lol
Hiya
That website has gotta be all kinds of illegal.
I assume you mean the one for the Marvel Superhero Advanced site I posted? No, it's all totally legit, with WotC permission. Feel free to DL and play all you want. :)
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Paul, All I can say is wow and thanks.
Another one I thought looked really interesting is With Great Power... It's an indie game where the rules are designed so that you fail early on to succeed later (think Spider-Man getting dumped and then beaten up by the Vulture before he comes back to save the day). Seems like an interesting attempt to imitate the structure of an actual comic book story.
That's an interesting idea. I think Mutants & Masterminds discussed some things along those lines, too (e.g. if you let the villain get away during your first battle, you'll get a hero point to use later).
Another one I thought looked really interesting is With Great Power... It's an indie game where the rules are designed so that you fail early on to succeed later (think Spider-Man getting dumped and then beaten up by the Vulture before he comes back to save the day). Seems like an interesting attempt to imitate the structure of an actual comic book story.That's an interesting idea. I think Mutants & Masterminds discussed some things along those lines, too (e.g. if you let the villain get away during your first battle, you'll get a hero point to use later).
It isn't handled in exactly that manner, but that idea is a key factor in the Mechanics of Truth & Justice as well.
All of Chad Undercoffler's PDQ games really.
They are interesting ideas in an age where we do not see the PCs fleeing or letting the villian get away all that often.
I've never been fond of that kind of meta-rule. Largely because I don't know of a good way to think about from the character's perspective. Spider-man doesn't decide to get dumped and beaten up by the Vulture so that he'll be more effective later. Letting the villain get away, so you get a hero point doesn't map to anything in the character's point of view.
And, as a player, I prefer to keep my decision making as near the character's as possible. Immersion is what I play for.
I guess it depends what you mean by "immersion". If I'm playing a comic book superhero RPG and the stories we end up with don't feel like comic book stories (e.g. inconclusive fights are common in the comics but aren't common in the RPG), I would probably consider that a lack of immersion.
A friend of mine contributed to the development of Phoenix, a set of superhero expansion rules for d20 Modern. The results are free, and available at http://phoenixprojectrpg.com/
I was involved with a few playtests, so while I might be biased towards the system, I also have a pretty good idea of how it plays out. The goal was to create some modicum of balance between the Supermans and Batmans of the superhero world (that is, heroes who come with massive superpowers built right in, and heroes who tinker or train their way to the top).
The results aren't perfect -- as the site notes repeatedly, players who seek to break the game will almost certainly find ways to succeed -- but it's a fun, accessible system, especially for those of us who feel most comfortable with d20 rules. Character creation takes time, but can be delightful, considering the range of powers, feats, and gadgets. There are even rules to include magic and psionics (under "F/X").
Check it out!
HERO 4th/GURPS 3rd. The latest incarnations I am less familiar with, although I doubt the principles are all that different. Those two along with COC/BRP (anyone remember Superworld?) I can run off a stack of blank index cards and the basic rules.
HU is an idea farm - playing it is far more "meh". V&V was awesome in its day. Neither are quick to play for those new to the system. FASERIP is also very fast and easy - my complaint is that character development is glacial with the Karma system.
V&V was awesome in its day. Neither are quick to play for those new to the system.
I assume you're thinking of character creation in V&V. Playing V&V certainly wasn't very complicated, other than the attack vs. defense chart.
I've never been fond of that kind of meta-rule. Largely because I don't know of a good way to think about from the character's perspective. Spider-man doesn't decide to get dumped and beaten up by the Vulture so that he'll be more effective later. Letting the villain get away, so you get a hero point doesn't map to anything in the character's point of view.
It's less a case of "letting" the villain get away from the POV of the character as much as much as it is the player accepting the complications, even if not 100% realistic, that cause the PC to fail to defeat his foe. Maybe one of Vulture's slashing attacks severs Spidey's swinging web causing him to fall. He can easily save himself, but the delay is enough to allow Vulture to get away. Accepting the setback allows the player to get a hero point rather than trying to play out a pursuit scene. Or maybe Rhino's charge, deftly avoided by Spider-Man, ended with the villain colliding with renovation scaffolding on the facade of a building. It collapses toward bystanders whom Spidey has to save... allowing Rhino to get away (and Spider-Man's player to take an action point).
