SUPERS! (2nd Edition)

[Simon W]

Okay, I'm not even sure I want to do a 2nd edition (but if someone else wanted to, I'd consider letting someone else have a go - PM me with offers!). But, if I did decide to, (or if someone else did it) what do you think should the Supers! Second Edition look like? And, how should it be published (i.e. just pdf or pdf & pod or through 3rd party distro like Cubicle 7/Chronicle City or self published all the way)?

[Dragonfly]

I don't really know about the industry stuff. I haven't researched publishers, publication costs, printing costs, distribution deals, etc. at all - and wouldn't presume to know what's best - at least not without doing the research first.

As far as I'm concerned, a second edition should not be a huge departure from the 1st. It should mostly be about streamlining certain powers or rules, maybe adding a few options here and there (in terms of boosts, complications, advantages, disadvantages, powers, aptitudes, and the like), providing some guidelines for things like material strength and super vehicles, and otherwise building on whats already there. I think care should be taken to not get carried away. Supers! should remain very much the rules-lite game that it currently is - just with a few new bells and whistles to patch a couple of holes and attract some new attention. To be honest, the work that Dustland, honestiago, and a few others have contributed already goes far towards addressing anything that I find lacking in the current version of the rules, and I hope that my work on the bestiary, the Multiform power, and benchmarks contributes a bit in this regard as well. A second edition, as far as I'm concerned, could simply tweak and consolidate those aspects of this fan-generated material that you like, adding them to a new version of the rulesbook.

Quite honestly, I would rather see you remain at the helm. This is your baby, and I trust your instincts with it. I'd love to see you use us as sounding boards or idea generators. I'd like to see you ecnourage vigorous debate or discussion on our part regarding how things should work or what needs to be included, but ultimately I'd feel most comfortable with you making the final decisions on what should be an official part of the rules, what should be presented as an optional rule, or what should be discarded overall.

I also tend to believe that a Think Tank approach to developing a second edition would be exciting, would draw on some great talent and love for the system, and would generate a good product. I would love to be part of that sort of think tank, whether you are at the helm, or whether you pass it on to somebody else.

Well, those are my initial thoughts. I'll probably write more later.

Best,

Dragonfly

[honestiago]

Dragonfly is correct. A 2nd ed would look a lot like the first. The things I think would need to be addressed are twofold:

(1) Crunch: no adding to complexity, but certainly a balancing of certain powers, as well as clarifications on others (regen and summoning come to mind). Finding a way to work some additional tactical elements in would also be helpful. Some of this can be addressed by adding in the components that Dust and Dfly have already proffered here. I'd personally like to see some sort of section regarding campaign play. Specifically, the development of the character on two axes: vertical (gaining "levels" in such a way that doesn't lead to tossing 8d) and horizontal (the development of the character as a person--something like MHRPG's milestones perhaps). The Ads/disads list could be expanded to accommodate this sort of thing or it could be made simpler (characters have types of hindrances, for example--social, psychological and physical--the player has to create the specific type). Icons Motivatios ape this, and that is one thing that might be brought into Supers with an expansion of the role-playing aspect of the game. You can achieve the same effect I think by merely expanding the Ads-disads list.


(2) Fluff: The system has a setting that perhaps needs more development. This could be done through supplements, of course, but maybe an expansion of the setting in RAW would appeal to some gamers. This could include such things as the public's attitudes toward super heroes. Of course a lot of that is determined by what era one plays. Perhaps some fluff about campaign creation addressing tone, etc.?

If a 2E is to be developed, it might be a good idea to discuss what elements/flavor players dig, then try to address them via the backdrop, to include its history, the major players, the setting feel and so on. I mention this bc I feel there isn't a massive amount of things to be done rule-wise. And if that's true, the challenge becomes hooking players another way. The key is to figure out what that way is.

---------- Post added at 09:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 PM ----------

Honestly a 2nd Edition is nothing more than the implementation of things that work well in play. You can easily drop in items like these right now if you wanted:

(1) The Qualities aspect Dustland has already produced (I have included a version of it in my next supplement already, and included an additional option called "ganging up" to make Mooks tougher).

(2) The dice pools option reaperwolf forwarded.

(3) Dragonfly's Multi-Form power

(4) My own tweak for summoning (to cite an example).

That's just a few things that came out of folks who've played the system mulling over fixes and tweaks.

