From: lmollett@lunatix.uucp (Laura Mollett)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Streamlining Hero (was Re: marvel)
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:05:05 GMT
Organization: Lexington Public Access Unix. -KY- (606) 253-1481

In article <1992Aug29.090939.13438@ecst.csuchico.edu> tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn) writes:
>Laura Mollett writes:
>>I'm a beginning Hero GM (we're playing FH) and I can't seem to figure
>>out exactly how to speed combat up without losing anything.  I'd really
>>appreciate the info if ya don't mind.
>
>A few simple rules:
	I'm sorry it has taken me so long to reply to this.  The bbs that
gives me read news access went down for a few, but it's back now :).
>
>1) Don't merely be the referee, be the Gamemaster. Your word is law, and
>   do not encourage debate at the table. Allow (encourage) creative actions,
>   but do not allow players to question or discuss your decisions.
>   a) Corollary: You must be consistent with both the established rules
>      and any house rules you've set before.
>   b) Corollary: You should decide effects in a way so as not to penalize
>      the players for being creative. If anything, err on the side of the
>      PC's. After all, they are the heros.
		I think this is one place where I'm having major problems.
I'm having some trouble making decisions between what is "reasonable" and what
will end up being the most fun role-played.  Also, somewhere below, you
mentioned that it's a good idea to make decisions based on character
conception, and that's another place I'm having trouble.  I have one character
(the most powerful in the game, as he understands the Hero rules the best) who
is playing a "swash-buckling" type of character.  He's a very good role-player
and has a tendancy to think up "3 muskateers" types of actions.  I'm having a
lot of trouble judging them.  Also the other characters are _not_ the same
type, but are playing more "realistic" people, in some ways, and I'm having
trouble being consistent.
	Ex:  The characters are in a tower with no exits - no windows etc.
		only one door...they know the bad guys are there, and that
		the bad guys have a good idea where they are.  One character
		decides to go on down the stairs, basically looking for
		trouble.  The others follow shortly after.  The first 
		character meets the major bad guy coming up the stairs, force
		marching a captured PC with a sword in his back.  The stairs
		are spiral, open on one side, and very narrow, with a landing
		about every 50 feet.  The first PC hears the bad guys coming
		up the stairs and stops on the landing the wait.  The captured
		PC is in the lead, the major bad guy is next, and there are
		a whole troupe of others behind him.  The swash-buckling
		character is 2nd on the scene.  The first character and major
		bad guy are chatting about making a deal exchanging captured
		PC.  The swash-buckler wants to jump over his party members
		head, jump over the head of the captured PC and run into the
		major bad guy bowling him down the stairs.  How in the world
		does one judge this kind of stuff.  Just to make it worse, 
		instead of saying that he was "going" to do that, he asked me
		if he could.  I told him it looked very difficult.  It seemed
		to me like the chances would be very good of him falling off
		the open side of the stairs and splatting 250 feet down (where
		the tower ends).  But it is a part of his character conception
		(swing from the chandeliers).  Also the first PC had used his
		action and since we were on 12 (lst combat round) he couldn't
		dodge.  What chances the PC would collide with the first PC
		instead of making it over him.  The captured PC was bound
		(physically and mentally) so how was he going to get over him,
		and hit the major bad guy (right behind him with the sword)
		etc.  Eventually the first PC TK'd the captured PC up out of
		the way, and the swash-buckler did roll down the stairs 
		bowling the bad guys down, and I didn't make him fall off the
		side, but realistically that still seems enormously difficult
		to me.
>
>2) Know the rules. You need not memorize them, but you need to know what
>   is in and what is not in the book. Fortunately, Hero doesn't have much
>   that is absolutely needed aside from the rulesbook (though FH's source-
>   book is thick, it is all guide.)
>   a) Corollary: The rules *are* consistent to a large degree (detractors
>      mutterings to the contrary) and you will see that most of the time
>      you can make up rules that are very close to what the book allows.
>   b) Corollary: The rules are also *thick.* Don't page through the rules
>      unless it is a matter of PC death or otherwise extreme (climax of 
>      a campaign, etc.) Keep things flowing.
		This is one of my major problems, of course.  I don't know
		them well enough.  I'm taking a break right now while
		someone else runs, so I'll have some extra time to go over
		them.  I know the basic rules well enough (11 plus OCV minus
		DCV - that one's not too bad :), but when we add STR for
		weapons, or combat maneuvers things seem to really bog down,
		and we end up looking stuff up in the book (ug).
