Hugh Neilson

i thought the best analogy for mind control was a grab
grab works vs user's STR, mind control works vs user's EGO

For what its worth, there was zero animosity in anything I said, save my dislike for Combat Luck; that dislike was genuine.  What was also genuine was my empathizing with your frustration.  Thats why there was no animosity in anything I said.  There still isn't.
 
At this point I have been reminded why we dont generally agree: I have the ereoneous tendency to believe that you are looking for discussion more than an echo chamber.
 
Before bowing out, I woukd like you to reconsider your reply, if only to save yourself a bit of dignity.  As it stands, you are asking everyone reading this to absolutely believe that what you quoted was your actual takeaway from from all that effort to help evaluate your viewpoint.
 
You want us all to accept that in spite of the number of us who have seen your work and your ideas, that you believe that what you replied above is what you one-hundred-percent believe I was saying.
 
If you can live with that, so be it.  I have very little time to share amongst my hobbies the past few months.  The time I waste is my own problem, but I do know when to stop doing it.
 
I do genuinely hope that you find the solution or whatever it is you are looking for, though, because despite your suggestions otherwise, I am a remarkably mellow person.
 
You folks have fun.
 

That may actually just be the two of you using the same terms with different understandings. Cumulative is pretty much just like damage. In one case you add the attacks until unconsciousness and or death  is reached and in the other until a level of control is reached.
 
The problem here is that HERO has no widely used mechanics for being hampered by damage(aside from Flash which is again a special case).
 
Obviously Mental Powers that fail to meet their threshold should have no effect, but what about those that do reach the level but are instantly overcome? Perhaps a breakout roll should be a half-phase action so the attacker gets some utility?

Heretic.  HERETIC!  BURN THE HERETIC!!!
 
Oh yeah...social distancing.  Stupid pandemic...  Guess we're stuck with a semi-rational discussion instead...😉
 
What are the problems?  As I see it (and I've had also some thoughts about changing the system in the past, so there's at least one more of us that sees a similar issue).
 
 - In combat, they are either hugely effective (remove a target from the battle immediately) or useless.  They are too "all or nothing".
 
 - Out of combat, they can't achieve effects that seem trivial in the source material.
 
If I wanted to change the way mental powers worked in my game, I would probably start with assessing how the existing rules could toolbox me an answer.  So what existing tools can fix this?
 
Cumulative makes the powers simultaneously less immediate and more able to achieve a significant effect over time.  For a +1 advantage, instead of a 12d6 Mind Control, we can have a 6d6 Cumulative Mind Control with a maximum effect of 144 points.  So remove the other options.  These powers cost 10 points per d6, but are Cumulative (either to a 4x max roll limit, or simplified to just fully Cumulative, but a maximum effect seems reasonable).
 
Right now, when Telepath Queen uses her 12d6 Mind Control, she averages 42, dominating an average ego target (at least briefly), and maybe getting a +20 effect against someone with a 13 EGO and 5 Mental Defense, who readily makes the breakout roll, so...wasted phase.  But maybe she gets a lucky shot in, and the target is her thrall for the rest of the combat.
 
If she had 6d6 Cumulative, she averages 21 on a single attack roll.  So she spends a turn (wow -a whole 12 seconds) to get 63- 126 points of effect (3 - 6 Speed), more than enough to force any action from virtually anyone, who remembers it as entirely their own decision.
 
In combat, she rolls 21 and gets 16 past that target's defenses.  She needs two hits to slip 32 points past and get a minor effect (more with above average rolls) or 3 to get 48 points past and dominate the target.  A 12d6 Blast against 22 defenses slips 20 points of STUN in on average, KOing the target in three hits.  The Mentalist is no longer using "save or suck" d20 abilities.
 
BTW, this model also would mean you no longer get to play "cumulative games".  Consider a 1d6 Mental Power, Continuous (+1/2), 0 END (+1/2), Double Penetrating (+1), Cumulative (+1/2), +10 doublings (+2 1/2), for 30 real points. That's a 6,144 maximum effect.  Once you get one hit (possibly via Mind Scan), you will get 3.5 points on average (1 if they have Mental Defense, unless they double hardened it).  It will take over 5 hours to max out, but you can likely get by with a lot less than 6,144 points of effect.  Let's not even consider more doublings for 45 or 60 AP.  But you could make it pretty wide AoE...or Megascale AoE if you want to affect everyone on the planet.
 
