Light Effects

[Duke Bushido]

Have we reached a consensus yet? 

 

Because we really need to be moving on to the precise mechanics for the air the characters are breathing. 

[PhilFleischmann]

I don't mean to throw more kerosene on this fire, but I've never bought the idea that natural darkness is only a -4 to sight.  Sure, in the outdoors, above ground, with the moon and stars, maybe -4 is appropriate (though I'd still call it generous).  Though I'd say it should be -5 - -7 if there's no moon, or if trees/mountains/clouds are blocking some or most of that little light.  And if you're in an underground cave or "dungeon", or in a closed room with no windows, it should be at least -8.

 

Have a friend go into an interior room (one with no external light source) and place an object somewhere visible.  Then you go into the room with your eyes closed.  Your friend turns off the light and closes the door.  How many PER rolls do you think it will take you to see the object?  A normal person in HERO has a sight PER roll of 11-, at -4, that's 7-, which is about a 16% chance.  This means it'll take you an average of about six tries to see the visible object in complete darkness.  And remember, this is sight, not touch, so feeling around doesn't count.  I don't think there's any chance at all to see in complete darkness, and I'm being generous making it only a -8 penalty, which means you can still see on a 3.  And if you happen to have better than average vision, like a +1 or +2, you've got a much better chance.

[ScottishFox]

11 minutes ago, PhilFleischmann said:

I don't mean to throw more kerosene on this fire, but I've never bought the idea that natural darkness is only a -4 to sight.  Sure, in the outdoors, above ground, with the moon and stars, maybe -4 is appropriate (though I'd still call it generous).  Though I'd say it should be -5 - -7 if there's no moon, or if trees/mountains/clouds are blocking some or most of that little light.  And if you're in an underground cave or "dungeon", or in a closed room with no windows, it should be at least -8.

 

Have a friend go into an interior room (one with no external light source) and place an object somewhere visible.  Then you go into the room with your eyes closed.  Your friend turns off the light and closes the door.  How many PER rolls do you think it will take you to see the object?  A normal person in HERO has a sight PER roll of 11-, at -4, that's 7-, which is about a 16% chance.  This means it'll take you an average of about six tries to see the visible object in complete darkness.  And remember, this is sight, not touch, so feeling around doesn't count.  I don't think there's any chance at all to see in complete darkness, and I'm being generous making it only a -8 penalty, which means you can still see on a 3.  And if you happen to have better than average vision, like a +1 or +2, you've got a much better chance.

 

Agreement.  It's minus PER rolls up to a point and then it's just absolute darkness.

 

Which does bring up a possible problem with the flashlights as a Suppress/Drain for ambient darkness.  If it's too dark then the flashlight does... nothing?

[PhilFleischmann]

And if you just have plain old +4 Sight Perception, then you can see in darkness as well as a normal person sees in light?

[Chris Goodwin]

During the run-up to 6th edition discussions, the whole "What do *you* want to see?" set of threads, an idea I had and suggested (not taken, but oh well) was Light Levels.  The same way we have Temperature Levels and wind speeds, you define what is essentially a comfortable base light level.  At that level you're at standard sight PER, more than a level above or below is a penalty due to either it being too bright or too dark, and then you could manipulate that with Change Environment as you could with the other leveled environmental effects.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

2 hours ago, ScottishFox said:

 

Agreement.  It's minus PER rolls up to a point and then it's just absolute darkness.

 

Which does bring up a possible problem with the flashlights as a Suppress/Drain for ambient darkness.  If it's too dark then the flashlight does... nothing?

Clearly the absolute darkness is Linked to the less-absolute darkness! 

 

Humor aside, I agree with PhilFleischmann that -4 isn't quite enough.  I don't think we need to go so far as defining an absolute natural darkness, though, I think -8 is punishing enough that anyone without super-vision isn't going to see anything anyways. 

 

1 hour ago, Chris Goodwin said:

During the run-up to 6th edition discussions, the whole "What do *you* want to see?" set of threads, an idea I had and suggested (not taken, but oh well) was Light Levels.  The same way we have Temperature Levels and wind speeds, you define what is essentially a comfortable base light level.  At that level you're at standard sight PER, more than a level above or below is a penalty due to either it being too bright or too dark, and then you could manipulate that with Change Environment as you could with the other leveled environmental effects.

I like this idea.  I like it a lot. 