That works a lot better for me.It's less a case of "letting" the villain get away from the POV of the character as much as much as it is the player accepting the complications, even if not 100% realistic, that cause the PC to fail to defeat his foe. Maybe one of Vulture's slashing attacks severs Spidey's swinging web causing him to fall. He can easily save himself, but the delay is enough to allow Vulture to get away. Accepting the setback allows the player to get a hero point rather than trying to play out a pursuit scene. Or maybe Rhino's charge, deftly avoided by Spider-Man, ended with the villain colliding with renovation scaffolding on the facade of a building. It collapses toward bystanders whom Spidey has to save... allowing Rhino to get away (and Spider-Man's player to take an action point).I've never been fond of that kind of meta-rule. Largely because I don't know of a good way to think about from the character's perspective. Spider-man doesn't decide to get dumped and beaten up by the Vulture so that he'll be more effective later. Letting the villain get away, so you get a hero point doesn't map to anything in the character's point of view.
Sometimes it's just a matter of putting the situation in a genre-based frame of reference. ;)
Essentially, the hero points are given out when complications arise or the PCs are defeated. If Spider-Man actually got knocked out by Mysterio or captured by the clone of Miles Warren, he'd get a Hero point for receiving the beat down. No player willingness necessary - it just happens because he got beat. He'd also get one if Mary Jane, Aunt May, or Gwen Stacy got involved in a situation (assuming they're all complications of his - and they probably should be). Ideally you want to have them build up toward the final confrontation, escaping his deathtrap, or to facilitate them finally corning the villain if the investigation proves a challenge.
Now, see, alternate modes of attack (or any) powers are one place M&M really shines. Since the action economy is the same, M&M dispenses with having the PC pay a lot for secondary attack modes on the same base power. It's pretty easy and slick. That is, if I understand the terms you are raising.
I thought it was unacceptably punitive for people who didn't have the "right" character concept in mind. But hey, different strokes and all that. :)
Now, see, alternate modes of attack (or any) powers are one place M&M really shines. Since the action economy is the same, M&M dispenses with having the PC pay a lot for secondary attack modes on the same base power. It's pretty easy and slick. That is, if I understand the terms you are raising.I thought it was unacceptably punitive for people who didn't have the "right" character concept in mind. But hey, different strokes and all that. :)
I really don't understand what you mean about it being punitive for not having the "right" character concept.
I really don't understand what you mean about it being punitive for not having the "right" character concept.Now, see, alternate modes of attack (or any) powers are one place M&M really shines. Since the action economy is the same, M&M dispenses with having the PC pay a lot for secondary attack modes on the same base power. It's pretty easy and slick. That is, if I understand the terms you are raising.I thought it was unacceptably punitive for people who didn't have the "right" character concept in mind. But hey, different strokes and all that. :)
Well, I didn't really want to go into details because it's been many years and I'm fuzzy on the exactitude. And it's also a bit of a threadjack. But suppose player A builds a character with 10 points in 'sword' and 10 points in 'pistol', while player B puts 11 points into 'swordpistol', which include both a 10 point sword attack and a 10 point pistol attack.
Player B is getting the second weapon for "free" (okay, it actually costs one point instead of ten but that's close enough to free) simply because he's not constrained by player A's conceptual concerns.
If you want more than one type of attack, there is never any reason why you would not max out one attack and then tack on alternative attack modes to it, rather than buying each attack individually (in real numbers I think it's a lot more than 9 points you're losing out on).
I didn't like that, and my attempts at trying to figure out what I was doing wrong was met with comments like "that's how it works and it's great" or "obviously you should only do that if it makes conceptual sense". Neither of which were particular helpful.
Eventually I gave up on trying.
Well, I didn't really want to go into details because it's been many years and I'm fuzzy on the exactitude. And it's also a bit of a threadjack. But suppose player A builds a character with 10 points in 'sword' and 10 points in 'pistol', while player B puts 11 points into 'swordpistol', which include both a 10 point sword attack and a 10 point pistol attack.Player B is getting the second weapon for "free" (okay, it actually costs one point instead of ten but that's close enough to free) simply because he's not constrained by player A's conceptual concerns.
