknowledge all of the inherent limitations. There are limitations, and they are being worked into the final cost. It's just that instead of having to work in all those highly specific limitations yourself for every single connected power(which would probably work out pretty close to the same anyway), the multipower does that for you. It's not much, but in a system that's already so complex it's nice to have a shortcut.

Because I have contended from the beginning that the Multipower doesn't limit sufficiently for the benefits it gives. And I haven't changed that position.

The rules on actions already describe what a person can do with their powers. Using one power at a time. Unless they are linked.  So no, there is no limitation that the Multipower actually gives. Because it is not at all limiting.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102763Because I have contended from the beginning that the Multipower doesn't limit sufficiently for the benefits it gives. And I haven't changed that position.

irregardless of what edition  various edition piled up on it over the years, the basic concept of multi power is sound, you are setting aside X points to be able to swap powers in and out of it. There is a cost that is attached that is increased the more powers you are able to swap in and out of it.

If you think the cost is too cheap then increase the penalty i.e. cost for having slots.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;1102762No, he wasn't. Here's post #8, written by you. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41096-My-shredding-of-a-pillar-of-the-Hero-System&p=1102409&viewfull=1#post1102409) First mention of both M&M and V&V in this thread. Or are you going to accuse him of hacking your account?

Thank you. I was about to go back and quote him, but you saved me the effort. Apparently pointing out where someone is just wrong about something counts as a personal attack against them in DK's world. That he felt lying about what he'd actually written and which could be easily cross-checked was a good idea is pretty telling.

Also, good point about getting close to the same values using various flaws that essentially duplicate the multi-power restrictions on power use (ex. Can't be used in the same phase as powers A, C or D).

M&M also has a rather important restriction that changing your array is a 1/round free action. This isn't important for attacks typically, but if you're running any defenses through it you can't swith from defense to attack and back until everyone's gotten a turn to go at you with the defenses down. Similarly, if you try to run your movement through an array, you might run into issues if you have to switch types more than once in a turn (ex. Burrow to Swim to Flight).

Quote from: estar;1102765irregardless of what edition  various edition piled up on it over the years, the basic concept of multi power is sound, you are setting aside X points to be able to swap powers in and out of it. There is a cost that is attached that is increased the more powers you are able to swap in and out of it.

If you think the cost is too cheap then increase the penalty i.e. cost for having slots.

I'd prefer it be gone entirely. Because simply increasing the slot cost wouldn't change the issue. That the Multipower doesn't actually limit anything.l

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102763But it still does not excuse the outright diatribe of personal attacks he has been making toward me.

Can you quote JUST ONE personal attack against you?  

Your first post to mention Personal Attacks was #44 on this thread.  The posts that it APPEARS you are considering personal attacks boil down to: You're wrong, here's why you're wrong, and here's an example from play.  

Now, I PERSONALLY don't have a problem with personal attacks, as long as they're clever and fun.  If you say something, someone replies with evidence to the contrary, then you IGNORE them and repeat what you said, I think it is appropriate to ask if you are an idiot or similar, but I'm not even seeing that.  

So, instead of examples of bad players being bad, how about some examples of multi-power actually breaking the game?  How about some examples of these 'outright diatribe of personal attacks'?  

I'm getting the sense that you're being entirely disingenuous with this thread (but that's not a personal attack!!!).

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1102769Can you quote JUST ONE personal attack against you?  

Your first post to mention Personal Attacks was #44 on this thread.  The posts that it APPEARS you are considering personal attacks boil down to: You're wrong, here's why you're wrong, and here's an example from play.  

Now, I PERSONALLY don't have a problem with personal attacks, as long as they're clever and fun.  If you say something, someone replies with evidence to the contrary, then you IGNORE them and repeat what you said, I think it is appropriate to ask if you are an idiot or similar, but I'm not even seeing that.  

So, instead of examples of bad players being bad, how about some examples of multi-power actually breaking the game?  How about some examples of these 'outright diatribe of personal attacks'?  

I'm getting the sense that you're being entirely disingenuous with this thread (but that's not a personal attack!!!).

I only respond to people I think are worth the response. Someone gets personal, they stop being worth my time. Their arguments and the points they make become completely irrelevant. So I do my best to ignore them. Unless they make themselves an extraordinarily large pain in my ass.

And yes, calling someone a liar is a direct personal attack on that person. And I don't put up with that crap. You may. But I don't.

The Mutants & Masterminds tangent in this thread meant nothing to me. Which is why I didn't comment on it in the first place. And I shouldn't have to. I'm not the servant of anyone who randomly comes into this thread and makes a pest of themselves. I am not their's to command.

I shouldn't have to tell people to stop making the conversation personal in the first place. It's basic etiquette.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102771I only respond to people I think are worth the response. Someone gets personal, they stop being worth my time. Their arguments and the points they make become completely irrelevant. So I do my best to ignore them. Unless they make themselves an extraordinarily large pain in my ass.

And yes, calling someone a liar is a direct personal attack on that person. And I don't put up with that crap. You may. But I don't.

Translation: I got caught lying and am using the excuse that being called out on it is a personal attack to justify not having to answer completely valid arguments against my position.

Chris24601:

You made yourself and your arguments utterly irrelevant to me. Go away!

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102778Chris24601:

You made yourself and your arguments utterly irrelevant to me. Go away!

I'll try to contain my tears of bitter bitter disappoint at your opinion from someone who tried to pass off a lie about me as truth (then said "I mis-remembered" when called on it)... then laugh at your belief that screaming "Go away!" works here like it does for Mods at the Big Purple.

I brought up why the multi-power mechanic exists and where its useful, how M&M is not based on the same pricing assumptions as HERO (therefore calling it afflicted by multi-powers was inaccurate, how ICONS/FATE is definitively not to my taste and clarified points of M&M design for others and why we weren't discussing things in M&M as much as in HERO.

These are the "personal attacks" you accused me of in the post where you tried to falsely claim I was the one who brought up M&M and were personally attacking you... and you wonder why I would presume your primary basis for the claims of personal attacks was basically that you were losing so badly you needed to change the topic?

You've yet to make a single valid argument for removing multi-powers beyond, "I don't like them because some people I didn't like gaming with used them" and "a borderline (at best) storygame doesn't need things like actual defined mechanics so there's no reason for games that employ defined mechanics as a selling point to need them too."

But I suppose I am at fault though for presuming malice on your part when rank ignorance, lack of imagination to think of multi-powers are only good for changing out damage types on an energy blast so could be replaced entirely with variable advantage, and a general inability to remember what you actually wrote two days ago.

For that, I do apologize.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102686* A Supporting Character Pile-up is where the rolls the GM is supposed to be making for every session regarding those DNPCs/Hunteds indicated that multiple of each should be coming into play in the same session. The problem being that you either use them as rolled, which can completely derail the entire session with unrelated elements, or (which I think many players kinda bank on) you ignore them because they're too much of a hassle and let the PCs clever enough to put most of their flaws into those sort of categories have free build points relative to the other players (who took more physical flaws that actually impact them without derailing whole sessions) without having to pay for them.

I handled this in Hero by not letting the players pick the Hunted details.  They set up the disadvantage the way they want (within the campaign limits, if any).  Then I pick the Hunted.  Usually, multiple characters end up Hunted by the same individual or organization, within whatever limits I want to manage.  I'd do something similar with DNPCs, but not that extreme--they'd pick the dependent, but I'd weave the various dependents into the campaign in such a way that they aren't all one-off characters.  Makes the game a little more soap-opera-ish than normal, but a good trade for making Hunteds and DNPCs that I wanted to bring in a lot.  We also had an option for mystery Hunted and DNPCs.  That one was quite fun for several players.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102686Whereas our group found M&M 3e is a step down in complexity from M&M 2e and quite a few steps below HERO. It's closer during the character creation process, but falls off precipitously in actual play.

I can see that. MM3 is definitely easier in-play than Hero. We had trouble with Afflictions. We kept asking "Wait, what does Hindered do again?" and "What does 2nd degree X and Y do?" Probably something a good GM screen and more experience with the system would solve.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102686...but just the stuff above was more than enough for the people I play with to pick M&M 3e over HERO (even 4e) every time.

I will gladly play Hero, but won't GM it. This thread has rekindled my interest in MM3.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102686I once had a fellow player try to present a PC in HERO who had five DNPCs (slightly less powerful, useful non-combat positions and skills; very frequent; 10 pt. each), five hunteds (less powerful; mildly punish; very frequent; 10 pt. each) and TEN rivals (romantic and professional; less powerful/inferior). I'm not entirely sure whether they were hoping for their 20 member supporting cast to keep the sessions always focused on their issues or if they were banking on that may rolls for involvement meaning they're de facto never going to be able to all be employed at once...

Hilarious!

And just to answer a lingering question.

No. I do not view it as honest or ethical for someone to come into a thread with the motivation of trying to attack and discredit a poster.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102825No. I do not view it as honest or ethical for someone to come into a thread with the motivation of trying to attack and discredit a poster.

I don't think DISAGREEING with someone qualifies as 'trying to attack and discredit' a poster.  Your OP indicated that you didn't think this would be a popular opinion.  I'm interested in learning what's good and what's bad in RPGs from a design point of view.  There have been some excellent posts in favor of multi-power costing.  It's your thread and if you only want posts from like-minded people, I think you could be more explicit.  But if you're going to 'shred' a pillar of the game design, I think you should do that.  Is it good or is it bad?  From this thread the only thing I've learned is that it IS GOOD, but you don't like the people who have used it.  

Like, maybe you're RIGHT, but the only thing I think I've learned is that you're bad at identifying cause from effect.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1102797I handled this in Hero by not letting the players pick the Hunted details.  They set up the disadvantage the way they want (within the campaign limits, if any).  Then I pick the Hunted.  Usually, multiple characters end up Hunted by the same individual or organization, within whatever limits I want to manage.  I'd do something similar with DNPCs, but not that extreme--they'd pick the dependent, but I'd weave the various dependents into the campaign in such a way that they aren't all one-off characters.  Makes the game a little more soap-opera-ish than normal, but a good trade for making Hunteds and DNPCs that I wanted to bring in a lot.  We also had an option for mystery Hunted and DNPCs.  That one was quite fun for several players.

This is basically how it was generally handled in most games I was involved in. The frequency/power level helped to guide the GM as to which individuals / groups to use. The roll was not so much a random thing, as how likely they were likely to be encountered. 8- was possibly limited geographically, or simply a small group not frequently encountered. Now of the player group happened to settle down in the area where the hunted group happened to be based, well then that 8- might end up showing up every session until the player group moved on to a new area. I'm pretty sure some editions explicitly stated the roll (8-, 11-, 14-) was just to give the GM an idea on the frequency of appearance, not a GM must literally roll each session.

Somebody dumb enough to take hunted, powerful, 14- was likely wanted by the kings personal guard or something similar which would make any adventuring in civilized lands, exciting. :eek:

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1102469Fuck me! How many pages? How many of the text could be shaved of without losing the essence? Yeah, that's so not for me! I'll stay with older Champions versions, the ones with the rules in it.

Well, that has been done if you buy Champions Complete which comes in at a mere 242 pages. If you add all the splat books how big would Pathfinder be with all character options? Over 500 pounds at least...

I mentioned earlier in the thread that there were two players who caused my last Champions game to detonate. But I only gave any detail on one of them. But the other one? just as bad.

He made a character who was a non-entity. No memory, no social connections. Nothing. The character was a big list of powers and stats. But was pretty much braindead.

He used this as an excuse not to engage with the world. He expected the GMs to hand everything to him. He wanted a sandbox to play in. But wouldn't read anything that was made to try and give the campaign a sense of being a living world. Claimed it would all be player knowledge. But the stuff created? It was what people would learn if they paid attention to the media at all. News stories, profiles on important figures, the current political climate. You know. Basic aspects of living in that world.