 
First, it's not 5 points per 1d6 if he either gets 9d6, 4.5d6 or 3d6, is it?  That 3d6 will typically bypass a low to average Ego, with a breakout roll of 11-, so 62.5% chance it does nothing.  5 points of Mental Defense and there's no longer the slightest hope.  Pop up to 12d6, and we have 4d6, or an average of 14.  Still need a good roll to bypass 5 points of mental defense, and the breakout is still  more likely than not in "wasted attack" territory.
 
I think, if you only want to make Ego more important, you go back to the older editions' system of multiplying EGO rather than adding points.  But when you need 3x EGO, a 15 EGO means virtual invulnerability to 12 DC attacks, at least at the high end.  Double EGO is still more than likely.  But your model keeps the "save or suck" aspect, which I perceive as the most significant issue.

Heretic.  HERETIC!  BURN THE HERETIC!!!
 
Oh yeah...social distancing.  Stupid pandemic...  Guess we're stuck with a semi-rational discussion instead...😉
 
What are the problems?  As I see it (and I've had also some thoughts about changing the system in the past, so there's at least one more of us that sees a similar issue).
 
 - In combat, they are either hugely effective (remove a target from the battle immediately) or useless.  They are too "all or nothing".
 
 - Out of combat, they can't achieve effects that seem trivial in the source material.
 
If I wanted to change the way mental powers worked in my game, I would probably start with assessing how the existing rules could toolbox me an answer.  So what existing tools can fix this?
 
Cumulative makes the powers simultaneously less immediate and more able to achieve a significant effect over time.  For a +1 advantage, instead of a 12d6 Mind Control, we can have a 6d6 Cumulative Mind Control with a maximum effect of 144 points.  So remove the other options.  These powers cost 10 points per d6, but are Cumulative (either to a 4x max roll limit, or simplified to just fully Cumulative, but a maximum effect seems reasonable).
 
Right now, when Telepath Queen uses her 12d6 Mind Control, she averages 42, dominating an average ego target (at least briefly), and maybe getting a +20 effect against someone with a 13 EGO and 5 Mental Defense, who readily makes the breakout roll, so...wasted phase.  But maybe she gets a lucky shot in, and the target is her thrall for the rest of the combat.
 
If she had 6d6 Cumulative, she averages 21 on a single attack roll.  So she spends a turn (wow -a whole 12 seconds) to get 63- 126 points of effect (3 - 6 Speed), more than enough to force any action from virtually anyone, who remembers it as entirely their own decision.
 
In combat, she rolls 21 and gets 16 past that target's defenses.  She needs two hits to slip 32 points past and get a minor effect (more with above average rolls) or 3 to get 48 points past and dominate the target.  A 12d6 Blast against 22 defenses slips 20 points of STUN in on average, KOing the target in three hits.  The Mentalist is no longer using "save or suck" d20 abilities.
 
BTW, this model also would mean you no longer get to play "cumulative games".  Consider a 1d6 Mental Power, Continuous (+1/2), 0 END (+1/2), Double Penetrating (+1), Cumulative (+1/2), +10 doublings (+2 1/2), for 30 real points. That's a 6,144 maximum effect.  Once you get one hit (possibly via Mind Scan), you will get 3.5 points on average (1 if they have Mental Defense, unless they double hardened it).  It will take over 5 hours to max out, but you can likely get by with a lot less than 6,144 points of effect.  Let's not even consider more doublings for 45 or 60 AP.  But you could make it pretty wide AoE...or Megascale AoE if you want to affect everyone on the planet.
 
 
First, it's not 5 points per 1d6 if he either gets 9d6, 4.5d6 or 3d6, is it?  That 3d6 will typically bypass a low to average Ego, with a breakout roll of 11-, so 62.5% chance it does nothing.  5 points of Mental Defense and there's no longer the slightest hope.  Pop up to 12d6, and we have 4d6, or an average of 14.  Still need a good roll to bypass 5 points of mental defense, and the breakout is still  more likely than not in "wasted attack" territory.
 