I just wonder, why stop there?  Have ambient levels for every sense group.  Too loud or in a sound-dampening field, can't hear footsteps.  Too smelly or in a cloud of anti-scent spray, can't smell particular things.  Too much noise jamming or too close to the radio-absorbatron, no blips on the radar set.  So on and so forth. 

[dmjalund]

4 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Have we reached a consensus yet? 

 

Because we really need to be moving on to the precise mechanics for the air the characters are breathing. 

If you get teleported into a vacuum, this could be important 

[dsatow]

I kind of disagree on larger penalties for environmental factors.  It sort of personal taste, but if a player is buying up a perception roll to say 14- (about 90.74% success rate), a -4 drops this to 10- (about 50% success rate).  A -8 penalty would drop it to 6- (or 9.26% success).  To me, it just seems like forcing a player to buy night vision or some other power to compensate from operating at night.  It reminds me of a scene in the comics where Nightwing is with Batman investigating the sewers IIRC.  Nightwing is using night vision contacts to see with but marvels that Batman has such good perception, he doesn't need it.  It reminds me of two players where one is using night vision through an inobvious focus while the other has bought up his perception roll to compensate (and to help with his detective work).

[Duke Bushido]

8 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

I don't mean to throw more kerosene on this fire, but I've never bought the idea that natural darkness is only a -4 to sight.  Sure, in the outdoors, above ground, with the moon and stars, maybe -4 is appropriate (though I'd still call it generous).  Though I'd say it should be -5 - -7 if there's no moon, or if trees/mountains/clouds are blocking some or most of that little light.  And if you're in an underground cave or "dungeon", or in a closed room with no windows, it should be at least -8.

 

Agreed.

 

Quote

 

Have a friend go into an interior room (one with no external light source) and place an object somewhere visible.  Then you go into the room with your eyes closed.  Your friend turns off the light and closes the door.  How many PER rolls do you think it will take you to see the object?  A normal person in HERO has a sight PER roll of 11-, at -4, that's 7-, which is about a 16% chance.  This means it'll take you an average of about six tries to see the visible object in complete darkness.  And remember, this is sight, not touch, so feeling around doesn't count.  I don't think there's any chance at all to see in complete darkness, and I'm being generous making it only a -8 penalty, which means you can still see on a 3.  And if you happen to have better than average vision, like a +1 or +2, you've got a much better chance.

 

Considering how the eye works, you're wasting a lot of time trying to figure that out.  In the complete darkness you postulate, no vision PER roll is possible, period.  Eyes don't work without light.  It's like figuring the DCV penalty for a dead guy.

 

However, this is a _game_, and people want to be able to do extraordinary things, so we work out penalties for complete darkness and dead guys who might not be completely flat on the floor so they could shift just a little bit in settling, hopefully at just the right moment to save their....    lives?   mmmmmm.....

 

But because it's a game, and because we all find different things fun, as Satow notes, it's a group-to-group thing.  I promise you're not going to be any happier with what I assess for my crew than I am for what you asses for your crew.

 

 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

2 hours ago, dsatow said:

I kind of disagree on larger penalties for environmental factors.  It sort of personal taste, but if a player is buying up a perception roll to say 14- (about 90.74% success rate), a -4 drops this to 10- (about 50% success rate).  A -8 penalty would drop it to 6- (or 9.26% success).  To me, it just seems like forcing a player to buy night vision or some other power to compensate from operating at night.  It reminds me of a scene in the comics where Nightwing is with Batman investigating the sewers IIRC.  Nightwing is using night vision contacts to see with but marvels that Batman has such good perception, he doesn't need it.  It reminds me of two players where one is using night vision through an inobvious focus while the other has bought up his perception roll to compensate (and to help with his detective work).

Ah, I'm not saying "Night should be -8".  I'm saying "Really totally dark, the basically-zero point, -8 seems good instead of fudging it into Darkness but counts as CE". 

[Hugh Neilson]

2 hours ago, dsatow said:

I kind of disagree on larger penalties for environmental factors.  It sort of personal taste, but if a player is buying up a perception roll to say 14- (about 90.74% success rate), a -4 drops this to 10- (about 50% success rate).  A -8 penalty would drop it to 6- (or 9.26% success).  To me, it just seems like forcing a player to buy night vision or some other power to compensate from operating at night.  It reminds me of a scene in the comics where Nightwing is with Batman investigating the sewers IIRC.  Nightwing is using night vision contacts to see with but marvels that Batman has such good perception, he doesn't need it.  It reminds me of two players where one is using night vision through an inobvious focus while the other has bought up his perception roll to compensate (and to help with his detective work).