>
>3) Know the characters. You *should* memorize them. Not only will this help
>   your plotting for them (I can hear the players cheering already) but it
>   will also allow you to decide if an action is allowed/attempted/success-
>   ful based on the character's conception.
>   a) Corollary: Try to be there for character creation. This will also cut
>      down on the instances where the character is created, then has to be
>      retrofitted into the campaign to fit. This is the best time to learn
>      the PC, to be there at the time of creation.
>   b) Corollary: When in doubt, question the action based on the character
>      conception (make sure you know the conception properly) and decide
>      based on the conception, rules be damned.
		I did ok on this part, I think.  I had a character-making
		party, so I was there when all the characters were made up,
		and I gave out some package deals that I wrote myself, so
		I understand what the characters have pretty well.  And I
		have copies of all the character sheets.  But see above for
		problems ruling actions based on character.
>
>4) Be organized. The photocopier is your friend. Graph paper is your savior.
>   Take down speed charts for everyone, so you can announce segments and 
>   call out actions. Have a special d12 out to mark the passing segments.
>   Have copies of everyone's sheets, and especially the mage's spell sheet.
>   Have your NPCs prepared ahead of time, or sketch them out on the spot,
>   but don't worry about points. The system *is* slow, and speed is of the
>   essence.
>
>5) Keep things short. NPCs go down to stay when they lose all Stun. They
>   go into shock, run around with blood spurting from limbs, etc when they
>   take their Body in a single attack, before or after hit locations.
>   You can even rate minor NPCs in 'attacks' that they can take before 
>   going away.
>
>6) If your willing to lose things (your header indicated that you weren't)
>   a) The hit location chart and the system in general allows for a Conan-
>      esque "I've waded through a hundred plebes, and I'm going to wade
>      through a hundred more" style high fantasy. I've found increasing the
>      damage modifiers on the hit location chart better simulates whatever
>      'reality' means. I use it to mean whatever the source material I'm 
>      working from indicates.
My 2nd major problem (other than the judging stuff) is that I want to make
combat "bloodier" (deadlier) at least for the NPC's and "faster" at the same
time, but Fantasy Hero's suggestion to make the game "bloodier" is to use
the hit location chart, and that just seems to make things slower, esp. when
you add a lot of combat maneuvers.  It seems to take forever to stun things
into unconciousness, and be a little out of character for the fantasy game.
I also have problems with the armor and adding PD...unless I'm confused
somewhere adding basically any piece of leather means you have armor and having
armor allows you to subtract your PD from an attack.  This seems to
make it take a _lot_ longer to kill something, and gets even worse when you
add the hit locations (do they or don't they have armor on that spot...subtract
PD in this place, not in this place etc.)  Any ideas?
>   b) The Speed chart is nice and all, but you can condense it down to a
>      4 SPD being max (or 6) with a minimum of work. It will still allow 
>      the same ordering, but it will be a lot simplier to work with. Just
>      make each impulse 2 or 3 seconds instead of one. Better yet, you can
>      probably do most combats with only a minimum one, one that you can 
>      keep at hand and nearly memorize.
I'm not sure I understand this, but it sounds like a really good idea...could
you give me an example?  The problem is I'm not really very math minded, but
we like the way Hero works for making up characters.  If we could get the
combat to work out well, this would be my groups fav. game.  It worked fine for
the one guy in the group who really knows the system well, but with me as GM...
>   c) You can reveal the NPC's DCV's (and ECV if applicible) for the public
>      record. When the time comes for a player to act, the player should have
>      already figured the to-hit number. If not, the character holds until 
>      the player is ready.
I do this.  But only one of the PC's really knows the system, and the others
forget what you have to add and subtract.  That'll get better, I suppose.
>   d) Lose the map. Just assume that a normal moving character will move
>      a few meters (about 6) in a half-action. Keep track of who is how far
>      from whom, and narrate to the players what they see, aided by a sketch
>      map (not drawn to scale, nor intricately detailed.) It should look like
>      a football strategy session when it's done.
>
>Hope these help!
A lot!!  Thanks very much for the long detailed discussion.  I think I really
shoulda let the guy bowl down the stairs, based on your comments.  Anyway it
made me think about it in a different light...it IS part of his character
conception to do that.  Thanks again,
				Laura Mollett
>
>-- 
>"A witty saying proves nothing."
>		-- Voltaire