I mentioned a wiki I worked on every night. Something set up by one of the GMs to keep track of campaign information and world details. It was linked to the campaign's homepage. It's something nobody should have missed. And was expected reading for everybody in the campaign.The wiki software would automatically send the latest entries to all of the e-mail of all the campaign's participants. So there is no way, and no excuse for anyone missing those updates.

But those two players? They didn't care. They ignored the wiki entirely. Remained deliberately ignorant of all of it. And would act extremely dumfounded if anything from it would come up in play. They just didn't care and they really didn't try to really be a part of the campaign.

The thing that still galls me the most about this entire situation? Mr. Non-Entity's player had the nerve to throw a fit at the GMs for shutting the game down. A game he didn't care one thing about in the first place.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102757I've become very picky with my gaming period since this and other online incidents. I only play RPGs with people I trust to treat me fairly. I've become pre-emptive about what games I attend and which players I play with now.

I haven't run a superhero game in about 4 or 5 years now. Because of the incidents that I outlined here. Even though I have people constantly requesting that I do so. My confidence to GM is sort of shot. For obvious reasons.

Just realize a couple of things... The pickier you are the fewer games you will play/run and the greater the frustration will be when players don't toe your line of proper character building or heroic play. Sounds to me like you've gotten extremely worked up about something you should just walk away from if it can't be handled in game. I think it was a grognard that said no gaming is better than bad gaming. Sounds like your nerves could use a rest from something that causes you so much distress. I am a long time Hero player, and the problems you describe aren't really a problem for us, but we highly stress character concept, and the gm always has the right to change or deny character builds. It happens almost never. Your problem are people problems, not system problems.

Darrin, I think this topic would have served you better as a catharsis about problem players than problem subsystems. :)

It seems like you are still chapped raw by insensitive players crapping on your labor of love. And, instead of having a shared grouse here, you are sublimating your desire for validation into a critique of a subsystem that you feel is the vector of abuse. (It may or may not be, as I don't know -- or care -- enough about HERO to woory these details.) However, you are already succeeding by turning your passion into a commercial success, something most of us here could only dream of about our GM notes. :)

So the big question I have is "Why are you seeking validation about this subject here, when you already succeeded in turning your passion into $, and your real pain seems to be more a keening wail about callous and unengaged players?" :o

There is a noticeable disconnect between your argument and your recounting, as that social issue seems to repeatedly bubble up. You may be too raw to do much else right now than purgate frustration on the social topic and hopefully receive commiseration. :)

Pick your battles: even if this is the Mos Eisley plus Thunderdome, we here are happy warriors who love a good bloodening, but you have to be aligned "mind & body" to also take a beatening! :D Maybe you need a drink at a bar with some of us 'rough-crowd' commisserating more than a spar in the ring. :)

Honestly I feel that Hero has 99 problems but multipower ain't one.

The main conceptual problem with Hero is that simply having point economy seems as though it should result in a tight, balanced game, when in actual fact any balance is entirely up to the GM - if he is up to the task.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102846I mentioned earlier in the thread that there were two players who caused my last Champions game to detonate. But I only gave any detail on one of them. But the other one? just as bad.

He made a character who was a non-entity. No memory, no social connections. Nothing. The character was a big list of powers and stats. But was pretty much braindead.

I love the Tick!!!!

I disagree with the premise of the OP post aboult Multipower. If anything that hampers Champions it's the complexity and crunch. With Hero Games essentially quadrupling down on both with 6E. Already fans were not to willing to buy a big book that can stop bullets. Let s make two of them. While somehow both the Hero devs and the fans that want nothing change thought that full color and better production values with little change would bring in a hoard of new and ex-HS fans back.

Quote from: sureshot;1102898I disagree with the premise of the OP post aboult Multipower. If anything that hampers Champions it's the complexity and crunch. With Hero Games essentially quadrupling down on both with 6E. Already fans were not to willing to buy a big book that can stop bullets. Let s make two of them. While somehow both the Hero devs and the fans that want nothing change thought that full color and better production values with little change would bring in a hoard of new and ex-HS fans back.

   It may be a mistake similar to that which D&D made with 4th Edition--the previous edition (3E D&D in 2000, 5E Hero in 2002) had been more successful than expected, so they thought that continuing in that direction and trying to address perceived problems with the system would continue the trend, without taking into account shifts in the market. 6E further suffered from being a year late, very expensive to buy into, and spending most of its support material compiling and representing material hardcore fans already had.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1102900It may be a mistake similar to that which D&D made with 4th Edition--the previous edition (3E D&D in 2000, 5E Hero in 2002) had been more successful than expected, so they thought that continuing in that direction and trying to address perceived problems with the system would continue the trend, without taking into account shifts in the market. 6E further suffered from being a year late, very expensive to buy into, and spending most of its support material compiling and representing material hardcore fans already had.

Completely agree. Even in 2002 the trend was in my personal opinion to go towards more rules light and less crunch. I kind of understand them still thinking that keeping the status quo was a good thing as Savage worlds 1E was released a year later. For 6E which was released in 2008 it seems they and the hardcore fans of the Hero System willingly and purposefully naively thought nothing had changed in terms of the fans wanting rules light and less complex. Those same hardcore fans solutions is to once again not change anything yet expect a massive resurgence in the rpg. I can respect that yet at the same time whatever good drugs your taking I want some because that reality exists only in pipe dreams imo.

They try and point to Pathfinder as being as complex it has complexity yet nowhere near as much. Want a Fighter for example the class is pretty much pre-made with having to do less choices in what one has to take. Unlike HS where everything has to be built from the ground up. For me it is the complexity is more keep track of the damn modifiers in combat. In any case the will spend the money in complexity to a certain extent yet not the kind found in the HS or Gurps 4E. Every time one tries to say make major changes to both one dies get shot down. So I stopped caring. Want to complain that no one plays either rpg and that the rpgs one likes are becoming a niche within a niche hobby. Well put up with it because as long as one insists on no major changes that is what Gurps ansd HS will remain. An ever increasingly smaller niche with a niche rpg market.

If the changes are significant enough many would be willing to buy the new material a second time at least if the setting information receives major changes. As well do not underestimate the overall general laziness of the average player and GM. I could have continued playing with my 3E FR books with Pathfinder 1E. I just was not willing to put the time and energy to do so and switched over to Golarion. With 6E the changes were just not that significant or major enough to warrant buying the same 5E books just re-released in color and better production values. Hero Games taking years to get POD of the ground also did not help either. Gamers wo want print were not going to buy volume 1 of 6E in PDf while buying 6E volume 2 in print.

In any case just weird seeing how Hero Games and to a certain extent SJGames kind of were oblivious to the changes in the market and the fanbase as a whole.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102860Darrin, I think this topic would have served you better as a catharsis about problem players than problem subsystems. :)

Well it started out that way. But drifted into the topic of what happened with my old group.

I've actually had the Multipower argument with its creator in another forum on multiple occasions. And got him to admit to its flaws. I just would like to see that particular tumor finally excised. Which would simplify things with that particular game system massively.

QuoteIt seems like you are still chapped raw by insensitive players crapping on your labor of love. And, instead of having a shared grouse here, you are sublimating your desire for validation into a critique of a subsystem that you feel is the vector of abuse. (It may or may not be, as I don't know -- or care -- enough about HERO to woory these details.) However, you are already succeeding by turning your passion into a commercial success, something most of us here could only dream of about our GM notes. :)

it's hard work to build what I did. I wasn't looking to have them say "oh this is a work of genius". I was looking for the most basic appreciation of my hard work in getting the campaign together in the first place. Instead? I got a couple of players who just didn't give a shit about anything.

QuoteSo the big question I have is "Why are you seeking validation about this subject here, when you already succeeded in turning your passion into $, and your real pain seems to be more a keening wail about callous and unengaged players?" :o

Unexpressed frustration internalized turns into an ugly, persistent mess. I think venting it and getting some feedback is the only healthy way of dealing with it.

QuoteThere is a noticeable disconnect between your argument and your recounting, as that social issue seems to repeatedly bubble up. You may be too raw to do much else right now than purgate frustration on the social topic and hopefully receive commiseration. :)

they are really two separate issues. Both which have caused considerable frustration for me.

My writing was really a response to my being continually unsatisfied with the experiences and feedback toward my creative endeavors in the gaming environment.

QuotePick your battles: even if this is the Mos Eisley plus Thunderdome, we here are happy warriors who love a good bloodening, but you have to be aligned "mind & body" to also take a beatening! :D Maybe you need a drink at a bar with some of us 'rough-crowd' commisserating more than a spar in the ring. :)

As for this forum. I prefer a more honest crowd than I would get over at TBP. Even if I get some responses I don't like. I at least feel that I am largely being treated fairly by the forum's population and management.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1102894I love the Tick!!!!

So do I.

But a character like him doesn't work in a highly interactive game group environment.

Quote from: sureshot;1102898I disagree with the premise of the OP post aboult Multipower. If anything that hampers Champions it's the complexity and crunch. With Hero Games essentially quadrupling down on both with 6E. Already fans were not to willing to buy a big book that can stop bullets. Let s make two of them. While somehow both the Hero devs and the fans that want nothing change thought that full color and better production values with little change would bring in a hoard of new and ex-HS fans back.

The complexity and crunch are made worse by the presence of the Multipower and Variable Power Pool. But they are not the only factors.

One of the other big ones was the direction development took with 5th Edition and beyond. The trend toward adding more complication to character builds didn't do the game any favors.

I'm not a fan of what Steve Long brought to the Hero System. In fact, I view it as being entirely negative.

The original Hero Games authors and originally rejected Steve Long's Hero System 5th Edition as being the wrong direction they wanted the Hero System to go. And I agreed with them. Additional complexity was the opposite direction from mass appeal.

Well, soon we'll be able to see Ron Edwards' take on 3e. No idea what he's doing with multipower.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102917The original Hero Games authors and originally rejected Steve Long's Hero System 5th Edition as being the wrong direction they wanted the Hero System to go. And I agreed with them. Additional complexity was the opposite direction from mass appeal.

What changed so that the manuscript was accepted? Just curious as the original HG devs worries unfortunately proved to be correct. With 6E it just seems that the devs were only focused on selling to the HG fabanse and no one else. It should be interesting to see if Ron Edwards take on 3E will do well. It might be too little too late or I could be completely and hopefully wrong and it sells well.

Well then, Darrin, it sounds like you are doing your happy purge and catharsis by rumbling right here in Mos Eisley. ;) Sometimes a good pisstake and a brawl takes the vinegar out and sterilizes the heartache. Carry on! :D

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102749That's not even close to an accurate assessment of the situation.

I think it is kind of accurate. You've spent far more words on your trials and tribulations with your players than you have providing any examples of how or why multipower is broken* (as opposed to something you just don't like) and how it is far more powerful and game breaking than the equivalent number of points spent on one power.



* Your initial point that the rules say to use the most expensive way of getting a power and multipower is cheaper than another more expensive way of getting the same power sounds like it is technically correct, but it begs the question of whether using multipower as described in the RAW results in a game breaking hero.

Quote from: sureshot;1102932What changed so that the manuscript was accepted? Just curious as the original HG devs worries unfortunately proved to be correct. With 6E it just seems that the devs were only focused on selling to the HG fabanse and no one else. It should be interesting to see if Ron Edwards take on 3E will do well. It might be too little too late or I could be completely and hopefully wrong and it sells well.

Steve Long and his partners bought out the company. Otherwise, the 5th Edition and beyond would have never seen print.

Steve Long is a rules lawyer that really was a literal lawyer.

They didn't appeal to the old fanbase. They appealed to just a hardcore fraction of it. Most of the 4th Edition fanbase got tired of the additional complication and went to look for other outlets. And eventually, Mutants & Masterminds became the bastion for that disaffected audience.

Steve Kenson originally developed Freedom City as a campaign book for Champions. When he got the chance to design his own game, he lept on it and took Freedom City with him.

What you don't know is that I was the initial spark that started the whole Fuzion debacle. I sent in a lot of information and research notes on the Hero System to Steve Peterson. And well, he took those ideas and went a direction I certainly wouldn't have.

