HERO System and GURPS

[white33]

Hello.

I've recently been curious about the HERO system and upon reading the Wikipedia/TV-Tropes entries it appears to bear several similarities with GURPS.

I've been wondering, to anyone who's familiar with it, how does it compare with GURPS? How successful is it at it's proposition of being a "create anything" generic type system. Is it fun? Effective? Complicated? I've only quickly browsed at a couple of books and at first glance it doesn't seem to have the simulationist nature that GURPS does.

I've tried asking this at other RPG forum around the web but it's almost as if nobody plays the system...

[Bruno]

The traditional description is that HERO is callibrated to the cinematic-to-super-hero end of the spectrum, and GURPS is callibrated to the everyman-gritty end of the spectrum.

Both systems can do both ends of things. But both systems have more detail in one area and not the other.

Mechanically, HERO tends to build traits out of "bits" that are made up around an abstract game mechanic, GURPS tends to build traits out of "bits" that are made up around an in-world description of what it does (not "How it does what it does" - that's different).

HERO tends to lean in the direction of equipment being traits, just like the rest of your traits, and built out of the same parts, whereas GURPS tends to lean in the direction of "equipment is stuff, you can buy it in the store" and describes it in "real world" terms as much as possible. Again, both can DO both.

These systems have been around a LONG time in the same environment, they've learned alot from each other, from the players, from the same competitors in the RPG industry, and from the same compeditors from other industries.

I wouldn't quite call it convergent evolution, but neither system is specialized so when they cover the same ground with some similar starting points, there are inevitable similarities that will come out. There's just only so many ways to roll 3d6.

[white33]

Originally Posted by Bruno

The traditional description is that HERO is callibrated to the cinematic-to-super-hero end of the spectrum, and GURPS is callibrated to the everyman-gritty end of the spectrum.

Both systems can do both ends of things. But both systems have more detail in one area and not the other.

Mechanically, HERO tends to build traits out of "bits" that are made up around an abstract game mechanic, GURPS tends to build traits out of "bits" that are made up around an in-world description of what it does (not "How it does what it does" - that's different).

HERO tends to lean in the direction of equipment being traits, just like the rest of your traits, and built out of the same parts, whereas GURPS tends to lean in the direction of "equipment is stuff, you can buy it in the store" and describes it in "real world" terms as much as possible. Again, both can DO both.

These systems have been around a LONG time in the same environment, they've learned alot from each other, from the players, from the same competitors in the RPG industry, and from the same compeditors from other industries.

I wouldn't quite call it convergent evolution, but neither system is specialized so when they cover the same ground with some similar starting points, there are inevitable similarities that will come out. There's just only so many ways to roll 3d6.

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Would you recommend it to someone who's already really into GURPS(like myself, been playing ever since the latter days of 2Ed. and pretty much tried and ditched every other RPing system along the way, for finding GURPS significantly superior)?

[sir_pudding]

The few times I've tried to play HERO, I've found it remarkably unsatisfactory. It definitely requires even more GM oversight than GURPS does, and I'm not sure there are many GMs really willing to do that.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by white33

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Would you recommend it to someone who's already really into GURPS(like myself, been playing ever since the latter days of 2Ed. and pretty much tried and ditched every other RPing system along the way, for finding GURPS significantly superior)?

From this little bit of description, I'd say no. Long time and relativley well satisfied Gurps players tend to like the way Gurps ahndles relatively normal humans who are differntiated by just a couple of Advantages and a highly detailed Skill system.

This is probably HERO's weak spot. The HERO Skill section is much shorter and less detailed than Gurps.

On the other hand, if you think Gurps Powers is the greatest Gurps book ever you might like HERO. HERO has a build it yourself "Powers" system that predates Gurps and which I consider far more flexible and "cleaner" in terms of rules.