---------- Post added at 09:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:19 PM ----------

And since I'm still thinking about it, here are a Disad that could be added:

Hangup (Disad)
The character has some sort of psychological problem or mental malfunction. Perhaps she is a glory hound, always seeking headlines (which leads her to take foolhardy chances). Or maybe she obsesses over the small scar on her cheek, treating it as if her appearance is grotesque (and lives in fear of losing her mask). This disad can be treated as a vulnerability or weakness, if the hangup is sufficiently hindering.

[burbleflurp]

I agree that the base of Supers2 is already there. Its strength is its ability to be modified/added to, as shown by honestiago's points (3) ands (4) above. What I feel is missing is a discussion in the rules as to why certain choices were made. The discussion between various people on these boards has been very helpful in that regard. Similarly a comment at the bottom of http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?582025-SUPERS!-Stuff-for-folks-to-use!/page6 (Cgeist's answer3 to Dragonfly's question) came out of the blue. I have no idea whether Dragonfly has any further comment to make about Cgeist's observation or not, but I found that such a suggestion if true will be very useful to me as a new GM.

Whilst I think Supers2 would benefit from a more formal setting, it wouldn't need to be in the main rulebook.

I've not seen the formal printed rulebook, but printed each page of the pdf in A5 (in B&W) at the local printer. I don't know about anyone else's printing costs, but in Australia I can buy it cheaper (after overseas shipping) than it would cost me to print the pdf in full color (A5 page size)! What I would say about the headings font is that it doesn't look great in B&W, and some of the artwork suffers as well.

(Oh and is it just me that's noticed that Beyond Belief Games appears to be the only active area under the Small Press/Indie forums at pen & paper games ?)

[honestiago]

Assuming this is a discussion of what we'd like to see in a second edition, I have a couple other thoughts, vis-a-vis powers.

I think there should be some way to link such things as Super Speed, Super Strength and Telekinesis to resistances, as a way to measure their passive capability. For example, rather than using SS dice for initiative, I'd have each dice in SS grant the character a +6 bonus to the normal INISH roll. For Super Strength, I'd have some sort of way to multiply SupStr by Fort to determine lift capability (or maybe just add Fort on top of SupStr to determine one's actualy lift). For TK, I think a link to Will would be applicable, in that you can do something like:

Will 3d

TK 3d

Lift capacity=(Will x TK) x 500. For the above, you get 4,500 lbs. Or something of that nature. (maybe the two multiplied, then add two zeroes [x100 basically]).

Super Speed might work the same way, as far as using Reaction to determine ground speed.

---------- Post added at 07:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:44 AM ----------

Whilst I think Supers2 would benefit from a more formal setting, it wouldn't need to be in the main rulebook.

That's a good point. I'm developing my own setting in my supplements, independent of Supersville.

[Dustland]

What you're describing is a big departure from how Supers! is set up imo Honestiago. And Fort isn't lifting capacity, Athleticism is. Just because the math is easy doesn't mean it's Supers! to me. Once you start down the path of math equations to derive abilities, stats, intiative, etc, I'm out. There's other games that do this and do it well, I don't see a reason to turn Supers into that.

Just my unsolicited two cents.

[Dragonfly]

Hey guys,

For what it's worth, I agree with Dustland on this, and for precicesly the same reasons. As I described over in rpg.net, I've really grown to appreciate the stand-alone nature of each Aptitude, Power, Resistance, etc., and linking these powers to Resistances seems to run somewhat counter to that.

For that matter, I'm also a little leary of the suggestion made earlier about creating a cosmic level of play that draws a line between traditional supers and cosmic ones. As far as I'm concerned, the source material doesn't really work that way. Spider-Man fights Firelord, Thor fights side-by-side with Hawkeye, and the Silver Surfer works on the same team with Nighthawk. This type of interaction would, IMO, be made more clunky by a rule that said that Silver Surfer, Thor, and Firelord operate at a different level (beyond having more dice for CERTAIN [not all] powers).

Source material aside, that sort of rule runs the risk of needlessly complicating the game.

All that said, there might be a pre-existing mechanic that a GM can use in order to manage those power levels while rolling fewer dice: Tough Defense and Armor Piercing.

Actually, for the sake of this discussion, why not streamline these Boosts, combining them into a new Boost called Maximum Effect. Maximum Effect could then be applied to any power (and possibly Aptitudes and/or Resistances).