My original suggestions were a total strip down and rebuilding of the system from the ground up. A re-evaluation of every element. While keeping a strong eye on making the system as simple and friendly as possible for new gamers. A sort of what was best about the 1st through 3rd Editions. But with very heavy refinement.

The first games for Fuzion were printed before the system itself was even half-written. Which led to catastrophe. There was no development. No research. No playtest. Just a rush to a quick buck.

Steve Long and his group have done their best to erase Fuzion from existence. And those who participated it in. I have an editorial credit in what eventually became the official powers plug-in Hero Games adopted.

As for Ron Edwards? He needs all the luck he can get in dealing with that crew of ruthless ravening grognards.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1102934Well then, Darrin, it sounds like you are doing your happy purge and catharsis by rumbling right here in Mos Eisley. ;) Sometimes a good pisstake and a brawl takes the vinegar out and sterilizes the heartache. Carry on! :D

About that past campaign? I feel a huge weight has been lifted off my chest. Just by expressing myself here.

Quote from: Bren;1102935I think it is kind of accurate. You've spent far more words on your trials and tribulations with your players than you have providing any examples of how or why multipower is broken* (as opposed to something you just don't like) and how it is far more powerful and game breaking than the equivalent number of points spent on one power.



* Your initial point that the rules say to use the most expensive way of getting a power and multipower is cheaper than another more expensive way of getting the same power sounds like it is technically correct, but it begs the question of whether using multipower as described in the RAW results in a game breaking hero.

Because a Multipower allows getting a chain of multiple powers strung together for a huge, unjustifiable discount.

I have said this multiple times. Not being able to use all of those powers at once is not limiting. It's trying to double-dip on rules that are already there guiding actions. It's a direct contradiction of some of the game's most basic defining elements.

Using a Multipower gives extra points that the player has no justification for having. Which are used on most occasions to increase the power level of the resulting character in a way that is completely unfair.

This results in characters of wildly disparate power levels. While the system has no consistent way to actually track those power levels.

The impact of this is felt by the GM when trying to build NPCs that can actually challenge the PC group. Finding that the power levels of each PC vary so wildly makes the process of building those NPCs unnecessarily difficult. Again. It opens up an arms race. Which the GM is always forced to play catch-up to.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102949Because a Multipower allows getting a chain of multiple powers strung together for a huge, unjustifiable discount.

You keep saying that this is true, not showing that it is true.

QuoteIt's a direct contradiction of some of the game's most basic defining elements.

It's a rule in the rules, right? So how (other than philosophical wankery) can it be a contradiction of the rules?

QuoteUsing a Multipower gives extra points that the player has no justification for having.

The power as it is listed in the rules is the justification. Just like any other element that provides extra points in the rules is justified by being in the rules. To show that it shouldn't be in the rules you have to show (not just say) that it is grossly unbalanced or game breaking.

QuoteWhich are used on most occasions to increase the power level of the resulting character in a way that is completely unfair.

How is it unfair?

QuoteThis results in characters of wildly disparate power levels. While the system has no consistent way to actually track those power levels.

Lots of builds in any point system will result in disparate power levels. We've already seen an example (by a previous poster) of three characters with the same build points who have wildly disparate powers.

Spoiler

Quote from: jhkim;1102486Regarding the Multipower issue - going back to my example of Captain Powerful vs Captain Flexible. They all spend the same points on their attacks.

Captain Powerful has one powerful attack - a 15d6 force blast.

Captain Flexible A (multipower) has five different moderate attacks: a 10d6 force blast, a 5d6 entangle, etc.

Captain Flexible B (no multipower) has five different very weak attacks: a 3d6 force blast, a 1.5d6 entangle, etc.


You're correct that multipower makes Captain Flexible A much more effective than Captain Flexible B. Your claim, as I understand it, is that this is cheating and makes Captain Flexible A too powerful. But I think that Captain Flexible A is actually reasonable balanced with Captain Powerful. The problem isn't that Captain Flexible A is too powerful. It's that Captain Flexible B is too weak. I do have a bunch of issues with the Hero System - I'm not defending it blindly. But on the issue of Multipower, I think it fills a useful purpose.

The outlier is NOT Captain Flexible A who uses multipower. The outlier is one or more of the two characters who don't use multipower. Either Captain Powerful is way too powerful or Captain Flexible B is way too weak. In contrast to those two, Captain Flexible A seems, like Mother Bear's soup and bed, to be just right.

QuoteThe impact of this is felt by the GM when trying to build NPCs that can actually challenge the PC group. Finding that the power levels of each PC vary so wildly makes the process of building those NPCs unnecessarily difficult. Again. It opens up an arms race. Which the GM is always forced to play catch-up to.

The arms race would seem to far more likely be a result of the players or possibly the GM who start and maintain the arms race, not a result of the system.

Quote from: Chris24601;1102651Yeah, my point is mainly that one person's "super-powered bully" is another's superhero... See people who think Deadpool is a superhero and not a villain protagonist... or people who think Carol Danvers is a superhero and not a fascist supervillain.

None of these are problems caused by the existence of Multi-powers.

Honestly, I wouldn't even BE in this discussion if not for the fact that DK insisted on dragging in M&M's use of arrays under the same umbrella even though M&M absolutely does NOT share HERO System's "must use the most expensive method possible" pretense to hang the argument for why Multi-powers go against the spirit of the game on.


M&M instead says "use the least expensive means you can find to emulate the powers you want and arrays are a standard way to set up having multiple different attack types." It even adds in that you might not even need to pay points for some of them at all (as in 0 PP) simply because really rarely used ones can instead just be acquired using the power stunting system in the game.

Use the most expensive way is a guideline presented as a means to avoid or notice over optimizing not some core of the rules, its advice. Multipowers serve function, are part of the rules and are something hundreds of players have used for decades with no trouble what so ever. And people that didn't care from them removed them. One thing Hero System has going for it is that its very modular. But for whatever reason, DK can't seem to that or just use another system (he seems to have one he likes better?).

QuoteBitching that M&M's arrays are breaking the rules is like claiming D&D's magic system being Vancian is breaking the rules when both are part of the foundations of their power/magic systems.

Precisely, he really seems to just want the attention more than anything else. Hell, HS isn't even a big name dominate system anymore so I don't know what DK thinks he's fighting or Championing (Pun intended) intended at this point. I'm kind of surprised this thread drew as much attention as it did. The rpgsite doesn't seem to be a secret haven of Champions fans.What's the point of beating this drum here and now?

I didn't mean to come across as pissed or disagreeing with you. Blame frustration with Darrin Kelly boiling over after seeing this same damn thread from him for umpteenth time over the years spilling over. I actually largely agree with you. I don't know if it some obsessive Troll thing with him or some bottomless hunger for martyrdom and/or attention, but this is one of DK's pillar issues and has been since he was on the Hero System boards and seem pissed off because everyone would clap him on the back for ranting about how they're game sucked as some kind of evil Munchkin Maker (because he said so),  that turned out to look more like he was playing with incompatible (I guess, they're not here to defend themselves...) and to have some very narrow minded notions of the RIGHT way to play (Not just supers but allot of things). All these threads, most of his threads go the same damn way. Has he started going off about the 'bullies trying to silence him" and how they will never win!" like he's some kind of persecuted activist yet?

Really strange, sad dude, but then again I'm a dumb ass for coming into another his threads knowing full well what I was going to get so I can't blame anyone but myself and morbid curiosity.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1102946They didn't appeal to the old fanbase. They appealed to just a hardcore fraction of it. Most of the 4th Edition fanbase got tired of the additional complication and went to look for other outlets. And eventually, Mutants & Masterminds became the bastion for that disaffected audience.

Other than page count 4E and 5E are quite similar in actual play. The rules didn't really change that much, but the explanation of the rules was much denser. It is true that DoJ did not make any appeal to the players who did not like the changes that came with 4E.


Without gettig into 'what 6E did wrong" I think 5E had several major things going for it, that 6E didn't have.

1) 5E wasn't a major change from the previous edition which had been relatively successful, so while it didn't win back the fans who preferred 3E, it also didn't alienate the fairly large existing 4E fan base.

2) HERO had been essentially dead (Cybergames wasn't interested in the table top form of the game) for several years when 5E came along. 5E benefited from pent up demand and fans happy to see the game moving forward again. There was also much excitement in the early days of 5E which allowed many to overlook particular bits that they did not particularly like.

3) The HERO boards were focused on 5E, but discussion of 3E and 4E were fairly broadly allowed and encouraged (to a point, DoJ never did handle criticism all that well). There was no expectation that Darren Watts or Steve Long (the new owners) could definitively answer questions on prior editions since they didn't write them, so their choosing not to wasn't really seen as "taking sides".

4) The 5E supplements were generally quite good, and there were many written which did not duplicate any existing HERO material. This made a lot of 5E material useful for any HERO player regardless of their preferred edition (more potential sales).


1) 6E by comparison immediately split the fan base, and it was a messy split, not simply a 5E/6E split. You had fans satisfied with 5E, fans who thought 6E was the greatest thing since sliced bread, fans who thought 6E went too far / too little and fans who were immediately clamoring for 7E because change was critical to the survival of the game and 6E completely missed the mark.

2) Critically 6E entered a market flooded with 5E material, so little need, and less good will from the fans overlooking their dissatisfaction with the direction 6E went (whether they preferred 5E, or just felt 6E didn't address the right issues).

3) While there was no official ban on 5E discussion, Steve Long refused to answer questions based in 5E, and there was a general chilling to 5E discussion and towards its fans on the official forum.

4) There was little new material unique to the 6E because the 5E stuff was largely compatible and they revisited existing material to support the hordes of new fans, largely ignoring the existing fans that had followed the change. 6E also dashed the hopes for several supplements people were expecting to come along when the 6E do over occurred. Supplements many 5E (and earlier) players may have bought.

Quote from: CarlD.;1102959Hell, HS isn't even a big name dominate system anymore so I don't know what DK thinks he's fighting or Championing (Pun intended) intended at this point. I'm kind of surprised this thread drew as much attention as it did. The rpgsite doesn't seem to be a secret haven of Champions fans.What's the point of beating this drum here and now?

HERO isn't all that visible because there is virtually no support for it. The game itself still has a lot of fans which becomes apparent when there is an actual HERO thread to discuss.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102969Other than page count 4E and 5E are quite similar in actual play. The rules didn't really change that much, but the explanation of the rules was much denser. It is true that DoJ did not make any appeal to the players who did not like the changes that came with 4E.


Without gettig into 'what 6E did wrong" I think 5E had several major things going for it, that 6E didn't have.

1) 5E wasn't a major change from the previous edition which had been relatively successful, so while it didn't win back the fans who preferred 3E, it also didn't alienate the fairly large existing 4E fan base.

2) HERO had been essentially dead (Cybergames wasn't interested in the table top form of the game) for several years when 5E came along. 5E benefited from pent up demand and fans happy to see the game moving forward again. There was also much excitement in the early days of 5E which allowed many to overlook particular bits that they did not particularly like.

3) The HERO boards were focused on 5E, but discussion of 3E and 4E were fairly broadly allowed and encouraged (to a point, DoJ never did handle criticism all that well). There was no expectation that Darren Watts or Steve Long (the new owners) could definitively answer questions on prior editions since they didn't write them, so their choosing not to wasn't really seen as "taking sides".

4) The 5E supplements were generally quite good, and there were many written which did not duplicate any existing HERO material. This made a lot of 5E material useful for any HERO player regardless of their preferred edition (more potential sales).


1) 6E by comparison immediately split the fan base, and it was a messy split, not simply a 5E/6E split. You had fans satisfied with 5E, fans who thought 6E was the greatest thing since sliced bread, fans who thought 6E went too far / too little and fans who were immediately clamoring for 7E because change was critical to the survival of the game and 6E completely missed the mark.

