Champions in the mid-eighties, GURPS: IST in late eighties and nineties (that's where Tink and the Duchess come from), mostly D&D 3e and 3.5 and 4e since then...

I actually have my own game system. I since learned its somewhat similar to the savage worlds system, but mine has no limits, it can be adapted to any game style.

I've been thinking of uploading it, but dunno if anyonw would want it or not.
If anyone wants my system uploaded, and free to use, just let me know.

On another note, I started with AD&D2, the old FASERIP system, tried Paladium, Gurps, and many others.

I've been RPing for 35 years now...crap I'm old... Started on AD&D, threw in Gamma World, Star Frontiers, Top Secret, Traveler, moved on to Villains and Vigilantes, and that's when the wheels came off. I got really addicted to Supers and started playing them semi-exclusively when I could find the groups. Played Champions, Marvel Super Heroes, DC Heroes, Superworld, GURPS Supers, Heroes Unlimited and all of the other craziness from Palladium, but then I eventually settled on Champions 4th and 5th ed. Heck, I even got some articles in the digital magazine. But after they went to 6th, I moved on to Mutants and Masterminds 3e, and I haven't looked back. I run a monthly game now set in the Villains and Vigilantes universe of all places, but using M&M as the ruleset. I also run one off convention style games for my group using Savage Worlds because it's so darn adaptable.

I've played a lot of them.
Fantasy Games Unlimited's Villains & Vigilantes was my favorite for years, until my copy was stolen, at a time when it couldn't be found anymore (there was no internet back then).
I ended up spending years trying out a lot of different systems.
TSR's Marvel Superheroes and Mayfair's D.C. Heroes were my favorite.
I found Champions and Gurps to be too complicated.
I haven't played Mutants and Masterminds yet. It seems a bit complicated for me to dive into it without someone else GMing for a while.

I spent years making my own system called Super Crusaders III, but I'm not real happy with it.
I'm currently working on a revision that will be a big improvement and will be called Action & Adventure.

I'm rather partial to Mutants & Masterminds because of something the designers did.

[b]There are no hit points[/b].

Instead of using the "bucket of HP" model that so many other games fall into, M&M instead used a stacking penalty system. Light wounds are a -1 to all dice rolls. I think Serious (or was it Severe?) wounds were a -5 to all dice rolls.

The nice thing about the system was that it made "playing hurt" a lot more of a challenge and "damage" became a liability to EVERYONE. Key point being that no one "wanted" to go into a fight wounded ... everyone wanted to be "full up" whenever they had to do something important (like combat). You never had anyone discounting the effects of being injured, which was refreshing after the "bucket of HP" experience where everyone fights at maximum effectiveness until they collapse and faceplant in a heap. Thus, you had a built in system for "degrees of impairment" short of a Boolean driven gameplay.

Redlynne wrote:

I'm rather partial to Mutants & Masterminds because of something the designers did.
There are no hit points.
Instead of using the "bucket of HP" model that so many other games fall into, M&M instead used a stacking penalty system. Light wounds are a -1 to all dice rolls. I think Serious (or was it Severe?) wounds were a -5 to all dice rolls.
The nice thing about the system was that it made "playing hurt" a lot more of a challenge and "damage" became a liability to EVERYONE. Key point being that no one "wanted" to go into a fight wounded ... everyone wanted to be "full up" whenever they had to do something important (like combat). You never had anyone discounting the effects of being injured, which was refreshing after the "bucket of HP" experience where everyone fights at maximum effectiveness until they collapse and faceplant in a heap. Thus, you had a built in system for "degrees of impairment" short of a Boolean driven gameplay.

I prefer Hit Points myself, even if....no actually Because it's not realistic.

But I am curious. How does a fight end in Mutants and Masterminds?
Is it when your penalties are so big you can't do anything?
Sounds to me like that could be a math heavy way to go.