I think, if you only want to make Ego more important, you go back to the older editions' system of multiplying EGO rather than adding points.  But when you need 3x EGO, a 15 EGO means virtual invulnerability to 12 DC attacks, at least at the high end.  Double EGO is still more than likely.  But your model keeps the "save or suck" aspect, which I perceive as the most significant issue.

My starting point was riffing from the Narosia example.  The various tiers could certainly be trimmed, and there is no magic to any of the numbers, just enough choices to engage the players.  I'd put in "cultures" only as options to "races", and because I want a Dwarf, Elf or Human to have the same point costs so we don't have "humans end up with 50 points of free-form spending" which leads to analysis paralysis.  But let's not kid ourselves - the race gets left in the dust just as fast as a culture or background, and we have a human with pointy ears that spent some Life Support points on an extended lifespan because he wanted all the other benefits Elf contained.  Actually, we should also bundle the Complications into these package.  Hero has a built-in ability to enforce some role playing with that Culture selection.  Plus, I don't want "now pick 75 points of build-your-own complications".
 
But my starting point is the full game - without any intention to release three sourcebooks of new races/cultures, classes/vocations and backgrounds in the first year or two.  The focus there should be expanding the adventure, with whatever setting expansions, monsters, etc. are needed to support it (even a Rules Expansion if we need it), and growing the races, vocations and backgrounds with new, more powerful abilties as the heroes gain experience.  We can also add new lower-power abilities that could be used by starting characters, assuming they can use experience to buy more of these rather than big powers (maybe our Priest selects one Major Miracle, two Moderate Miracles or thee Minor Miracles - and yes, those need better names - or maybe he just gets to invest in more Miracles, some of which are more powerful, and more expensive, than others).
 
The starting point for the first book would be "how long is the book?"  Then "how many pages for each section?".  The number of choices will have to fit the allotted page count.  That includes leaving out mechanics wholesale to fit.  To me, a major key to a playable Hero game is "here is a manageable amount of choices", not "and then spend the 75 points left over on whatever you want".
 
D&D does this with "you get this much in Characteristics"; now pick a race - it has these abilities (and perhaps some alternates to select between); now pick a class - it has these abilities (it may have some internal choices like spells or bardic talents; it probably enhances some stats, like Warriors getting extra BOD); now pick your skills - you get this many (really, this is part of Class in D&D) and select a Feat.  I focus on the 3e model as that is where I am most familiar.
 
Rules and mechanics, of course.  Gear choices.
 
Enough setting and monsters to run the included adventure(s) and enough adventure to whet their appetite to buy an adventure book.

I’m looking to Book 1 of a Game Powered by Hero, not necessarily a micro-starter book.  Hero is not going to compete as a “gamer’s first game” any time soon.  But my numbers were definitely the highest, not the lowest, I would consider.
 
I envision much less advancement, though, with no new spells, powers, etc. And limited advancement in the intro sessions.  More breadth, less depth, so we are not adding new races, vocations, etc. In the next few books, but providing advancement options as well as the new adventures, and possibly some new locations.
 
But adding four to eight full prefabs would also make sense.  Grab and play, if desired.  Or pop in a micro-book that introduces the full “Powered by HERO” game which starts with the book I described.

Especially with Hero branching out to try new things, I really think we need a "game powered by Hero" which takes the above into account.
 
Let's assume Fantasy because that is where the market starts.  What does the game need?
 
It needs to explain the stats.  Maybe not all of them.  Maybe we actually build some as combined stats.  Maybe STR comes bundled with some STUN and some PD and CON comes bundled with some END, REC and ED.  Perhaps everyone gets 10 BOD and 3 SPD by default.  Those need not be the choices, but choices are needed.
 