2) Critically 6E entered a market flooded with 5E material, so little need, and less good will from the fans overlooking their dissatisfaction with the direction 6E went (whether they preferred 5E, or just felt 6E didn't address the right issues).

3) While there was no official ban on 5E discussion, Steve Long refused to answer questions based in 5E, and there was a general chilling to 5E discussion and towards its fans on the official forum.

4) There was little new material unique to the 6E because the 5E stuff was largely compatible and they revisited existing material to support the hordes of new fans, largely ignoring the existing fans that had followed the change. 6E also dashed the hopes for several supplements people were expecting to come along when the 6E do over occurred. Supplements many 5E (and earlier) players may have bought.

I think the switch 6E ed was just generally flummoxed, in part by the big middle finger they gave to 5th Ed fans that didn't go along with Steve Long's Hero being the greatest thing ever (or at least that's what it felt like particularly on the boards). I didn't like some of the changes either which tended to make you more or less a heretic so I kind of drifted away from the general fandom.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1102972HERO isn't all that visible because there is virtually no support for it. The game itself still has a lot of fans which becomes apparent when there is an actual HERO thread to discuss.

Which still leaves me to wonder what crawled up Kelly's ass and died about Hero System that he feels the need to keep resurrecting his haet that no no limit even, years, approaching decades later. Its like he won't rest until he has the joy of preaching to choir instead of a half empty church. All the major Hero Haters that I can recall off hand have moved on, maybe very occasionally resurfacing to drop tightly coiled steaming piles of wisdom in Hero System positive threads. But to roll out this tired shtick and repeat the same lines once again...?

Quote from: CarlD.;1102985I think the switch 6E ed was just generally flummoxed, in part by the big middle finger they gave to 5th Ed fan that didn't go along with Steve Long's Hero being the greatest thing ever (or at least that's what it felt like particularly on the boards). I didn't like some of the changes either which tended to make you more or less a heretic so I kind of drifted away from the general fandom.

I agree, I had a similar reaction, except once I got away from the HERO boards I found there were quite a few others who didn't care for 6E.

Quote from: CarlD.;1102985Which still leaves me to wonder what crawled up Kelly's ass and died about Hero System that he feels the need to keep resurrecting his haet that no no limit even, years, approaching decades later. Its like he won't rest until he has the joy of preaching to choir instead of a half empty church. All the major Hero Haters that I can recall off hand have moved on, maybe very occasionally resurfacing to drop tightly coiled steaming piles of wisdom in Hero System positive threads. But to roll out this tired shtick and repeat the same lines once again...?

I'm not clear on the premise of the thread either, simply was responding to the surprise that a HERO thread could generate 16 pages of discussion. I kind of feel like the 6E civil war caused some to go underground. It seems there is still a fairly sizable fan base but they don't talk about it much. A game like HERO appeals most strongly to those who want to do it all themselves. I think GURPS has a similar issue, it also seems to be more popular than the fairly small online footprint would suggest.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1103001I agree, I had a similar reaction, except once I got away from the HERO boards I found there were quite a few others who didn't care for 6E.




I'm not clear on the premise of the thread either, simply was responding to the surprise that a HERO thread could generate 16 pages of discussion. I kind of feel like the 6E civil war caused some to go underground. It seems there is still a fairly sizable fan base but they don't talk about it much. A game like HERO appeals most strongly to those who want to do it all themselves. I think GURPS has a similar issue, it also seems to be more popular than the fairly small online footprint would suggest.

It is good to hear that there's still a fair chunk of Hero gamers out there. I hold the somewhat romantic idea that if people are still playing a game and enjoying themselves its not 'dead'. I still see occasional Hero System driven 3rd party products pop up on Drivethru and such.

I'm fed up with explaining my position over and over again. I'm not doing it anymore.

I'm nobody's servant. And I won't be subjected to that type of interrogation tactic. It's bullshit.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103049I'm fed up with explaining my position over and over again. I'm not doing it anymore.

I'm nobody's servant. And I won't be subjected to that type of interrogation tactic. It's bullshit.

How dare people disagree with you! THOSE BASTARDS!

Why don't they just kill Kenny and have done!?

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103049I'm fed up with explaining my position over and over again. I'm not doing it anymore.

Why do you keep making promises that you know you want keep?

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103049I'm fed up with explaining my position over and over again. I'm not doing it anymore.

Did you ever stop to think that if lots of people are saying you aren't making a clear argument, that the problem isn't with them, but with the clarity of your argument?

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1103050How dare people disagree with you! THOSE BASTARDS!

Why don't they just kill Kenny and have done!?

It's not disagreement I object to. It's interrogation tactics. Trying to force someone to answer the same question over and over. Hoping they will crack.

That's torture. And I won't put up with it.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103058It's not disagreement I object to. It's interrogation tactics. Trying to force someone to answer the same question over and over. Hoping they will crack.

That's torture. And I won't put up with it.

No. You're apparently bad with definitions.

Even IF I were to concede that they are interrogating you (which would be a big stretch to call just questions an interrogation), interrogation /= torture inherently. No one is pulling your fingernails out or stabbing you with hot metal. No one is even keeping you from sleeping with metal music. It's not torture.

So - I'll just sit back and laugh at your ridiculous hyperbole. Lol

Quote from: CarlD.;1103029It is good to hear that there's still a fair chunk of Hero gamers out there. I hold the somewhat romantic idea that if people are still playing a game and enjoying themselves its not 'dead'. I still see occasional Hero System driven 3rd party products pop up on Drivethru and such.

I play 6E every weekend. There are things I'd change about the system, but the group likes it and everyone has fun, so it doesn't matter.

6E is my favorite Hero edition. I like the elimination of the figured characteristics and elemental controls. I stopped playing the game around 87, and 6E brought me back. That and Hero Builder. It's a lot of fun just making characters with HB.

If we were really going to interrogate Darrin it would sound something like this...

[video=youtube;rVLDJHMGcQ8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVLDJHMGcQ8[/youtube]

(If you are impatient, start about 1 minute in and pay particular attention around 2:15 onwards.)

...Now! Sign ze papers Old Man.

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1103060No. You're apparently bad with definitions.

Even IF I were to concede that they are interrogating you (which would be a big stretch to call just questions an interrogation), interrogation /= torture inherently. No one is pulling your fingernails out or stabbing you with hot metal. No one is even keeping you from sleeping with metal music. It's not torture.

So - I'll just sit back and laugh at your ridiculous hyperbole. Lol

Huh, torture. I think that's a new one.

Quote from: Aglondir;1103071I play 6E every weekend. There are things I'd change about the system, but the group likes it and everyone has fun, so it doesn't matter.

6E is my favorite Hero edition. I like the elimination of the figured characteristics and elemental controls. I stopped playing the game around 87, and 6E brought me back. That and Hero Builder. It's a lot of fun just making characters with HB.

Good to hear :)

What a strange thread. Have to agree with a previous poster that the problem doesn't seem to be with Multipower, it's potentially with one or more of the players. (Or the GM.)

But going back to Multipower itself, you could argue against a slew of powers. Not the least Duplication & Multiform. My guess is the players are all (nearly all) OIF addicts too. (Does 6th have Focuses? Can't remember.)

The Hero System is arguably one of the worst to use if there's a problem player. Why not use something simpler for a "Who's the dick?" test? Diagnose it at the simplest level and more forward from there. If I was a (ex?)traumatized GM, I sure as Hell wouldn't start back up with trying to run HS. (Unless it was potentially with a rock-solid group.)

Why was this thread started with two warnings and then a claim of being tortured when things got hot? Seems kind of passive-aggressive.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1103001I agree, I had a similar reaction, except once I got away from the HERO boards I found there were quite a few others who didn't care for 6E.

I don't and use my mighty black book of bullet shielding whenever I run a superhero campaign.

Some much for the OP objectivity and more importantly sincerity in wanting to actually have a discussion. Already the initial post came off as not really wanting to hear anything but a validation echo chamber style thread. Now acting like it is some kind of torture to actually prove his point is the op just reinforcing that at least to myself.

No one is saying that no one plays 6E. To the amount that is required for HG as a company remain profitable not enough imo. Hero Games wanted to cater to only a those that wanted nothing at all to change and it end up killing the company. Many were not interested in the same crunchiness and complexity of 5E with a few house rules added in. Or to put it anther way they wanted more than just a Pathfinder version for the HS. Releasing the same older 5E material over again even if let's be honest that was kind of given kind of both angered and alienated fans. The market and tastes of many gamers has changed since 5E was released and that was ignored by HG and the fans that want nothing to change.


SJG and Gurps would be in the same situation if they did not have Munchkin and other IPs to fall back on so they were able to mitigate would has almost killed of Hero Games

There is a difference between a discussion and someone using interrogation techniques. I feel that completely undermines any polite atmosphere.

Does someone want to continue the discussion? I'm open to that. But I have already presented my case several times. I don't feel should have to any further. I've reached the end of my tolerance for dealing with people who are acting in bad faith.

So Darrin, in your opinion, Multi-power is too good for what it does because, with it, it makes characters that are more powerful than their point values suggest, correct?  Also, IIRC, you mentioned that changing the pricing structure of the Multi-power won't change the fundamental issue that you've presented, which is that the more effects a character has in their multi-power, the more bang they're getting for their buck when compared to other characters who are not built with a Multi-power.

As a possible fix to this, IIRC, you've suggested using the Variable Advantage or Variable Effect instead.  Variable Advantage could cover an array of attacks, for example, and Variable Effect could cover powers that affect multiple traits that fall under a specific theme at once.

In your opinion, do you think that any other use of a Multi-power other than those that can be covered by Variable Advantage, Variable Effect, and Variable Special Effect is simply a player trying to exploit the system, irrespective of character concept?

As a side-note, how do you feel about Variable Power Pools?

Quote from: ronwisegamgee;1103170So Darrin, in your opinion, Multi-power is too good for what it does because, with it, it makes characters that are more powerful than their point values suggest, correct?  Also, IIRC, you mentioned that changing the pricing structure of the Multi-power won't change the fundamental issue that you've presented, which is that the more effects a character has in their multi-power, the more bang they're getting for their buck when compared to other characters who are not built with a Multi-power.

As a possible fix to this, IIRC, you've suggested using the Variable Advantage or Variable Effect instead.  Variable Advantage could cover an array of attacks, for example, and Variable Effect could cover powers that affect multiple traits that fall under a specific theme at once.

In your opinion, do you think that any other use of a Multi-power other than those that can be covered by Variable Advantage, Variable Effect, and Variable Special Effect is simply a player trying to exploit the system, irrespective of character concept?

My issues with the Multipower started in 3rd Edition. And I believe they snowballed as higher amounts of character points per character came into the picture.

I think most uses of the Multipower can be covered by Variable Advantage, Variable Effect, and Variable Special effect. It's not a perfect solution by any stretch. But it produces more mathematically fair results.

QuoteAs a side-note, how do you feel about Variable Power Pools?

I don't like them.

They are based on the Multipower. So they suffer the same math issues that the Multipower does.

It would have to be rebuilt with a different basis to make it a fair construct.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103175My issues with the Multipower started in 3rd Edition. And I believe they snowballed as higher amounts of character points per character came into the picture.

I think most uses of the Multipower can be covered by Variable Advantage, Variable Effect, and Variable Special effect. It's not a perfect solution by any stretch. But it produces more mathematically fair results.



I don't like them.

They are based on the Multipower. So they suffer the same math issues that the Multipower does.

It would have to be rebuilt with a different basis to make it a fair construct.

What is it about using the Variable modifiers mentioned that doesn't make using them over Multipower a perfect solution?  What would you propose to remedy the gaps that the Variable modifiers don't cover from the Multipower issue?

What basis would you use to rebuild the Variable Power Pool (and, perhaps by extension, Multipower) to make it a more fair construct?

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103152Does someone want to continue the discussion? I'm open to that. But I have already presented my case several times. I don't feel should have to any further. I've reached the end of my tolerance for dealing with people who are acting in bad faith.