Anyway, this is how I see this working. A GM running a cosmic level campaign COULD decide that all die increases beyond 6D MUST be purchased with the Maximum Effect Boost. The effect of this is that players still won't roll more than 6D to resolve actions (or 5D, or whatever the GM decides). To some degree, this provides the necessary effect (high result totals), while achieving the goal of not escalating the number of dice rolled. It also has dual advantages: 1) Even when employed, it works within the system as it exists, and 2) It maintains flexibility. A different GM or player group okay with large numbers of dice being rolled could simply not employ this option.

Now, this doesn't necessarily cover certain things like range, speed, and cosmic level areas effects. Upon further consideration, I don't think the system needs more rules to handle that sort of thing. Let the abstract nature of the game handle it for you.

Ex.) Star Lord has the power Cosmic Energy Control 8D (Boost: 3D). This allows him to affect 4 TARGETS. Star Lord is slumming it in Supersville, and runs into 4 super villains robbing a bank. He fires a comic bolt at the foursome, who are clustered around the bank entrace about 30' apart, but the exploding star bolt covers a broad enough area that they all have to save against the effect. Later, Star Lord is flying through space when he gets attacked by four imperial starships. Star Lord hurls a star bolt at ships, which are all approaching from the same direction, but are miles apart from each other (if not more). The distance, however, doesn't matter, because Star Lord's power affects TARGETS, not an area of a specified size. Furthermore, the Starships are considered minions. Star Lord rolls damage against their rating, and manages to destroy two ships with one blast.

In one setting, Star Lord's bolt is grand enough to destroy a fleet. In the other, it feels more mundane. To me, that emulates the comics pretty well.

Cosmic level play, then, might be best accomodated by some GM advice, rather than by new rules. In other words, the "fluff" mentioned in an earlier post, as opposed to the "crunch."

Mind you, I'm up for SOME crunch. I agree with the sense that Regeneration is over-powered, as well as with many of the other things mentioned by you guys.

Well, that's enough for now. I need to take Goggle Girl to her ballet class.

Best,

Dragonfly

[urbwar]

As I all ready made suggestions in another thread, I don't really have anything more to add. I just want to say that I hope you stay at the helm Simon, and not pass this onto someone else.

[Dragonfly]

I just want to say that I hope you stay at the helm Simon, and not pass this onto someone else.

Amen to that! I know I already said it, but it bears repeating.

Best,

Dragonfly

[honestiago]

What you're describing is a big departure from how Supers! is set up imo Honestiago. And Fort isn't lifting capacity, Athleticism is.

There's nothing in the rules that states either has anything to do with lifting capability. And frankly, if you were to have someone lift something in game, there's nothing saying you have to use either. In fact, considering that Fort and Reaction make up the inherent physicality of a character, I think it's safe to say one can assume Fort is as good a representation of Brawn as anything, including Athleticism. It's a judgment call, but I think there's enough there to defend the way I used it, whether you dislike the suggestion or not.

Just because the math is easy doesn't mean it's Supers! to me. Once you start down the path of math equations to derive abilities, stats, intiative, etc, I'm out. There's other games that do this and do it well, I don't see a reason to turn Supers into that.

Just my unsolicited two cents.

A couple of variations on a pair of powers isn't rewriting the system. The only derivative you're getting is a number, the same way the original numbers in the game are derived -- so many dice equals so much capability. What it does is enhance the value of the resistance. You would still roll the dice separately. Your suggestion that a minor tweak constitutes a slippery slope is off the mark. Resistances are what they are. So are Powers. I would further add that my suggestions do not detract from the stand alone nature of the Powers in play, just the derived numbers (or benchmarks). The dice mechanic is the same.

On a related note, no one is suggesting a major rewrite, including me. That said, you and I both know that we had to enact several bits of houseruling when we played. And some of the power choices could be tweaked a bit, we know that. Honestly, I don't see how this is any different from your suggestion to grant a bonus for every 6 points you roll on a dice (in the case of covering fire, for example). I'm only suggesting a tweak to a powers blurb, not a rule that changes the nature of the game, and I frankly resent the insinuation that I'm doing otherwise.

[Dustland]

Sorry to have hurt your feelings. And Weightlifting is a specialization of Athleticism so that's where I'm coming from with regards to lifting capacities.