It needs to provide some races, cultures, archetypes, vocations and/or backgrounds.  62 (above) seems like a lot.  Let's say 4 human cultures and 6 non-human races (you select one of the 10 choices), 12 vocations (segregated into 4 archetypes such as "Warrior", "Mage", "Devoted" and "Rogue" (you pick one) and 15 Backgrounds (pick 1).  If we got to 12 backgrounds and were out of great ideas, stop.  if we had two more great Cultures, add them.  But the number of choices must be manageable.
 
Now, let's make each Race/Culture cost 50 points, each Vocation costs 100 and each Background costs 25.  That's your 175 starting points.  DONE.  Within each, we might have choices (e.g. select 5 skills from this list; select 3 Prayers from the Orisons list and 2 from the Miracles, Minor list).  
 
Now we need to describe the skills, those mechanics taken up in the abilities gained through Vocations and the game play rules.  That's our Rules section.  Too many rules to fit the page count?  Cut something, and take all abilities related to it away. 
 
Now, let's pick a setting.  Maybe this will be a Turakian Age game, or perhaps we start from scratch.  Pick a location in the broader world and provide enough detail to make it a "home base".  MAYBE provide some broader info on the bigger world, but that's space permitting.  We can have a full world book, or new region books, later.  They can even have new races, cultures, vocations and/or backgrounds.  Provide some monsters and some short starting adventures.  Provide an xp system, but all they can do with xp is increase stats, buy new or improved skills or buy new picks from their race, vocation or background.  Don't even offer the option of buying from other cultures, backgrounds or vocations.
 
Get the adventure rolling, and map out a broader "adventure path" surrounding it.  If it sells, we can make Book 2 - more adventure, and some more character options for more powerful characters.  We left room for Miracles well past Minor, and should do so in all "vocation powers" structures.  They want to custom-design abilities and powers and new gear and new monsters and and and and?  Buy the Hero System.  Unlike most games, you can look under the hood and customize the game using the same toolbox the designers worked from.  Want more pre-designed stuff?  If you keep buying the books, we'll keep making the books!
 
But make and sell a game.  Not a "here is the huge system and an enormous list of options for what you can do to build a game within it".  A game already built from that huge system, pre-selecting the options for the gamers.  Is that for sure what they want, and it will fly off the shelves?  Nothing is for sure.  Is it similar to other gaming products, some of which pull in a lot more sales than Hero has in the recent past?  I hope so because that was the idea.

Agreed that pulling from an existing Hero setting would be the best approach for Fantasy.
 
I like Fantasy as it has broad appeal, but a different genre might be a better choice to capture a bigger % of a smaller market - existing gamers (Hero will not be the first RPG someone ever sees any time soon) interested in a specific genre.

We can agonize over the food issue.  We could wonder how Iron Man's armor can actually work, and be broken with parts lying around, yet no one else has been able to figure out how to make the same thing, or at least a suit you can  use to fly to work.  We can question how a blood sample from Steve Rogers can't be analyzed to replicate the Super Soldier Serum, or how Vision's AI can't possibly survive without the Mind Gem when Ultron managed just fine, or why no one else can figure out Pym Particles, or how Starlord's walkman managed to go decades without wearing out (leaving aside where the replacement batteries come from) and why that one cassette has lasted so long.
 
Maybe there is a story in there worth telling.  Perhaps there is not.
 
I can work with "In the course of a fingersnap, Banner was able to scan the universe five years back, pre-Snap and post-Snap, to find that Natasha Romanoff was nowhere to be found, so he could probably ensure people did not appear in mid-air, in the depths of space (the earth moves) or in the ocean (the world turns), and fix up the food chain".  I already accepted a Super-Soldier, Asgardian deities, gamma irradiation causing strength and stamina rather than cancer, that seemingly-magical Iron Man armor and a host of other impossibilities to get this far.

A bit of an aside, but I give very little credit to "it's appropriate for my character", "I'm just playing my character" or "that's what the module says".
 
You (player or GM) choose how to design characters.  If they are overpowered or inappropriate for the game, or just ruin the fun for everyone else, that's not on "the character", it's on you for inappropriately designing a character whose fully appropriate abilities are not appropriate for the game.
 