Darrin, I do think that accusations have gotten too personal here, and I'm sorry for the animosity.

Still, I feel like you were dismissive of my examples without giving any examples yourself to show how lack of Multipower was a more fair assessment.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103152There is a difference between a discussion and someone using interrogation techniques. I feel that completely undermines any polite atmosphere.

I get some posters here myself included sometimes can be less than diplomatic in presenting their counter arguments. That being said with the OP you just came across already as not wanting to really discuss the subject of the thread and more a validation and echo chamber style thread. Seeing as how some are fans of the system expecting only to receive posts that completely agreed with yours was not really very realistic and perhaps purposefully naive assumption from the start. That being said if you were wrong about a point you wrote above just admit to making a mistake and move on. Claiming that your a victim of some kind of hostile interrogation is not really making you look good. Nor making me want to discuss anything with you in another post. If too much pushback= an interrogation well why waste my team later on to be told the same thing.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103152Does someone want to continue the discussion? I'm open to that. But I have already presented my case several times. I don't feel should have to any further. I've reached the end of my tolerance for dealing with people who are acting in bad faith.

Posters disagreeing with you especially if you were wrong about one of your posts is not acting in bad faith. That is not how one conducts or presents a discussuion. Disagreements with your OP and your following posts is not acting in bad faith. I can say that too to undermine other posters when they disagree with me as well it won't make it any more true. While making it look like you can't handle pushback or disagreements with other posters.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1103152Does someone want to continue the discussion? I'm open to that. But I have already presented my case several times. I don't feel should have to any further. I've reached the end of my tolerance for dealing with people who are acting in bad faith.

You made a bad argument, and you continue to make a bad argument.  You claim that Multi-Power is not costed fairly, but have not shown an example of a character that uses Multi-Power to gain 'unreasonable power'.  You refuse to provide such an example because you don't want to be 'interrogated'.  This is clearly intended to be a conversation with people who agree with you, but there are no people who agree with you.  

Either you are wrong or you should try to show an example of a character that is over-powered by their use of Multi-power.  At this point, it's not even clear that it is POSSIBLE, let alone COMMON.

Considering you have indicted dick players more than the power, it could be your premise is false.

HERO is fun.

... after reading this thread? LOL I have questions...

/shakes up gas can

As everyone has equal access to multipowers they are inherently balanced.

Hero sixth was a major improvement on previous editions.  It streamlined and simplified the cludgy accounting around figured stats and reigned in the variety of stat prices.

/Drops match

GURPS still does a lot of things better than hero, but superheroes ain't one of them.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1103266You made a bad argument, and you continue to make a bad argument.  You claim that Multi-Power is not costed fairly, but have not shown an example of a character that uses Multi-Power to gain 'unreasonable power'.  You refuse to provide such an example because you don't want to be 'interrogated'.  This is clearly intended to be a conversation with people who agree with you, but there are no people who agree with you.  

Either you are wrong or you should try to show an example of a character that is over-powered by their use of Multi-power.  At this point, it's not even clear that it is POSSIBLE, let alone COMMON.

Considering you have indicted dick players more than the power, it could be your premise is false.

Personal feelings about him aside, this post sums up what I really don't get about DK's complaint. I've played Hero System for decasdes, seen, created, played countless characters with multipowers and without. Those with multipowers haven't seen more power or unduly powerful,particularly not just because they had MPs. More flexible in some cases, yes, they had more options and could be harder to box in but that generally came across as a feature not a bug. In some ways,they're more vulnerable. Characters with MPs are still subject to the same campaign guidelines are the rest of the PCs.

Now I have no doubt that some real Hero System mechanics could come up with builds that really stretch, bend and even break the system and some of these might use MPs but that doesn't mean that MP in and of themselves are busted. Almost anything can be abused. But abuse is a product of the players and a lack of GM oversight, there's nothing inherently abusive about them at I've seen.

I'm not sure how MPs are "pillar" of Hero System. It works just fine without them. They're a useful tool in the kit, that's all.

I'm a Hero fan. I'm also open to criticism of it. I can totally accept that it is clunky and balance is illusory. 6e didn't really bring a lot extra to the table, and more arguably Steve Long's entire tenure, well-meaning as it was, went in the wrong direction.
Still not convinced that multipower is an issue.

Quote from: The_Shadow;1103468I'm a Hero fan. I'm also open to criticism of it. I can totally accept that it is clunky and balance is illusory. 6e didn't really bring a lot extra to the table, and more arguably Steve Long's entire tenure, well-meaning as it was, went in the wrong direction.
Still not convinced that multipower is an issue.

When is enough, enough? When are all you people going to stop torturing Darrin Kelley?

Spoiler

:D

All the huge manatees that have been sacrificed to this thread! The huge manatees! o the huge manatees.

Quote from: CarlD.;1103449Personal feelings about him aside, this post sums up what I really don't get about DK's complaint. I've played Hero System for decasdes, seen, created, played countless characters with multipowers and without. Those with multipowers haven't seen more power or unduly powerful,particularly not just because they had MPs. More flexible in some cases, yes, they had more options and could be harder to box in but that generally came across as a feature not a bug. In some ways,they're more vulnerable. Characters with MPs are still subject to the same campaign guidelines are the rest of the PCs.

Now I have no doubt that some real Hero System mechanics could come up with builds that really stretch, bend and even break the system and some of these might use MPs but that doesn't mean that MP in and of themselves are busted. Almost anything can be abused. But abuse is a product of the players and a lack of GM oversight, there's nothing inherently abusive about them at I've seen.

I'm not sure how MPs are "pillar" of Hero System. It works just fine without them. They're a useful tool in the kit, that's all.

The OP also mentioned not caring for VVPs, either. Way back he also mentioned some (of what he considers) hallmarks of of the HS system that are highly dubious.

Playing the game without VVPs & MPs, you've got a system that is much easier to control. (As he's also mentioned one or more players are apparently of the problem sort.)

So it does indeed seem much less of an issue of those rules then the group itself - or just the GMs ability to handle the unexpected. If if the latter, it would be nice if said GM admitted that fact.

I tried to read through this thread and was curious about how we'd make characters if the Multipower wasn't available.

This is a Multipower on my Arklight character, an attempt to simulate my Champions Online character of the same name:
[Note] The powers are Unified as I have other electrical powers outside the Multipower

--Multipower, 60-point reserve,  (60 Active Points); all slots Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)
f Taser Barrage:  Blast 4d6, Autofire (5 shots; +1/2), Attack Versus Alternate Defense (ED Resistant Protection defined as a forcefield, or being fully insulated; All Or Nothing; +1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1) (60 Active Points); Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)
f Lightning Blast:  Blast 12d6 (60 Active Points); Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)
f Conic Lightning Blast:  Blast 9 1/2d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +1/4) (60 Active Points); Further Reduce to No Range (-1/4), Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)
Character Point cost:40+4+4+3=49

I will attempt to make all powers use the same number of points as allocated for the Multipower

• A more narrative approach:

   Lightning Blast:  Blast 12d6 (60 Active Points); Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)
Power:  Electricity 16-

This option helps simulate the ability for the character to power stunt or perform different tricks and is similar to what would be done in an ICONS game

• The use of the Lockout limitation to force powers to not be usable with other 'slots'

   Taser Barrage:  Blast 3d6+1, Autofire (5 shots; +1/2), Attack Versus Alternate Defense (ED Resistant Protection defined as a forcefield, or being fully insulated; All Or Nothing; +1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1) (51 Active Points); Lockout (-1/2), Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)
Lightning Blast:  Blast 10d6 (50 Active Points); Lockout (-1/2), Limited Range (-1/4), Unified Power (-1/4)

For 2 powers, with my other limitations, a small reduction in the individual power and it costs 1 point more than the Multipower and my 1st presented solution
[/LIST]

I'll try to come up with more another time.

Welcome CptPatriot!!

Thanks, trechiron.

Quote from: sureshot;1103109Some much for the OP objectivity and more importantly sincerity in wanting to actually have a discussion. Already the initial post came off as not really wanting to hear anything but a validation echo chamber style thread. Now acting like it is some kind of torture to actually prove his point is the op just reinforcing that at least to myself.

No one is saying that no one plays 6E. To the amount that is required for HG as a company remain profitable not enough imo. Hero Games wanted to cater to only a those that wanted nothing at all to change and it end up killing the company. Many were not interested in the same crunchiness and complexity of 5E with a few house rules added in. Or to put it anther way they wanted more than just a Pathfinder version for the HS. Releasing the same older 5E material over again even if let's be honest that was kind of given kind of both angered and alienated fans. The market and tastes of many gamers has changed since 5E was released and that was ignored by HG and the fans that want nothing to change.


SJG and Gurps would be in the same situation if they did not have Munchkin and other IPs to fall back on so they were able to mitigate would has almost killed of Hero Games

The unfortunate thing is there is no reason there can't be both. Both systems are quite simple at their core, it would not be all that hard to have a relatively light version and the full nerd out version with 10,000 options.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1103891The unfortunate thing is there is no reason there can't be both. Both systems are quite simple at their core, it would not be all that hard to have a relatively light version and the full nerd out version with 10,000 options.

A simplified Hero exists - the Basic Rules. It's actually very good in my opinion. Hasn't been marketed well, though and the grognards decry it because it's missing about 5% of the rules options.
Well, it's missing 5% of the powers and many details to bring it down to 120 pages.

Quote from: The_Shadow;1104007A simplified Hero exists - the Basic Rules. It's actually very good in my opinion. Hasn't been marketed well, though and the grognards decry it because it's missing about 5% of the rules options.
Well, it's missing 5% of the powers and many details to bring it down to 120 pages.

   It was also one of the first items in the 6E line to go out of print and not get reprinted, which is somewhat surprising considering its small size and the apparent demand--at least, it was going for high prices before Hero Games moved more fully into the PoD model.

I always thought the way you use the stats is weird in the Hero system. It's been a while though.

My take is this:

You are told that you can have $200,000 to spend on multiple cars, provided that none individually cost more than 40K, or you can spend $150,000 on a single car.

With the 200K, I can buy a mid-range sedan for day-to-day; a 4-wheel drive SUV for winter driving; a light truck for hauling stuff; a fun, sporty two-seater for the weekend; and an econo-box for long drives. Each one has it's own advantages and disadvantages, but I can still only drive one at a time. The only practical advantage being that if one car doesn't work for some reason, I can still drive another, even if it's not the optimal one to use.

But none of those cars will ever be as fast and as bad-ass than the $150K supercar I could buy instead.

Quote from: The_Shadow;1104007A simplified Hero exists - the Basic Rules. It's actually very good in my opinion. Hasn't been marketed well, though and the grognards decry it because it's missing about 5% of the rules options.
Well, it's missing 5% of the powers and many details to bring it down to 120 pages.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1104019It was also one of the first items in the 6E line to go out of print and not get reprinted, which is somewhat surprising considering its small size and the apparent demand--at least, it was going for high prices before Hero Games moved more fully into the PoD model.

:eek: What?! :confused: Even high school drop out drug dealers know the first hit's free!

 :mad: Why on earth would you gatekeep your fun with an intimidating level of complexity as the first and only big step? You start at Basic and you let people work their way up to Expert! It is all about the low-hanging, succulent fruit! :( This is basic allure 101 -- it's not even economics or marketing theory! This is raw temptation that even plants and animals understand.

Why do nerds try to be exclusivise and reinvent biological drives? :o This is bass'ackwards. :p

Quote from: ronwisegamgee;1103226What is it about using the Variable modifiers mentioned that doesn't make using them over Multipower a perfect solution?  What would you propose to remedy the gaps that the Variable modifiers don't cover from the Multipower issue?

The Variable modifiers are based on fair math. The Multipower isn't.  That's as plain as it gets.

QuoteWhat basis would you use to rebuild the Variable Power Pool (and, perhaps by extension, Multipower) to make it a more fair construct?

Something more similar to what is done to handle it in Mutants & Masterminds. Make it its own independant power.