[Dragonfly]

On a related note, no one is suggesting a major rewrite, including me. That said, you and I both know that we had to enact several bits of houseruling when we played. And some of the power choices could be tweaked a bit, we know that. Honestly, I don't see how this is any different from your suggestion to grant a bonus for every 6 points you roll on a dice (in the case of covering fire, for example). I'm only suggesting a tweak to a powers blurb, not a rule that changes the nature of the game, and I frankly resent the insinuation that I'm doing otherwise.

Hey honestiago,

You haven't responded to my post yet, but based on your response here I'm concerned that I offended you as well. If so, I want to make a preemptive apology. Needless to say - I wasn't trying to insult you, or suggest that you want to dramatically alter the rules. Indeed, you've made statements expressing your desire to keep the game largely as-is in previous posts. I also want to state that I have the highest respect for the work that you've done and for the ideas that you generate. For that matter, I hold everybody else in our little SUPERS! community in the same high regard.

That being said, we're not always going to agree, and I believe that it's in the best interest of SUPERS! for us to be vocal about our ideas and to weigh in on each others' contributions. In this particular case, I happen to agree with (or prefer) Dustland's interpretation of the rules with regards to Resistances, but you're right - the rules are vague on this, and your interpretation is perfectly valid (even if mine is different). I also happen to prefer Dustland's approach regarding the issue of using Resistances to figure certain values, but I by NO MEANS believe that your suggestions would destroy SUPERS!. I AM a little more concerned about the cosmic thing, but only mildly so. I'm also taking it as a problem to solve, because I do see the need for accomodating cosmic level play, but am trying to figure out how to do it by staying as close to the current system as possible. Again, I apologize if my words conveyed the sense that I was attacking you, or at least being overly critical. Looking back at the wording (and at the build-up of the posts), I can see how you would have taken it that way. I usually try to be more thoughtful, but I was rushed AND enthusiastic about sharing my thoughts - a bad combination.

BTW, this is why I think it's REALLY important for Simon to stay at the helm. It should be our job to propose suggestions and debate them back and forth. It should be Simon who makes the final decisions about what gets to be an official part of the core rules that he so brilliantly designed - even if that means that he tells us that ALL of our ideas are a no-go.

Anyway, no hard feelings, I hope.

Respectfully,

Dragonfly

[honestiago]

I appreciate the mea culpas, gentlemen, though I am thinking I may not have presented my ideas in way that made it clear I wasn't trying to change a mechanic, just a derivative. I tend to play around with various systems and try to smash what I perceive to be good ideas together, so I can overthink and complicate things unnecessarily. Sorry if I overreacted to what was posted. I like to defend my views as much as anyone else. That said, I don't want to waste time on fruitless objectives, so I'll make sure to confine my comments to specific things.

On that, what I am seeing here overall is that:

(1) Everyone agrees it is Simon's call to make decisions about his game
(2) Everyone has concerns with some balance issues, be they specific powers, or power levels in general.
(3) Everyone would like to see Supers! get more recognition and play.

I can't promise I won't throw out any additional semi-baked ideas from time to time, so I'll ask for forgiveness in advance for that. My main concerns, for the record are similar to everyone else's.

On Cosmic level play: since I'm not a fan of massive amounts of dice being thrown (we had an character here who had an 8d magnetism attack, which got ridiculous [my fault, I was the GM]), I am wondering how to push Supers! for how well it does street level and, for lack of a better phrase, middle-level heroes. I honestly feel like that, once you get above 5d, it gets a little hairy. I have no good answers for how to handle increasing power levels, other than to propose a cap on the maximum dice you can count, if not throw. I suppose that's left to each group playing, but I wonder if other people have similar feelings on that.

So, to go back to things I am sure about:

Regen needs a price fix (or a change to the way it works).
Summoning needs a tweak to avoid "Mook sprawl."
Campaign play could use some tweaking.

These are my three actual heartburn areas. I am sure they could be handled kn various ways, to include campaign supplements that provide options for the specific game world they are produced for. So it actually may be that the best thing for Supers! is to leave the system pretty much as it, and let developers generate options that do not gut or reinvent the wheel, but do provide additional options, clarifications, and perhaps codified limits.

But before all this, it may be even more important to determine whether Simon even wants to deal with any revisions or changes to the core book. If not, we're all sort of spitting into the wind here...well, more or less.

[Simon W]

I'm not sure what I'm doing with Supers! yet guys. But it's good to consider options, especially as C7 isn't going to be printing any more, just getting rid of any stocks they still have.

[danbuter]

I recommend using RPGNow for a pdf and POD combo. They are easy to work with, and it should be pretty simple to prepare.