If you want more than one type of attack, there is never any reason why you would not max out one attack and then tack on alternative attack modes to it, rather than buying each attack individually (in real numbers I think it's a lot more than 9 points you're losing out on).
I didn't like that, and my attempts at trying to figure out what I was doing wrong was met with comments like "that's how it works and it's great" or "obviously you should only do that if it makes conceptual sense". Neither of which were particular helpful.
There might be reason to include separate attack powers - if one power gets suppressed, all of the attacks based on it get suppressed as well. A separate power would be unaffected. There are also attacks that, conceptually, shouldn't be built together. A gun/sword works OK as a rifle with bayonet, but as two separate objects I think most GMs probably would require them to be bought separately.
But I can certainly see your point about the complexity of interweaving concepts and the power structure. This why point systems like M&M and Champions generally work better when the player works closely with his GM in building the character.
I'm kind of a Super gamer uber fan. Use to run Meanwhile...The Supers Gaming Podcast.
I prefer games like HERO System and GURPS but to get new players I fish with Mutants & Masterminds.
Are your podcast episodes still available?
Subject says it all.
GURPS
I definitely like Aberrant a great deal. Part of the reason for that, however, is that it's not really a Supers game; it's about how the world would work if there were people with super powers, which is completely different. I like the mechanics for it, and I love the setting, but I wouldn't really call it a superhero rpg.
It looks like Marvel Heroic Role Playing is at its end, at least as far as new development.
Margaret Weis Productions - Pipeline News
"And in Marvel news… the economics of licensing a tie-in product is always something we have to weigh carefully. We brokered an admittedly ambitious license with Marvel. Our first event, CIVIL WAR, was successful and well received, but it didn’t garner the level of sales necessary to sustain the rest of the line. We’ve learned from this and are taking a very different approach with the other licensed properties we’re bringing out to you in the next three years. We believe we created a great game. Those of you that have supported us have been terrific, and we appreciate you. But, unfortunately, we will not be bringing any new product out under the Marvel line. We know this affects our customers. Those that have pre-ordered Annihilation will receive a full refund or a credit worth 150% of their Annihilation order to use on existing or future product."
Well, that's kind of disappointing. I had heard good things about that game.
On the other hand, I think it would be kind of nice if they were to try developing their own intellectual property rather than simply always making games from other peoples. By this point I feel they have enough of a name for themselves that could work well.
Of course, that is wholly off-topic for the original post.
I LOVED running/playing in the FASERIP Marvel game (back in the 80/90s when I was in college). I also really like Mutants and Masterminds for it's amazing flexibility (like someone said you can make a superman vs. batman as a legit fight using it). Aberrant was neat for it's history, but suffered from the usual White Wolf system. I've also done Villains & Vigilanties (like it), Champions (not a fan), and if you can find it, Underground was one of the slickest background color for games (think Marshall Law the RPG).
I definitely like Aberrant a great deal. Part of the reason for that, however, is that it's not really a Supers game; it's about how the world would work if there were people with super powers, which is completely different. I like the mechanics for it, and I love the setting, but I wouldn't really call it a superhero rpg.
That's a good point. As a European gamer who's never actually had much exposure to traditional American comic books, I really like the "realistic" approach of the setting.
My favorite is GURPS 4th Edition for superheroes. With the core book and Powers, you can literally make anything you want, plus you have disadvantages and such, something most games don't have. Like for example, if you wanted to make Superman in most systems, how do you do his weakness to kryptonite? You don't... There's no rules for that... but GURPS there is.
Hiya
That website has gotta be all kinds of illegal.I assume you mean the one for the Marvel Superhero Advanced site I posted? No, it's all totally legit, with WotC permission. Feel free to DL and play all you want. :)
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Not exactly... from the site you linked...