I would not even try to rebuild the Multipower at all. Under any circumstances.

Quote from: jhkim;1103231Still, I feel like you were dismissive of my examples without giving any examples yourself to show how lack of Multipower was a more fair assessment.

I spent years, decades arguing with the Multipower's creator. And finally, after a long and arduous effort, I got him to admit that it's an unfair construct. That it was never a fair construct.

I'm not eager at all to engage in a repeat of arguing that point. Especially after all the abuse, I got over it on The Big Purple over it.

Quote from: The_Shadow;1103468I'm a Hero fan. I'm also open to criticism of it. I can totally accept that it is clunky and balance is illusory. 6e didn't really bring a lot extra to the table, and more arguably Steve Long's entire tenure, well-meaning as it was, went in the wrong direction.
Still not convinced that multipower is an issue.

It's one of many. And the Hero System has a lot of issues.

I focused my energies on the Multipower because it has one of the biggest effects on actual play. I viewed it as a higher priority.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1104311I spent years, decades arguing with the Multipower's creator. And finally, after a long and arduous effort, I got him to admit that it's an unfair construct. That it was never a fair construct.

I'm not eager at all to engage in a repeat of arguing that point. Especially after all the abuse, I got over it on The Big Purple over it.

Do you have a link or proof this years long debate or this admission? I've never heard of any such thing.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1104312It's one of many. And the Hero System has a lot of issues.

And it is your Holy Mission to expose them or what? Play something else.

QuoteI focused my energies on the Multipower because it has one of the biggest effects on actual play. I viewed it as a higher priority.

In playing the system for decades, you're really the only person I've seen with persistent bug up your ass about Multipowers. I guess the rest of us are too damn stupid to see it and need your endless yamme- I mean enlightened wisdom.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1104310The Variable modifiers are based on fair math. The Multipower isn't.  That's as plain as it gets.

If this were true, you should be able to produce an example that shows it to be true.  In fact, you should be able to produce an example that is OBVIOUSLY true.  The fact that you have not done so does not inspire confidence.

Your argument boils down to: I KNOW it to be true, so you should trust me.  

It doesn't work for me with people that talked to Jesus and it won't work with you.

In response to Darrin Kelly's  claim of convincing the creator of the multipower that its 'unfair'  this was the response from the person that came up with Multipower.

Quote from: Strange VisitorGiven I'm the Multipower's creator, its a fascinating claim.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1104311I'm not eager at all to engage in a repeat of arguing that point. Especially after all the abuse, I got over it on The Big Purple over it.

'Abuse' like the horrible torture of being asked to prove your claims like you're getting here?

Edit: Strange Visitor expanded on his reply.

Quote from: Strange VisitorGiven I've been acquainted with--and argued with--Darrin on and off for years, its entirely possible its me he's referring to.  Being generous, its possible he's defining "unfair" in a very broad way--in which case its correct.  Let me explain.



Multipowers were originally designed for a single primary purpose; to represent people who had a wide range of powers that were unusable at the same time, either because of quirks of their particular power structure (someone like a Green Lantern or a wide band psionic who only had so much personal resource to deploy at any given time) or because the power was intrinsically unusable at the same time as another because of practical reasons (the fact in most game systems it doesn't matter if you have five offensive powers, you're only using one in a given round).  These are both incredibly common superheroic designs to one degree or another, and without a cost savings (and a fairly substantial one) you simply wouldn't see it, in many cases because there simply wouldn't be enough points available to do so (not to mention in games no having an active point or Rule of X cap the fact its an idiots game to, say, buy three separate offensive powers rather than one offensive power at triple the potency).



As such if you approach the matter as seeing buying each power alone as the "fair" case, then the multipower is certainly "unfair".  My view even then was that buying those separately is, in fact, a design error, and using the multipower (and its equivalent in a few other systems like M&M or BASH UE) is the appropriate case, and buying the powers separately should be reserved for special cases where they are both necessary and effective.



(Now, if you wanted to talk to me about Elemental Controls, which I also created, with years of assessment in the rear-view mirror, yeah, those were probably a mistake.  As sort of pre-designed package deals, they seemed reasonable at the time, but that was probably an overly zoomed in sort of view).



So its possible he at some point had a conversation where he presented his definition of "fair" and I might have said that by that definition, the multipower was, indeed "unfair"; the missing part of the discussion is that I would not have agreed that definition was reasonable.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1104311I'm not eager at all to engage in a repeat of arguing that point. Especially after all the abuse, I got over it on The Big Purple over it.

'Abuse' like the horrible torture of being asked to prove your claims like you're getting here?

Quote from: Starnge VisitorNow, if you wanted to talk to me about Elemental Controls, which I also created, with years of assessment in the rear-view mirror, yeah, those were probably a mistake. As sort of pre-designed package deals, they seemed reasonable at the time, but that was probably an overly zoomed in sort of view).

I have been saying this for years, and everyone called me a heretic until 6E. At last I am vindicated!

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1104311I spent years, decades arguing with the Multipower's creator. And finally, after a long and arduous effort, I got him to admit that it's an unfair construct. That it was never a fair construct.

I'm not eager at all to engage in a repeat of arguing that point. Especially after all the abuse, I got over it on The Big Purple over it.

Quote from: CarlD.;1104318In response to Darrin Kelly's  claim of convincing the creator of the multipower that its 'unfair'  this was the response from the person that came up with Multipower.

So basically DK badgered the guy until he got a soundbite quote he could cite out of context to prove his position is actually correct, but with context is shown to be a liar who accuses anyone who questions him of attacking him so he can justify in his head ignoring them.

I expect he'll be headed back to his safe space soon after having been forced to deal with exposure the horrible thing called truth.

At a meta-game level, since super-games try to duplicate comic book fights and powers,
a multipower is a handy framework on which to model
someone with 17 different super powers, but they only use 1 on a given turn.

Quasar, High Evolutionary, Green Arrow, Batman's Utility Belt, etc.

Quote from: CarlD.;1104318In response to Darrin Kelly's  claim of convincing the creator of the multipower that its 'unfair'  this was the response from the person that came up with Multipower.

Quote from: Strange VisitorAs such if you approach the matter as seeing buying each power alone as the "fair" case, then the multipower is certainly "unfair". My view even then was that buying those separately is, in fact, a design error, and using the multipower (and its equivalent in a few other systems like M&M or BASH UE) is the appropriate case, and buying the powers separately should be reserved for special cases where they are both necessary and effective.

Thanks for posting this Carl. That sort of admission is what I would have expected from the posts I've seen in this thread. It made me realize that the  one thing that was missing from Darrin's many posts was him concluding with,

   "There, I've run rings around you logically."

There is nothing wrong with being tired of arguing the same points endlessly. Which I definitely am.

There reaches a point where the debate needs to end. And an actual decision needs to be made. And that is what I reached. The decision phase.

The supporters of the Multipower are not making any new points. They are simply rehashing old points endlessly. Without actually looking at the underpinnings of the system itself. Their argument always comes down to "I want", "I like", or "It is useful for". And not any real legitimate analysis of the mechanic itself.

Game design takes actually making concrete decisions. Instead of engaging in an endless argument.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1106671The supporters of the Multipower are not making any new points. They are simply rehashing old points endlessly. Without actually looking at the underpinnings of the system itself. Their argument always comes down to "I want", "I like", or "It is useful for". And not any real legitimate analysis of the mechanic itself.

Or it distractors avoiding questions they don't want to answer.

Again the point of multi-power is to reserve X points and allow the player to switch the powers occupy that number of points. The balance was to charge additional points for that flexibility. You have made no case that isn't resolved by adjusting what is charged for that flexibility. Nor have you offered a substitute for reserving X number points and allowing different powers to be swapped in and out for those points. The closest you have come is variable advantage. But that only effects the advantages on the power not the power itself.

Nor you addressed the issue of misquoting what the designer of multi-power said.

Quote from: estar;1106682Or it distractors avoiding questions they don't want to answer.

I only have to answer those questions that I believe are worth my time. Rather than ones that have been asked and answered ad Infinitum.

You and some of the others seem to believe I have to defend myself. That I have to immediately assume a defensive posture in any conversation I participate in. Which is anything but the case. I don't have to defend myself to anyone. And I am nobody's dog or servant forced to answer someone else's commands. None of you have the right to subject me to interrogation or any kind of manipulation. You aren't police.

I know very well what the Multipower allegedly is supposed to do. I don't need anyone repeatedly explaining it over and over again into infinity.

QuoteNor you addressed the issue of misquoting what the designer of multi-power said.

I don't have to. He's not a member of this board. And I don't do cross-board drama. He flat out was never a part of the conversation.

Once again you evade the questions I ask. As for being forced to do anything, you invited everyone by posting your opinion on a public medium, the forum, built around discussion. If you wish to remain evasive that is your right. Just as it is my right point out the unanswered points and questions every time you publically post on this thread.

I agree that you don't have to discuss anything you don't want to - you can come and go as you please.  

But it feels like this entire thread was intended as a wholly unsupported rant.  As someone unfamiliar with the system I have come away with entirely the opposite opinion that you intended - multi-power seems like a necessary and appropriate tool that is required by the game to support numerous common character types.

I will reframe my original question.

I have three powers that can't be used at the same time.

Fire Blast

Fire Flight

Fire Shield

Each are worth 40 points.

How much is the limitation "Can't be used the same phase as other Fire Powers (Blast, Flight, Shield) " worth?

Conversely how much is the following limitation is worth?

"Can only use 40 points shared among the Fire Powers (Blast, Flight, Shield)"

Quote from: estar;1106789I will reframe my original question.

I have three powers that can't be used at the same time.

Fire Blast

Fire Flight

Fire Shield

Each are worth 40 points.

How much is the limitation "Can't be used the same phase as other Fire Powers (Blast, Flight, Shield) " worth?

Conversely how much is the following limitation is worth?

"Can only use 40 points shared among the Fire Powers (Blast, Flight, Shield)"

And affected as a single power by negative Adjust powers and points can only be reallocated with a 0 Phase action (once you've, for example, attacked) you can shift points until your next Active Phase.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1106710I don't have to. He's not a member of this board. And I don't do cross-board drama. He flat out was never a part of the conversation.

You're the one who dragged him into things when you lied about what he'd said. All that happened here is that someone found the actual source and posted it, showing your earlier statement to be nothing but slander. I think showing readers of this thread that something said about him isn't true is a good and neighborly thing to do. Especially since, as you pointed out, he's not a member here and is therefore unable to defend himself at the moment. So well done, CarlD!

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1106710I only have to answer those questions that I believe are worth my time. Rather than ones that have been asked and answered ad Infinitum.

Darrin, you're not required to do anything -- but conversely, you are going to get social pushback from some behaviors that you show.

As a suggestion...

This thread has shown that there are a number of people here who are still interested in the Hero System. Are there other Hero System topics you'd be interested in discussing? Because it seems like you're not interested in discussing Multipower more, in which case it might be best to drop it rather than to keep going back and forth without much substance.

Quote from: jhkim;1106840Darrin, you're not required to do anything -- but conversely, you are going to get social pushback from some behaviors that you show.

I don't back down from bullying. And that is what a lot of the people who have come to this thread have engaged in. Bullying, direct personal insults when they don't get the reactions they want. I've put up with enough of it online over the years. I'm not letting it stop me from doing anything I want to do.

QuoteAs a suggestion...

This thread has shown that there are a number of people here who are still interested in the Hero System. Are there other Hero System topics you'd be interested in discussing? Because it seems like you're not interested in discussing Multipower more, in which case it might be best to drop it rather than to keep going back and forth without much substance.

My view has always been this: The Hero System has a great untapped potential that has yet to be expressed. And that potential will never be realized without growth and change.

This always has caused me to bang heads against the grognard faction of Hero System fans. Who doesn't want that growth and change to ever happen at all. A faction of the fandom I personally see as being entirely destructive to the necessary part of that process.