 

Well, if we move to the point that one can still see, even in a complete absence of light, I think we need to revisit Duke's proposal to assess the Hero qualities of the air our heroes breathe, because even someone with no Life Support should, with enough Skill Levels in Breathing, be able to keep right on going even when he has no breathable atmosphere at all.

 

In complete darkness, sight does not work.  Hearing fails entirely in a silence field.  This is different from applying penalties due to reduced light, or ambient sound.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

10 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Well, if we move to the point that one can still see, even in a complete absence of light, I think we need to revisit Duke's proposal to assess the Hero qualities of the air our heroes breathe, because even someone with no Life Support should, with enough Skill Levels in Breathing, be able to keep right on going even when he has no breathable atmosphere at all.

 

In complete darkness, sight does not work.  Hearing fails entirely in a silence field.  This is different from applying penalties due to reduced light, or ambient sound.

But in comics, super-vision man can sometimes see in complete darkness because it turns out it was only 99.99% dark and super-hearing man can hear in total silence because his ultra-ears can pick up the interaction of sound on the wind outside the field and yadda yadda. 

[PhilFleischmann]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Considering how the eye works, you're wasting a lot of time trying to figure that out.

I'm not trying to figure it out.  I already know that total darkness is much more than a -4 penalty.  I'm offering a way for others to figure it out, in case they aren't convinced. 

 

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

In the complete darkness you postulate, no vision PER roll is possible, period.  Eyes don't work without light.

I agree, but the RAW don't.  That's why I think I'm being generous.  For the sake of the game, I might allow the following:

 

Bright moon & stars = -4 penalty to Sight.

Dim moon & stars = -5 (generous - could range up to -7)

No light whatsoever = -6 (very generous - should be -8 at least)

 

And this is still subject to modifiers for the object being viewed (or that one is attempting to view).  If there's some especially shiny, sparkly object that nicely reflects what little light there may be, you might get some bonus to see it, that will partially counteract the darkness penalty.

[Duke Bushido]

Agreed again,  but that leads us back to the whole "what are you and your group trying to simulate" question.  This is very much a group-to-group decision; potentially even a campaign-to-campaign question. 

 

We cannot find a perfect answer within the rules because this is a question of how the world works, and HERO has no official hard and set universe to compare things to.  It has several genres, and a number of setting books--many different books within each genre, even, and other than that sad attempt with the expanded time-line, no real relationship between them.  None of them are even spelled out beyond "here's a place to do things, races and people to do them with, and a sackful of politics; have fun."

 

Accordingly, we can't ever come to a point of "and this is the right way to do it," because no right way is defined (other than "images: only to create light," and that's a big 'Hell no" from me.  Don't get me wrong; I totally understand it:  anyone looking into the illumination can see it.  My problem is the binary nature, or, put another way "total light here; zero light beyond this cleanly-defined hex."  Further, if we are simulating actual light, Images offers no penalties for standing in or near the image and looking away.  Anyone st-  forgive me: I digress, and in doing so add nothing to what we already know.)

 

There is no hard and fast" world works thusly" defined anywhere.  We can tout the glories of a perfect universal system all we want, but we have to accept that there are some severe downsides to a system with no actual game.  Unfortunately, the biggest downsides are the endless disagreement on "how to" and the fact that there is no resolution both precise and universal.  I expect it's because we all had to grab the system and make our own games.  Because of that, we are each and every one of us playing a different game. 

[Solitude]

17 hours ago, dmjalund said:

If you get teleported into a vacuum, this could be important 

 

I'm pretty sure that even a STR 5 character could tear the paper liner and then unzip the bag and step out. Unless it's one of those Dyson's. 

[Hugh Neilson]

Even within the same genre, differences in how sight is treated exist.  I don't believe I have ever seen a Supers comic suggest that a Super with really good eyesight, but no special senses, can see in total darkness.  Way back when I was a kid, I remember picking up Avengers #115.  They fought an unremarkable giant bug, and an equally unremarkable tribe of underground troglodyte humans.  The former had no eyes and the latter could see in the dark (infrared, I believe).  After they beat the bug in its pit, the Troglodytes poured water down to douse the lights.  "Even my synthezoid eyes are useless in total darkness" was the phrase I recall.  The only one on the team who could see (something must have been broken in Iron Man's armor...) was the Black Panther due to enhanced senses provided by the heart-shaped herb.