Hit points seem a lot easier to use and as I said I like their unrealistic feel. It fits the fantasy better.
I can (and do) always imagine that a character on his last few hit points is struggling, but his heroic efforts allow him to keep fighting at full strength until he completely gives out.
In my game Zero Hearts doesn't have to mean you're unconscious, (though it usually will) it just means that you're no longer willing or able to keep fighting. A character who has low Hearts, might be physically weak, or just not heroic enough to keep fighting to the end. Some characters start talking when they're beaten.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

Hit points seem a lot easier to use and as I said I like their unrealistic feel. It fits the fantasy better.
I can (and do) always imagine that a character on his last few hit points is struggling, but his heroic efforts allow him to keep fighting at full strength until he completely gives out.
In my game Zero Hearts doesn't have to mean you're unconscious, (though it usually will) it just means that you're no longer willing or able to keep fighting. A character who has low Hearts, might be physically weak, or just not heroic enough to keep fighting to the end. Some characters start talking when they're beaten.

The system doesn't sound complicated but I'm used to other games as well. It actually still seems like a HP system to me, just worded differently as to appear not to be.

In M&M I have, they say heroes don't generally die, it doesn't fit the genre, so you really just get beat/fall unconscience.

Brand X wrote:

TheMightyPaladin wrote:
Hit points seem a lot easier to use and as I said I like their unrealistic feel. It fits the fantasy better.
I can (and do) always imagine that a character on his last few hit points is struggling, but his heroic efforts allow him to keep fighting at full strength until he completely gives out.
In my game Zero Hearts doesn't have to mean you're unconscious, (though it usually will) it just means that you're no longer willing or able to keep fighting. A character who has low Hearts, might be physically weak, or just not heroic enough to keep fighting to the end. Some characters start talking when they're beaten.

The system doesn't sound complicated but I'm used to other games as well. It actually still seems like a HP system to me, just worded differently as to appear not to be.
In M&M I have, they say heroes don't generally die, it doesn't fit the genre, so you really just get beat/fall unconscience.

I'm not trying to pretend it isn't a hit point system.
It totally is.

I don't call the hit points hearts to try to trick anyone but because it fits a theme running through the game.
In Super Crusaders III I have 4 classes, called Arm, Eye, Leg & Mind
The New Game I'm currently working on has a new Class called Heart
I started calling them Hearts a few years ago when my son asked me to make a game based on Zelda. It stuck

There is one thing about my Hearts that's different from most Hit Point systems:
Different things can happen when you run out of Hearts.
Usually you'll be unconscious,
If you were beaten by a deadly attack, you might die.
If you're totally surrounded the GM might say, you realize you can't win and surrender.
NPCs might run away after you beat them,
and some NPCs might surrender and start talking
but it's up to the GM and the story you're in.

I've also toyed with the idea of having non damage type attacks cause damage in this game. That's because they would eventually wear you down and beat you, That would be a big change and I haven't made a firm decision on it.
You have an opinion?

Brand X wrote:

I was talking about the M&M system. Ticking away from damage taken is still some form of hit points to me, even if they call it something else.

I can agree with that assessment. While it might not look like the more traditional style of hit points, your Toughness Score certainly has that aspect to it.

I liked the idea of a system that would impose appropriate penalties as battle damage grew, and the Toughness Roll gave you that extra level of defence rather than just relying on not being hit. In 2nd edition, the Mecha and Manga supplement even had a feat that would allow you to take up to -5 on your defence to apply that same number to your toughness so you would just stand there and take it.

When I was RPing on City of Heroes, and on Champions in fact, the idea of rolling up a character sheet in MnM came to mind when I learned that there were folks in the game who played vampires and used the Vampire: The Masquerade rules and character sheets, but, well, there were problems with it I guess. The core was that a lot of the folks were ran into almost demanded that everything be played by the rules they had on hand, which was made difficult since the setting permit abilities beyond the array of powers available in your standard run of WoD.

The other problem occurred to me later on when I realised that it was a tad redundant, given that the MMO, for the use of Superheroing, already had a system in place, it would have been simpler to just make an appropriate build in game. Regardless, the idea remained and I regret not taking it up now, since it would have made a decent substitute to play some tabletop adventures sfter CoH was closed down.