I've been dealing actively with the Hero System since 1987. I'm far from ignorant about how the system works. And its underpinnings.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1106879My view has always been this: The Hero System has a great untapped potential that has yet to be expressed. And that potential will never be realized without growth and change.

This always has caused me to bang heads against the grognard faction of Hero System fans. Who doesn't want that growth and change to ever happen at all. A faction of the fandom I personally see as being entirely destructive to the necessary part of that process.

I've been dealing actively with the Hero System since 1987. I'm far from ignorant about how the system works. And its underpinnings.

Okay, there's nothing productive I can say that beyond: I hope you get over this fixation or whatever is driving you but given that you've been going at it for ever a decade I'm not holding my breath. Good luck at scouring the word Multipower from the obelisks and temple walls and blanking its name from the royal records or whatever you want to accomplish with this Don Quixote-like mission you've chosen.

Quote from: jhkim;1106840Darrin, you're not required to do anything -- but conversely, you are going to get social pushback from some behaviors that you show.

As a suggestion...

This thread has shown that there are a number of people here who are still interested in the Hero System. Are there other Hero System topics you'd be interested in discussing? Because it seems like you're not interested in discussing Multipower more, in which case it might be best to drop it rather than to keep going back and forth without much substance.

Its good advice but he's not going to let it drop. at least that I've never seen him do it. People get flustered, bored or just realize what game he's playing and drift off and whatever the thread dies a natural death or  eventually enough people get fed up with his crap and he get's the boot from the site. But just drop it? Never seen it and I don't expect too.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1106710I only have to answer those questions that I believe are worth my time. Rather than ones that have been asked and answered ad Infinitum.

You and some of the others seem to believe I have to defend myself. That I have to immediately assume a defensive posture in any conversation I participate in. Which is anything but the case. I don't have to defend myself to anyone. And I am nobody's dog or servant forced to answer someone else's commands. None of you have the right to subject me to interrogation or any kind of manipulation. You aren't police.

I know very well what the Multipower allegedly is supposed to do. I don't need anyone repeatedly explaining it over and over again into infinity.



I don't have to. He's not a member of this board. And I don't do cross-board drama. He flat out was never a part of the conversation.

How about, what's the frigging point in starting this thread in the first place? If you have already decided how you want to play it, or want to resolve it and are not open to questions or dissenting opinions,  what are you attempting to accomplish here? Attaboys? It seems as if you want to start a contentious argument and then don't have the sack or the endurance to carry it through. It reeks of attention seeking self entitlement to me... You are tilting at windmills of your own making, and your snide, dismissive attitude towards anyone who asks questions you don't like seems as if you are seeking conflict and yet don't have the stomach for it. WHAT IS YOUR END GAME HERE?

Quote from: shuddemell;1106974WHAT IS YOUR END GAME HERE?

His end game was that he was going to completely discredit the very idea of Multi-Power.  This was a hit-job that would prove to the world how stupid it was.  Like most real-life hit jobs, it was a total failure because the assassin is incompetent.  

At this point, his argument amounts to an unsubstantiated claim that has been refuted by specific examples.  His failure to provide a single example in support of his position and his laughable claim that engaging with his premise is 'bullying' has kept this thread dragging on for 4 additional pages.  

This is no longer a debate about multi-power...  This is a meta-debate about how to avoid sophistry.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1107027His end game was that he was going to completely discredit the very idea of Multi-Power.  This was a hit-job that would prove to the world how stupid it was.  Like most real-life hit jobs, it was a total failure because the assassin is incompetent.  

At this point, his argument amounts to an unsubstantiated claim that has been refuted by specific examples.  His failure to provide a single example in support of his position and his laughable claim that engaging with his premise is 'bullying' has kept this thread dragging on for 4 additional pages.  

This is no longer a debate about multi-power...  This is a meta-debate about how to avoid sophistry.

Of course, this hits the nail on the head. The question then becomes, why not abandon it when he realizes he didn't achieve his goal? Seriously, it's like a weird sort of arrogant masochism. I suppose for those who view themselves as victimized, as he obviously does, they must set themselves up to once again play the victim. I think this sort of delusion is rampant these days, and this is a glaring example of such. How pathetic.

Quote from: shuddemell;1107168Of course, this hits the nail on the head. The question then becomes, why not abandon it when he realizes he didn't achieve his goal? Seriously, it's like a weird sort of arrogant masochism. I suppose for those who view themselves as victimized, as he obviously does, they must set themselves up to once again play the victim. I think this sort of delusion is rampant these days, and this is a glaring example of such. How pathetic.

Darin's attitude is as old as the hobby. It stems from inflexibility and a belief and that there only one right way to represent something in a wargame or RPG. They can prove it because it mathematically or logically correct!

Quote from: estar;1107301Darin's attitude is as old as the hobby. It stems from inflexibility and a belief and that there only one right way to represent something in a wargame or RPG...

The OP has mixed this with a victim narrative. My guess is he's announced this thread to his players in the exact same way. The next time he does it, I'd suggest he check if his players are in agreement with positive eye contact or just face down in their character sheets. If it's the latter, it ain't the OP who is being abused here. We've all been in games like that.

Quote from: estar;1107301They can prove it because it mathematically or logically correct!

Except for when they can't and/or it isn't.

To beat a dead horse:
*There's been no culture of "let's exploit multipower to min-max" in the Hero community. Nor has there been a related "you must build with multipower in order to keep up"
*Power frameworks have been intensively looked at, and EC removed, to little controversy.
So if it's a major break in the system, few except for Darrin seem to have noticed it.

>>>>The Hero System has a great untapped potential that has yet to be expressed. And that potential will never be realized without growth and change.

And   a resurrection. They shot themselves in the foot with 6th Ed, and bled out.

Quote from: Egyptoid;1107407And   a resurrection. They shot themselves in the foot with 6th Ed, and bled out.

And it's not going to happen with the current company ownership. That much is completely clear.

I don't have much hope for Champions Now. As it is currently being written and influenced by the same people who produced 6th Edition.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1107418And it's not going to happen with the current company ownership. That much is completely clear.

I don't think it's clear.  I think that's another unsubstantiated claim that isn't supported by the data you've provided.  

Logically and obviously someone who is sometimes invulnerable to bullets and sometimes has laser eyes is less powerful than someone that ALWAYS has invulnerability to bullets and laser eyes.  At best, your claim can only be that the specific costing is inaccurate relative to the potential benefits.

So did even one person familiar with the HERO system agree with the OP that multi-power is an issue? If they did I missed it.

Not that I noticed.

Apparently the silent majority of HERO fans who must agree with Darrin are still silent and everyone posting here is doing so solely to torture Darrin. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Toadmaster;1107566So did even one person familiar with the HERO system agree with the OP that multi-power is an issue? If they did I missed it.

Nope. And anyone who disagreed was "attacking him" and that gives DK the right to forever ignore anything said by that person.

Which probably explains why, in his mind, "everyone" agrees with his take on multi-powers... everyone who disagrees is memory-holed because disagreeing is an attack on him and that makes their disagreement illegitimate.

Not that he'll ever read this because I was first on his ignore list from this thread because I challenged his misrepresentation of my own statements.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1107418And it's not going to happen with the current company ownership. That much is completely clear.

I don't have much hope for Champions Now(CN). As it is currently being written and influenced by the same people who produced 6th Edition.

Actually, I have hope that CN will breathe new life into the game because the alternative is that the Hero System dies and I'll just move on to a new game. I happen to like the Mighty Protectors(unofficially V&V 3.0).

Hero System dying is not the only alternative. There's a fair chance it will stay as is, attracting new blood by word of mouth and the paltry amount of games ran here and there.

Quote from: CptPatriot;1107736Actually, I have hope that CN will breathe new life into the game because the alternative is that the Hero System dies and I'll just move on to a new game. I happen to like the Mighty Protectors(unofficially V&V 3.0).

Ron Edwards breathing new life into Hero? I can't think of a less likely candidate. Only one guy in my group of Hero grognards backed the KS, and that was out of charity.

Quote from: Aglondir;1107757Ron Edwards breathing new life into Hero? I can't think of a less likely candidate. Only one guy in my group of Hero grognards backed the KS, and that was out of charity.

Yeah, I couldn't even bring myself to for charity's sake, and I buy pretty much everything they put on their site anymore for just that reason. Most of it is worth what is charged, though some doesn't really fit with what I am doing. But, it's my favorite system, and I want it to survive, even if only as a anorexic survivor of a forgotten age. And really, that's what has happened with Hero. It will never be the "it" system again, and because they continue to support all the older versions on their site, even the fanbase is largely fractured. I have been playing it since 1982, so I am not about to chuck all the work I put into it over the years, but it has become almost impossible to find new players to invest the time that my group did back then. To me, it's increasingly odd that DK has such a vested interest in fighting over a system that basically is dead, and expecting Hero to retool it to his satisfaction. I don't know about now, but when I was young, we were happy to houserule anything and play it the way we wanted, and he could do the same, but the validation he is seeking isn't going to be found among the grognards, and we are the only ones really heavily invested in it anymore...

Really, it's hard to throw dollars at Hero Games even out of charity. Look at their onsite pdf store: no previews, and page counts of products not even listed. How many dollars has that shitshow of a "store" lost in sales due to those factors alone?

Honestly? My opinions of the Multipower have never effected when I was actually running Champions games. My setups tend to have been really basic and somewhat predictable and conservative for what they are. And I tended to give the players a lot of trust when conducting themselves with the game. Someone would probably say that I gave way too much. Given my history with players who acted in bad faith.

Recently, I sat down and had a long talk with a friend. Exposing and dealing with the personal demons that developed over my life in gaming. I got to deal with the root cause. Which is what I had been looking to do ever since the original incidents happened. I got some good advice that actually seems to be guiding me back to the GM's chair. That has resulted in my feeling secure enough to try again.

In my games? I have to be more assertive. I'm in control. I control the content and the expressions of the game rules. I choose the game system I am comfortable with. I'm in the driver's seat. I don't have to settle for a choice between bad players and no players at all. I have choices. And realizing that is very emotionally freeing.

Hero Games did not help the situation by taking way tl long to set-up their POD titles. The first volume of 6E  was out of print for many years and while one could get both in PDF, print was another matter. Which did not help sales.

As for bad players I agree that one should not run or play with them as long as they are legitimately bad players. Not bad players for simply refusing to bend over backwards to accommodate the DM. I have seen that too often in my years in the hobby.

I was a GM that usually bent over backward for the players. Because I believed showing trust was an important part of the foundation I was trying to build.

But that didn't account for players who were acting in bad faith. That's now changed. I'm far more particular with who I let play in the games I run. Instead of letting myself be a slave to desperation.

Changing game systems was a good start. To something, I view it as easier to manage. Something free of the game-specific frustrations I had in the past.

As a GM I am usually pretty easy-going. I have always tried to only place a minimum of ground rules so that the players had a lot of freedom of expression in character design. I didn't want to place unnecessary roadblocks in front of the players that would impede their imaginations or creativity.

But the era of me being naive is done. If I see clear abuse by a player, I will just show the player the door. No argument. No second chances. No more being a doormat.

On a more upbeat note (maybe I should have started a new thread) this was announced recently

Hall of Champions (https://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/98998-community-content-program-hall-of-champions/)

Quote from: CarlD.;1110162On a more upbeat note (maybe I should have started a new thread) this was announced recently

Hall of Champions (https://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/98998-community-content-program-hall-of-champions/)

They also have a lot of 3rd, 4th and 5th ed material available on DTRPG now, it is nice to see them relaxing the 6E or bust mentality.

I'm a pessimist at heart, but maybe this will bring some past players back, and draw in a few new ones. Might be an opportunity for someone to offer that "easy HERO" some clamor for.

Quote from: CarlD.;1110162On a more upbeat note (maybe I should have started a new thread) this was announced recently

Hall of Champions (https://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/98998-community-content-program-hall-of-champions/)

Damn, that's very cool. Too late for me as I'm OSR and not in the mood to dig to find the right people (which HS really demands if your game's gonna be worth anything), but I wish them luck.

