Quote from: The Butcher;940673M&M3 is "too simple"

I find the Feat system a GURPS-like drag. But please elaborate; you may end up selling me on it!

Well, the fact that almost all attack powers are based on Affliction (x result on success, y result on success +5, z and final result on success +10) means that everything comes off a bit generic to me.

JG

ICONS is the only actual superhero game I like. The only one I've ever really liked.

Two-Fisted Tales can be used for awesome pulp adventuring, including very low-range Golden- or early Silver-age type supers play, but you'd probably have to invent some powers and such.  The upcoming new edition might end up having more stuff for that.

I will have to look into ICONS, I keep hearing good things about it.  Onto the Wishlist it goes!

Quote from: Christopher Brady;941652I will have to look into ICONS, I keep hearing good things about it.  Onto the Wishlist it goes!

It's a very well done game, I must admit. I wish I could testify to actual play experience.

So far, we've used Aberrant and it seems to work all right- but then again, all we've got out of the way are mostly-narrative introductory sessions.  Mostly because until next weekend, I won't have all of my players together at the same time.  I got quite a bit of support on this, and I was shocked that two people dropped D&D games for it.  

If ICONS works better, I'll give it a try.  Not to dismiss anyone here, but I'm going to have a look elsewhere on the things mentioned to see what people say.  Not that I find anyone's opinion invalid- just that I want to see people saying the worst and the best things about the games, and they may highlight something that is a pet peeve to me.

After all, this forum is the reason I didn't throw away cash on Malifeaux- despite everyone else everywhere claiming that it was the best miniatures game ever.

Quote from: cranebump;941660It's a very well done game, I must admit. I wish I could testify to actual play experience.

I picked it up cuz it was on sale.  Looks cute.

ICONS is very very very good. It would probably be my favorite supers-game if it weren't for the fact that I'm so deep into FASERIP that I don't really need ICONS to do what I'm already doing in FASERIP. They would play almost identically.

You can't go wrong with ICONS. It's a superb choice - and has some great support:

https://icons-truth-justice-and-gaming.wikispaces.com/Characters+Conversions

What you're going to get out of ICON's is scalability and simplicity. Because it's using the FASERIP chassis but slightly scaled down numbers, it actually allows for faster gameplay than FASERIP (which is insanely fast once you understand it).

Quote from: Crüesader;941970So far, we've used Aberrant and it seems to work all right- but then again, all we've got out of the way are mostly-narrative introductory sessions.  Mostly because until next weekend, I won't have all of my players together at the same time.  I got quite a bit of support on this, and I was shocked that two people dropped D&D games for it.  

If ICONS works better, I'll give it a try.  Not to dismiss anyone here, but I'm going to have a look elsewhere on the things mentioned to see what people say.  Not that I find anyone's opinion invalid- just that I want to see people saying the worst and the best things about the games, and they may highlight something that is a pet peeve to me.

Hey, Cruesader. I've got some old web pages on Aberrant - from the first edition in the early 2000s. I don't know if things have improved since then, but I found the editing to be pretty atrocious, although I liked some of the background ideas.

http://darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/aberrant/

Quote from: tenbones;942168ICONS is very very very good. It would probably be my favorite supers-game if it weren't for the fact that I'm so deep into FASERIP that I don't really need ICONS to do what I'm already doing in FASERIP. They would play almost identically.

You can't go wrong with ICONS. It's a superb choice - and has some great support:

I find it very basic, so far.  It's not bad, but may be a little too vague for me.

Quote from: tenbones;942168ICONS is very very very good. It would probably be my favorite supers-game if it weren't for the fact that I'm so deep into FASERIP that I don't really need ICONS to do what I'm already doing in FASERIP. They would play almost identically.

You can't go wrong with ICONS. It's a superb choice - and has some great support:

https://icons-truth-justice-and-gaming.wikispaces.com/Characters+Conversions

What you're going to get out of ICON's is scalability and simplicity. Because it's using the FASERIP chassis but slightly scaled down numbers, it actually allows for faster gameplay than FASERIP (which is insanely fast once you understand it).

By the way, I have something for you.  You should check your PM's.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;942199I find it very basic, so far.  It's not bad, but may be a little too vague for me.

I liked the random chargen, plus the FATE-like elements. It also looked like it would run very easily. Are you missing a certain level of crunch?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;942199I find it very basic, so far.  It's not bad, but may be a little too vague for me.

I prefer the vague in this case.  I've yet to see a Superhero book that gives me fluff that I can stomach.  Using what I have right now, I can still honestly tell you that I am perfectly fine ignoring Aberrant's fluff.  And I most certainly want nothing to do with Champions.  

As it stands, "Quantum Blast" is a perfect example of vague.  "You blast [whatever it is you shoot]."

I like it.  Or is there something else in this system that you are talking about that isn't fluff?

Quote from: Crüesader;942439I prefer the vague in this case.  I've yet to see a Superhero book that gives me fluff that I can stomach.  Using what I have right now, I can still honestly tell you that I am perfectly fine ignoring Aberrant's fluff.  And I most certainly want nothing to do with Champions.  

As it stands, "Quantum Blast" is a perfect example of vague.  "You blast [whatever it is you shoot]."

I like it.  Or is there something else in this system that you are talking about that isn't fluff?

I need things like a range of what Amazing strength means, what's the minimum and maximum weight?  Nothing super definite, just a ballpark, but it doesn't give that much.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;942469I need things like a range of what Amazing strength means, what's the minimum and maximum weight?  Nothing super definite, just a ballpark, but it doesn't give that much.

Use the Benchmarks table on page 13, assuming you're looking at the Assembled Edition. The table covers stuff like strength, speed, and distance. So, for example, someone with Amazing Strength (Strength could lift a jet or train. Bumping it to 9 would allow for a building to be lifted, and 10 puts one in the territory of tossing mountains around.

Quote from: Brand55;942474Use the Benchmarks table on page 13, assuming you're looking at the Assembled Edition. The table covers stuff like strength, speed, and distance. So, for example, someone with Amazing Strength (Strength could lift a jet or train. Bumping it to 9 would allow for a building to be lifted, and 10 puts one in the territory of tossing mountains around.

What kind of jet plane?  Fighter?  747?  That's an incredibly wide range.  That's what I meant by vague.  It's not bad, but it's a bit too broad.