It is a problem for many peoiple that _everything_ in HERO is built from this system. A HERO GM might well only alow you to buy standard Gadgets taken from books or designed by himself but every piece of technology or gear in HERO is the equivalent of a Gurps Gadget built with the Powers system. This boggles some people.

HERO is also much weaker in sourcebooks. In HERO you can build _anything_ (and don't challenge a HEROhead to prove that) but you generally have to build _everything_. I started playing HERO when GURPS was still Melee/Wizard/The Fantasy Trip and even I fiind it tiresome much of the time..

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by white33

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Would you recommend it to someone who's already really into GURPS(like myself, been playing ever since the latter days of 2Ed. and pretty much tried and ditched every other RPing system along the way, for finding GURPS significantly superior)?

If you can borrow a friends copy, go ahead! Getting to evaluate it for free is obviously the best, there's no drawback for you. So might as well give it a read through.

But whether you should slap down the money for your own copy is a harder question.

I would worry that, as someone who's so familiar with and dedicated to GURPS that you might find the "similar but different" approach annoyingly "not quite right" feeling, at least at the beginning. Not because GURPS has poisoned your brain or because HERO is horrible, but because it's sometimes much harder to learn something new if your old reflexes keep getting in the way. And the more similar two things are, the more likely reflexes and habits from one can get entangled in the other.

I've played in a few HERO games of various editions (all short-lived). I went back to GURPS after. The experience wasn't horrible or anything, but there wasn't much to offer me that GURPS wasn't already doing. Comparing GURPS 3e and HERO 5e, HERO was better suited for Superhero games (Bam pow zowie) and that's what we did with it. But both games have moved on since then. GURPS definitely is more elegant at superhero games now than it was in 3e, I hear HERO has come a little more to terms with non-supers games too.

I suspect you'll find it interesting, but I can't say if you'll find it interesting enough to justify a purchase. If you like to collect game rules, I'd generally say "Go for it". If you don't, I guess I'd say "Probably not worth your time."

[Bruno]

What I remember of HERO 5e the most was everything being a trait, and basically everything costing "fatigue points" based on "active point total" which made my head spin a little.

I have a vague impression the initiative/turn order was a little baroque and involved sub-turn-length segments of some kind, but I haven't read the rules lately.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by white33

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Would you recommend it to someone who's already really into GURPS(like myself, been playing ever since the latter days of 2Ed. and pretty much tried and ditched every other RPing system along the way, for finding GURPS significantly superior)?

I'd recommend for anyone who puts a huge emphasis on standardized consistency in design systems and so finds theirselves complaining about things like Magic and Imbuements and trying to take apart advantages like Supernatural Durability into the "components" it is made of. But personally I find it bland.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Bruno

What I remember of HERO 5e the most was everything being a trait, and basically everything costing "fatigue points" based on "active point total" which made my head spin a little.

I have a vague impression the initiative/turn order was a little baroque and involved sub-turn-length segments of some kind, but I haven't read the rules lately.

No, not everything costs Endurance pts and I prefer to think of the Speed system as "nuanced" where Gurps is annoyingly bland (or baroque when you start trying to go beyond the "everybody gets one turn/action/whatever per second" thing). All that confusion about Extra Attack and Altered Time Rate don't happen in HERO. That's one of the places where HERO is cleaner.

[Refplace]

I played HERO for a couple of years and through 3 editions.
I played GURPS through TFT/Man to Man/Orcslayer and 3 editions. Never played 4th, though I have most of that editions books,
That said I second Brunos descriptions and points.

HERO is simpler but more work as was noted you have few source books and have to build everything.
GURPS simply says a lot of things don't have to be built AND it builds more for you.
GURPS also does realistic better and HERO still does cinematic better. Even on the low end its hard to have a non cinematic character in HERO.

GURPS does a better job of world building and lending different feels to different subsystems like various forms of magic or science because it uses different systems that behave differently yet try to be point balanced.
HERO everything is off the same system so even stacking different limitations and powers it feels the same. Also the players know that.