 

Now, in Hero terms, he paid points to be capable of seeing in the dark.  If his teammates paid for Enhanced Perception, or Enhanced Sight Perception, they got bonuses to see in every game session.  Shouldn't the character who paid to be able to see in the dark be able, at least on occasion, to have an advantage as a result over his teammates who spent their points on other abilities, and do not possess such an enhanced sense?

[redsash]

33 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Now, in Hero terms, he paid points to be capable of seeing in the dark.  If his teammates paid for Enhanced Perception, or Enhanced Sight Perception, they got bonuses to see in every game session.  Shouldn't the character who paid to be able to see in the dark be able, at least on occasion, to have an advantage as a result over his teammates who spent their points on other abilities, and do not possess such an enhanced sense?

 

The -4 for natural darkness is defined as "a very dark night." You can get that effect with CE (the example there is "fog" but it works)

 

I would consider a dead black underground room with no light source to be the same as a base Darkness field     (5AP per 1m radius); i.e., no sight PER allowed without an exempt power: clearly that's the reason Darkness is a separate power from CE.

 

At 10 AP per 2m radius, the Suppress flashlight works fine. I personally would allow it to work on such a pitch-black Darkness effect without further Advantages because it specifies "Natural Darkness," which would otherwise be worth a small Limitation (since it can't dispel character-created CE "fog" or the Darkness power).

 

Gandalf's Light spell is specifically designed to counter darkness effects of any type.

 

But yes, a logical way to do this would be with CE, except that the rulebook specifically disallows bonuses with CE.

 

Oh, and CE wouldn't counter the Darkness power without tweaks...

[Chris Goodwin]

CE, provides Sight PER penalties to targets sensitive to bright light.

[PhilFleischmann]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

We cannot find a perfect answer within the rules because this is a question of how the world works, and HERO has no official hard and set universe to compare things to.

AFAIK, there is not even the slightest hint in any of the genre books or setting books or rule books that implies that natural darkness is in any way different in the Turakian Age as opposed to in the modern Champions world.  Nor is there any difference in Western Hero vs. Star Hero.

 

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Accordingly, we can't ever come to a point of "and this is the right way to do it," because no right way is defined

Who's "we"?  Why not?  Just because the rulebooks didn't define it right is no reason to just give up.  It really isn't that hard.

 

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

My problem is the binary nature, or, put another way "total light here; zero light beyond this cleanly-defined hex."

That's what range penalties are for.  They apply to perception as well as targeting of attacks.  It's harder to see something that is farther away.

 

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

There is no hard and fast" world works thusly" defined anywhere.

Well, there is in the real world.  All we have to do is decide how to simulate it with the rules.

 

An additional problem is the "immovable object vs unstoppable force" contradiction of a power that creates light vs a power that creates darkness.  I think we all agree that a light-creating power (even a mundane flashlight or candle) should work against natural darkness, but it doesn't work against the Power Darkness.

 

And then there are other effects like fog or obscuring smoke, which could be natural or caused by the Darkness power.

 

Assuming, for the purposes of this discussion, that we're only interested in natural darkness and the Darkness with the SFX of just "darkness" - taking away all light - not making the air opaque, then we can just define light based on that.  A Dispel Darkness power, by default, works against all SFX, from a field of blackness which removes all light, to thick fog, or even a jumbled confusion of bright colors that gets in the way of the real objects that would otherwise be seen.  I think this shows that a plain "Dispel Darkness" is not sufficient for creating light.

[dsatow]

I believe the official rule from HERO games is that the world is a construct of the GM.  How the GM arbitrates the world is how the world functions.  So we should not argue whether the official rules should do something or not in every world.  Just on the merits of the house rule that's being suggested.  After all, the GM can make a game in a teletubby world where light is intelligent and that in order to see in the darkness, one needs to make an Presence attack or a Persuasion roll for any area to be visible or to affect how many modifiers to your perception rolls exists.

[PeterLind]

I suggest that the manipulation of environmental conditions, such as light, darkness, temperature, wind, etc. can be treated separately from other existing powers.  This can be treated as its own thing, and need not (IMO) be confined by the dictates of the rules.  I would not have a problem with a player just assigning some points towards such an effect, and then let the GM adjudicate.  To follow this discussion, suppose we have one character with 20 pts. invested in light manipulation and then another character invested in 20 pts. of darkness/shadow manipulation.  How would you adjudicate things if you were the GM?