TSR is a registered trademark owned by TSR Inc. TSR inc. is a subsidiary of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a division of Hasbro, Inc. Names(s) of character(s) and the distinctive likeness(es) thereof are Trademarks and © of Marvel Characters, Inc. and DC Comics, and are used without permission, for educational purposes. This site is NOT a for-profit enterprise, and does not make money. It provides resources to players of a game no longer being produced.
That does not say WotC is ok with it. This is a case of what in the computer games industry is called "Abandonware." The makers of the game no long support it, no longer care about it, and probably aren't going to come after you for pirating their game... however, they technically still could, and therefore it's technically still illegal.
It's been up for years. It's not exactly hidden or shady. You think WoTC doesn't know about it?
If they don't care, why do you?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's been up for years. It's not exactly hidden or shady. You think WoTC doesn't know about it?
If they don't care, why do you?
I was just pointing out the fallacy that WotC approved it. They probably don't care, but if they did, they totally could do something about it because it IS still technically illegal. That's all I'm saying. Just because they don't bother to shut down the site doesn't mean they've expressly given permission any more than EA has given permission to pirate their 1986 game Wasteland. They don't stop you, doesn't mean they gave you permission.
It's been up for years. It's not exactly hidden or shady. You think WoTC doesn't know about it?
If they don't care, why do you?
Well, PAIZO might object to someone linking that site on their boards. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, PAIZO might object to someone linking that site on their boards. :)It's been up for years. It's not exactly hidden or shady. You think WoTC doesn't know about it?
If they don't care, why do you?
Yep, even more so with it being a WotC owned property.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, that's kind of disappointing. I had heard good things about that game.
On the other hand, I think it would be kind of nice if they were to try developing their own intellectual property rather than simply always making games from other peoples. By this point I feel they have enough of a name for themselves that could work well.Of course, that is wholly off-topic for the original post.
The Marvel RPG is quite good IMO. I highly recommend picking it up. If you want to buy the PDF's, you have until April 30th I believe, they're discontinuing online sales after that.
One of the lead designers on Marvel is in my gaming group. We don't play it, because he doesn't like playing his own games, but he does good work. The most we've done is help him test a couple of demo's leading up to conventions. I've played it a little with some other people though as well, normally I'm not a big on the super hero genre, but I do like the system. Marvel is one of my favorite systems to use a die-step system, even though I'm not normally a big fan of that kind of system, I do like theirs.
Well, that's kind of disappointing. I had heard good things about that game.
On the other hand, I think it would be kind of nice if they were to try developing their own intellectual property rather than simply always making games from other peoples. By this point I feel they have enough of a name for themselves that could work well.Of course, that is wholly off-topic for the original post.
The Marvel RPG is quite good IMO. I highly recommend picking it up. If you want to buy the PDF's, you have until April 30th I believe, they're discontinuing online sales after that.
One of the lead designers on Marvel is in my gaming group. We don't play it, because he doesn't like playing his own games, but he does good work. The most we've done is help him test a couple of demo's leading up to conventions. I've played it a little with some other people though as well, normally I'm not a big on the super hero genre, but I do like the system. Marvel is one of my favorite systems to use a die-step system, even though I'm not normally a big fan of that kind of system, I do like theirs.
It is a really good system, and I recommend getting the base game, the Civil War core book, and the Civil War X-Men book before they disappear. The others are needed only if you like the characters that appear in those books. I have the core book in print and PDFs of all the Civil War stuff. I didn't really care for the Civil War story, but I wanted all the datafiles for the heroes and villains. I now have enough to run about anything (non-cosmic) in the Marvel Universe. Plus I have enough character comparisons that making home-brew and custom characters is a lot easier.
It's too bad about the game; I really like it. I am hoping they republish the rules (with all the Marvel stuff expunged) as a generic supers game.
One of the lead designers on Marvel is in my gaming group. We don't play it, because he doesn't like playing his own games, but he does good work.
If it's a question of not liking his vocation to dominate his avocation and wanting to play something he's not constantly working on, then I could understand that. But frankly, I would be suspicious of any chef who doesn't eat his own cooking...
|
My Vote is Champions powered by the Hero system. Anyone who says that you need a PHD to play the game is wrong. If you graduated from high school you can do the math. It dose take a more work than some other supers rpgs on the market. Yet out of all of them imo the most versatile and complete ones on the market.