Arguably the best thing that would help (maybe it's already out there, IDK), would be a supplement of hordes and hordes of starter point heroes (templates) with modular rotating power lists beside them so you're up & running very quickly.

Quote from: CarlD.;1110162... (maybe I should have started a new thread) ...

Got ya covered boss! :-D Happy news!!

Looks like the OP started a similar thread on the boards: https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41320-Venting-a-bit-of-frustration-over-bad-players

Probably going to end up being the same behavior from OP.

Quote from: trechriron;1110467Got ya covered boss! :-D Happy news!!

Thanks, probably a better idea than trying to salvage this train wreck. Hell even the engineer has bailed on it.

I don't agree with the premise that just because a power isn't a massive attack, it's useless.

For instance, in Mutants and Masterminds, I found that having a small amount of healing that was usable on others was incredibly handy, and it cost hardly anything.

I do agree that Multipower is easily abused. My favorite trick was to have 6 or 7 multipower slots, each of which could only be used once per session.

Quote from: jhkim;1102640I tend to run all my convention games with pregenerated characters regardless of system, so that I can be prepared for what to run and can be familiar with them.



.

I was going to wait until I got to the end of the thread to comment about Hero (I rather like 3e, lookign through the 5e and 6e books a few months back I realized that with regards to Champions, at least, I am an Edition Grognard, as I found the game absurdly, unreasonably stupid the later the edition... despite the fact that the rules themselves are unchanged on a basic level)...

Anyway: As a teen (14 ish?) i played Champions for the first time at a Convention, with a GM made pregen character for what was ostensibly a street-level campaign, so much so that my pre-gen brick (the only character available when I joined the game) wore a bulletproof vest for armor, though he did have some supernatural durability going on as well.

At the end of the game I failed to jump from one skyscraper to another, and rather than embarass my character more by struggling to pull myself up (and knowing the Big Bad was undoubtedly making his way to the street), I chose to fall thirty stories to the ground to beat him there.

The GM rerolled the damage dice five times before he realized statistics were not on his side, and I survived with only two points of body damage sufferred, though I was stunned for a long damn time.

In short, he had no idea the character he created was quite that tough.  


Also: I sort of want to know where Darrin is based out of, so I can never, ever go there to game.   Seriously, bro: Its been a year or more since I posted here, and you are still making shit threads that read; This is a shit game because bad players!   No rule or set of rules can ever defeat bad players.  Don't GM for players who make a habit of breaking the game. Don't 'co-GM' with GMs who permit players to pull stupid shit that breaks the game for you (for that matter: Why on earth does anyone 'co-GM'?  I've never heard a single story that made the game better for having a second GM, only horror stories like Darrins....)

I've run multi-year campaigns in three different settings/systems with a co-GM. All of them worked out very well.

It was an online campaign run with Maptool and Skype. And the selection of players were gained through the former chat on the Hero Games website itself

So if you think you are safe in online games. Well you would be wrong. Bad gamers are everywhere. And there is no real way to filter them out until they show their true colors and do their damage.

My takeaway from this? No gaming with people I don't know or trust.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1111704My takeaway from this? No gaming with people I don't know or trust.

Just vet players first. That's what I do before starting a game with them.

Quote from: Spike;1111385Also: I sort of want to know where Darrin is based out of, so I can never, ever go there to game.   Seriously, bro: Its been a year or more since I posted here, and you are still making shit threads that read; This is a shit game because bad players!   No rule or set of rules can ever defeat bad players.  Don't GM for players who make a habit of breaking the game. Don't 'co-GM' with GMs who permit players to pull stupid shit that breaks the game for you (for that matter: Why on earth does anyone 'co-GM'?  I've never heard a single story that made the game better for having a second GM, only horror stories like Darrins....)

DK seems quick to label anyone that doesn't play exactly how he deems 'proper' a Bad Player! (and apparently out to get him personally). But then he does about the same thing with anyone that disagrees with him or asks for some information to back up his claims (Bullies! No one will silence me! etc...)

As for multi-gms, I've played in a couple of game with more than one gm. They worked well.

Quote from: CarlD.;1111709DK seems quick to label anyone that doesn't play exactly how he deems 'proper' a Bad Player! (and apparently out to get him personally). But then he does about the same thing with anyone that disagrees with him or asks for some information to back up his claims (Bullies! No one will silence me! etc...)

Unfortunately an too often occurrence in our hobby. With the added and unwanted bonus of never wanting to admit they can be wrong. It is everyone else and never them the problem. Makes me not want to feel anything but contempt for the OP and others who act like him. Why would I care when if I don't give them validation or agree 10000% I'm a bully out to get them.

I don't give a fuck what the humanoids here think of me or my GMing style. They have never experienced it. So they have nothing of substance to say.

None of the shit being talked here changes the one fact of the matter. That the GM is the final word on interpretation and application of the rules in their campaign. And no amount of bad player bitching and whining will result in anything else but that player being shown the door.

And as for the hatred and contempt aimed at me. I don't care. My opinions are my opinions. And nobody has any right to tell me they are wrong.

Yes because only you Darrin have ever experienced bad players or DMs at the table and no one else apparently.

Actually you know what take your self depreciating fake validation seeking martyrdom garbage and shove it up your severly constipated ass.

Lesson learned never posting in any of the op threads ever again.

No loss to me. My threads will be a lot more peaceful without you. So that's a win in my book.

Sorry your now on my ignore list not wasting anymore energy on pathetic piece of garbage.

Oh just eat shit and die.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1111705Just vet players first. That's what I do before starting a game with them.

This. And if it still doesn't work out - nobody's ability to judge people is perfect, so it happens - you can always be an adult, say "this isn't working out; we need to part ways." with the tact level adjusted as appropriate, and that's that. I've never really understood why people react to a few bad experiences with any kind of blanket ban. It seems like overkill, and a surefire way to lock out way more good experiences than bad.

Girls, giirrls, you're both beauti... :( oh, it's too late isn't it. :o

Well the sun'll come out to-morrow, tomorrow! Bet your bottom dollar, tomorrow, there'll be sun! :)

I'm referencing the quote in your signature.

The players who exploit the character generation are indulging in a dick measuring contest. To see who can create the biggest virtual penis. It has nothing to do with them actually participating in the actual campaign.

For them it is all about having the most minmaxed and exploitive character. They actually don't care about actually playing. For them it is about them being the center of attention while they force everybody else to watch their mathematical masturbation.

The only reason they are there is to waste the time of everybody else. It is absolutely anti-social acting out.

Sometimes people like to learn the rules, use the rules to the fullest because its how you test your mastery... AND they like to play the game.  Embrace the power of And. Better yet, get your mind reading license renewed, because you keep impinging motives onto people. You are not professor X.

Hell, I'm not even sure why you are so upset with min-maxers. They don't break campaigns and ruin games... they are almost always dynamic and engaged players because they actually want to do shit. Its the passive seat warmers that can just eat a game in my experience, sucking the life and energy out of a game by refusing to engage in anything, refusing to learn even the most common rules.

Different strokes and all that.

Quote from: Spike;1111871Hell, I'm not even sure why you are so upset with min-maxers. They don't break campaigns and ruin games... they are almost always dynamic and engaged players because they actually want to do shit. Its the passive seat warmers that can just eat a game in my experience, sucking the life and energy out of a game by refusing to engage in anything, refusing to learn even the most common rules.

The thing about dynamic and engaged players though is they're also the ones most likely to have their own ideas and be self-motivated in finding their own plot lines instead of going with what the GM thinks should happen.

DK's already admitted to preferring FATE so my hunch is his real problem is he's a frustrated author and his "bad players" are those with enough agency to not follow his railroad.

Quote from: Chris24601;1111900The thing about dynamic and engaged players though is they're also the ones most likely to have their own ideas and be self-motivated in finding their own plot lines instead of going with what the GM thinks should happen.

Well... yes!

My interest in FATE developed after the campaign in question blew up.

The greater sense of player engagement required for a FATE game definitely was an aspect I was interested in. Anything that gets the players more involved in the game is good. In my opinion.

The problem I had with the two players that caused the campaign to detonate was their utter refusal to engage with the campaign in any way. They wanted everything handed to them like the GM was a server at a buffet. They didn't actually want to be engaged in the game.

No matter the system. If you have players refuse to engage with the game. You might as well have empty seats. Because those players are utterly useless. They are not participants. They are just taking up space.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1111831And as for the hatred and contempt aimed at me. I don't care. My opinions are my opinions. And nobody has any right to tell me they are wrong.

I don't think it's hatred and contempt, but people here have every right to tell you that you're wrong.  If you say 'I like broccoli because it is sweet', well, that's an opinion, but it is also wrong.  I mean, you can like broccoli, sure, but like it for the right reasons!  

Here's a quote that I've found very helpful.

QuoteAll of your relationships have one thing in common: you. You are the fundamental unit of every partnership, friendship, romantic entanglement, or antagonistic encounter you've ever had.

Sometimes things don't work out because what you want and what someone else wants are just too far apart.  But more often, it stems from an unwillingness to find a compromise that works for everyone.  

You could watch a short video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERd9SC6Pu4k) of someone reading Ladybug Girl and Bumblebee Boy for an example of both the problem and a solution.

Hell I prefer Min-maxers to the opposite. The ones that deliberately make a terrible character and expect the DM. players or both to cover their weaknesses. While getting angry both at not being able to do anything and everyone else not helping them overcome their too flawed character. The first while I find annoying at least can actually contribute to both the campaign and party. The second for example will make a highly skilled character with no combat skills and dump stat the necessary stats to be effective. Make a non-melee class in a campaign where both players and DMs warn of it being mostly combat then being almost utter useless and whine they can't do anything and why no one else is doing a dam thing to fix it.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1111944I don't think it's hatred and contempt, but people here have every right to tell you that you're wrong.  If you say 'I like broccoli because it is sweet', well, that's an opinion, but it is also wrong.  I mean, you can like broccoli, sure, but like it for the right reasons!  

Honestly your advice and everyone and anyone else here on this forum, others and in real life will fall on stubborn deaf ears. Te OP insists and keeps spamming multiple threads where they want a congratulatory, validation, mutual masturbation "just damn agree with me will you" style responses.

Yes I know I said I would not post again yet as the OP holds everyone here in complete and utter contempt if we don't agree with him 10000% I'm not giving him any satisfaction.

Quote from: Chris24601;1111900The thing about dynamic and engaged players though is they're also the ones most likely to have their own ideas and be self-motivated in finding their own plot lines instead of going with what the GM thinks should happen.

DK's already admitted to preferring FATE so my hunch is his real problem is he's a frustrated author and his "bad players" are those with enough agency to not follow his railroad.

From what I can see here and elsewhere the OP wants mindless drones for players who should just bend over backwards and completely agree with him at all times. Failing to get what he wants and refusing to possibly admit he may be at fault. Assume it's everyone else fault.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1111831And as for the hatred and contempt aimed at me. I don't care. My opinions are my opinions. And nobody has any right to tell me they are wrong.

Will you be able to get that cross back to Jesus? And how do you nail your other arm to it? That's a neat trick.

Ever notice that almost everyone that throws out "my opinions are just my opinions and you can't tell me they're wrong!" type lines does it after or during screeds about how people that disagree with them are wrong bad people who should feel bad about their bad wrong opinions?

I just wish Darrin would expend his word count in this thread debating Hero System mechanics. I'd be all ears for that.

Quote from: CarlD.;1112023Will you be able to get that cross back to Jesus? And how do you nail your other arm to it? That's a neat trick.

Ever notice that almost everyone that throws out "my opinions are just my opinions and you can't tell me they're wrong!" type lines does it after or during screeds about how people that disagree with them are wrong bad people who should feel bad about their bad wrong opinions?

The thing is he knows he won't get the backslapping complete and utter vindication he wants yet he keeps trying anyway. What do you call someone who insists on doing the same thing over and over again and failing consistently. Stupid, Insane and both.