 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

47 minutes ago, PeterLind said:

I suggest that the manipulation of environmental conditions, such as light, darkness, temperature, wind, etc. can be treated separately from other existing powers.  This can be treated as its own thing, and need not (IMO) be confined by the dictates of the rules.  I would not have a problem with a player just assigning some points towards such an effect, and then let the GM adjudicate.  To follow this discussion, suppose we have one character with 20 pts. invested in light manipulation and then another character invested in 20 pts. of darkness/shadow manipulation.  How would you adjudicate things if you were the GM?

But what does, say, 10 points of unopposed darkness manipulation mean?  Sure it can cancel 10 points of light, but what else can it do?  How much area can I darken?  How dark can I make that area?  What happens to Ned Needslighttosee if he's fighting in my darkness?  What about Feline Frank with his cat's eyes?  And how do you build such things anyways under a light/dark manipulation system? 

[Doc Democracy]

2 hours ago, dsatow said:

I believe the official rule from HERO games is that the world is a construct of the GM.  How the GM arbitrates the world is how the world functions.  So we should not argue whether the official rules should do something or not in every world.  Just on the merits of the house rule that's being suggested.  After all, the GM can make a game in a teletubby world where light is intelligent and that in order to see in the darkness, one needs to make an Presence attack or a Persuasion roll for any area to be visible or to affect how many modifiers to your perception rolls exists.

 

I think this is central to understanding HERO as a GM.  It is incomprehensible that anyone would want to downvote it. 😞

 

I immediately wanted to put my players in just such a situation, it actually demonstrates the power of the system.

 

Doc

 

[PeterLind]

> But what does, say, 10 points of unopposed darkness manipulation mean?  <

 

First, I would just put it down on my character sheet and then see what the GM will do with it. . .    First, I think trying to use the existing game mechanics to try to define something like this -- simply manipulating natural phenomena -- is more trouble than it is worth.  Which power should I use to cover this?  Another problem is that the power can end up being cost-prohibitive.  Example, Telekinesis defined as only vs. the certain natural phenomena.  This can be cost prohibitive because you now having to consider such things as strength, area of effect, and so forth.  So first I think what we need is something that has all of the limitations built into the power itself. 

 

So perhaps one way to look at this kind of power is that it really is a bundle of powers and limitations that are built in.  Kind of like a micro-power pool, but I would allow it into a power framework.  Some general guidelines could be given such as:  Up to 1d6 of effect per 10 points (such as reducing the size/heat of a fire), up to 1" of area per 10 points, +/- 1 environmental modifier per 10 points, etc.  The player would state what is the intended effect of the power when it is used, and the GM adjudicates.  Perhaps this is just Change Environment, but I think this might take things a bit farther . . . 

 

Specifically, unopposed darkness manipulation could mean what the player decides, within certain guidelines:  Make an existing shadow become darker within natural ranges, make an existing area of darkness larger or smaller, or perhaps move slowly. . . I think you could have a lot of fun with this kind of power . . 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

43 minutes ago, PeterLind said:

> But what does, say, 10 points of unopposed darkness manipulation mean?  <

 

First, I would just put it down on my character sheet and then see what the GM will do with it. . .    First, I think trying to use the existing game mechanics to try to define something like this -- simply manipulating natural phenomena -- is more trouble than it is worth.  Which power should I use to cover this?  Another problem is that the power can end up being cost-prohibitive.  Example, Telekinesis defined as only vs. the certain natural phenomena.  This can be cost prohibitive because you now having to consider such things as strength, area of effect, and so forth.  So first I think what we need is something that has all of the limitations built into the power itself. 

 

So perhaps one way to look at this kind of power is that it really is a bundle of powers and limitations that are built in.  Kind of like a micro-power pool, but I would allow it into a power framework.  Some general guidelines could be given such as:  Up to 1d6 of effect per 10 points (such as reducing the size/heat of a fire), up to 1" of area per 10 points, +/- 1 environmental modifier per 10 points, etc.  The player would state what is the intended effect of the power when it is used, and the GM adjudicates.  Perhaps this is just Change Environment, but I think this might take things a bit farther . . . 

 

Specifically, unopposed darkness manipulation could mean what the player decides, within certain guidelines:  Make an existing shadow become darker within natural ranges, make an existing area of darkness larger or smaller, or perhaps move slowly. . . I think you could have a lot of fun with this kind of power . . 

So Mother-May-I.  No thanks, I like my rules to be rules.