Jeff's point about Champions being "un-comic-like" is a good one, although I mostly like the fact that people are hard to kill (both in Champions and as the default assumption in M&M). Certainly his comment about making double sure that villains are unconscious was a major problem in my experience.
If it's a question of not liking his vocation to dominate his avocation and wanting to play something he's not constantly working on, then I could understand that. But frankly, I would be suspicious of any chef who doesn't eat his own cooking...
One of the lead designers on Marvel is in my gaming group. We don't play it, because he doesn't like playing his own games, but he does good work.
At conventions he has to run demo's and sessions of his games and he's paid to do so, it is work for him, so in the home games it still kind of feels like work.
It's not uncommon for creative types to not really seek out experiencing their own work.
Also, as a group we have a ton of games we want to play and we've all played Marvel at some point. We also do a lot of play testing for other projects, though not for MWP, as we have multiple game designers in the group.
I've played a lot of Champions and it gradually got more and more frustrating for me. It's very versatile and complete, but much of that versatility is a trap. It's easy to be misled into building something like a many typical comic book super-heroes and while you can do that, much of the time you'll get a useless or vulnerable character. Everyone really has to have pretty close to the same levels of offense and defense to be effective, which simulates the standard brick pretty, but doesn't handle most comic book energy projectors. It's also pretty easy to break those limits and build an overpowered combat monster, unless you establish limits beyond total number of points spent.
I think Champions is very good at recognizing that it's possible to create the overpowered combat monster and offers some of the best advice about GM involvement in PC creation - highlighting powers that push the envelope, for example. I could see more of that getting into PF when it comes to understanding the ups and downs of certain spells and feat selection.
But I'm surprised about the problems you've had making energy projectors. I've typically found them as easy as making bricks. It's the characters with multiple powers based on one broad theme (element controllers, speedsters) that are the biggest pain. Too many powers to have to pay for.
There's no good way in the system to represent what FASERIP called Power Stunts. Creative variations on your normal powers or novel, situational uses of them. Which is a very common thing in superhero comics. Powers are very mechanical, built on points and defined by the abilities not the special effects. If you've got an energy blast, you can't use it to slow yourself when falling from a plane, unless you bought something to reflect that, for example.
If you have not checked out Mutants and Masterminds/DC Adventures yet, I recommend doing so. They've got a very good answer to the power stunt - one I like much better than FASERIP Marvel's (which I thought made them too costly).
I agree that that's another shortcoming of Champions: if Spider-Man needs to wear a bulletproof vest in your game, something's wrong.
(Cyclops is probably a better example, but I've always thought of the issue with squishy characters as "the Spider-Man problem", not "the Cyclops problem".)
Wild Talents was mentioned, but can anyone expand on it further?
How would it be for a generic supers game?
Does it have a decent character generation system or are you just expected to use the published characters?
The cortex system has a book coming out this year that would help with chargen. As is its not hard to do but can be op since you just pick what you want. There is a random generator available on the website. And it's not hard to modify someone close to what you want. Ex. In an exiles based game my wife was playing the daughter of tony stark and carol Danvers. She took a few things from each ones power sets to make a character who had an armored weapon system but had her own super str and speed.
Re: Cyclops and Spiderman
You do know that the X-Men uniforms are reinforced/resistant to various energies (i.e., "Armor" under Champions rules)? Cyclops has also done some martial arts training, IIRC. Yes, he's primarily focused toward his eyebeams, but that doesn't mean he's too much of a glass cannon; he is a bit of one (sort of like a blaster sorcerer), which is one reason why he's part of a team instead of a solo hero.
The same with Spiderman's suit (although to a lesser degree, since that radioactive spider bite made him tougher, as well as faster and stronger, than a "normal"). Spiderman, however, is really a low-level "brick" with high agility (making him hard to hit) and supernormal "Spider-sense." In Champions terms, he has a high "Danger Sense" talent with "Defensive Combat Levels" (making him even more difficult to hit) based on his "Danger Sense" roll. "Not getting hit" is mentioned as one of the forms of defense in the Champions rulebook.