You (the player or GM) chose the character to design and include in the game.  If the character is an a-hole, and drags down the game, then you are an a-hole for building an a-hole character and putting it in the game.  [Some dispensation to GMs as it's often appropriate for an adversarial NPC to be an a-hole]
 
The game is not run by the module writer, it is run by the GM.  Part of the GM's job is to tailor the game to the group's enjoyment.  The module writer cannot envision every circumstance, nor are they perfect, so customize the module to fit your game.  If the module said "kill the entire party here" or "now award them a thousand xp", you'd likely fix that PDQ.  Other things that need fixing may be less obvious.

A bit of an aside, but I give very little credit to "it's appropriate for my character", "I'm just playing my character" or "that's what the module says".
 
You (player or GM) choose how to design characters.  If they are overpowered or inappropriate for the game, or just ruin the fun for everyone else, that's not on "the character", it's on you for inappropriately designing a character whose fully appropriate abilities are not appropriate for the game.
 
You (the player or GM) chose the character to design and include in the game.  If the character is an a-hole, and drags down the game, then you are an a-hole for building an a-hole character and putting it in the game.  [Some dispensation to GMs as it's often appropriate for an adversarial NPC to be an a-hole]
 
The game is not run by the module writer, it is run by the GM.  Part of the GM's job is to tailor the game to the group's enjoyment.  The module writer cannot envision every circumstance, nor are they perfect, so customize the module to fit your game.  If the module said "kill the entire party here" or "now award them a thousand xp", you'd likely fix that PDQ.  Other things that need fixing may be less obvious.

We can agonize over the food issue.  We could wonder how Iron Man's armor can actually work, and be broken with parts lying around, yet no one else has been able to figure out how to make the same thing, or at least a suit you can  use to fly to work.  We can question how a blood sample from Steve Rogers can't be analyzed to replicate the Super Soldier Serum, or how Vision's AI can't possibly survive without the Mind Gem when Ultron managed just fine, or why no one else can figure out Pym Particles, or how Starlord's walkman managed to go decades without wearing out (leaving aside where the replacement batteries come from) and why that one cassette has lasted so long.
 
Maybe there is a story in there worth telling.  Perhaps there is not.
 
I can work with "In the course of a fingersnap, Banner was able to scan the universe five years back, pre-Snap and post-Snap, to find that Natasha Romanoff was nowhere to be found, so he could probably ensure people did not appear in mid-air, in the depths of space (the earth moves) or in the ocean (the world turns), and fix up the food chain".  I already accepted a Super-Soldier, Asgardian deities, gamma irradiation causing strength and stamina rather than cancer, that seemingly-magical Iron Man armor and a host of other impossibilities to get this far.

I don't typically measure the effectiveness of a power based on what it can do to a 2 DEF, 8's across the board, 16 STUN normal.  I measure it based on effectiveness in situations where the character can either win or lose, depending on how effective his powers are.  When will Our Hero use his psychic powers on Nellie Normal and not have several phases to spend on the attempt?
 
In any case, neither your nor my approach is going to make it easy for Captain ControlFreak to get Nellie Normal to hand over her boss's top-secret files.  Under my model, his 60 AP 6d6 Cumulative, 144 point max effect will require several attempts to get past Nellie's 8 EGO and passionate loyalty to (or dread fear of) her boss (+30 effect) with her thinking she was just persuaded it was the right thing to do (+20), not psychically manipulated.  58 will take3 phases, and a fourth will mean 84 effect, so -5 to her breakout roll.
 
Under your model, he gets 4d6 to beat Nellie's EGO of 8 + 20 so she thinks it was ultimately her decision = 28, which is four more than he can ever roll. 
 
So my better way of approaching the issue is to make mental powers cost 10 points per d6, and be cumulative to 4x maximum roll, by default. 
 
 
Well, there's the Martian Manhunter (much better known with multiple appearances on Supergirl) - basically Superman with mental powers.  Psylocke, the mentalist ninja. 
 
And how hard is it in Hero?  A few more slots in the Multipower don't cost that much.
 
Many source material Supers have no apparent rDEF either.
 
 
I consider an Advantage to make each 5 points in the ability more useful, while an adder just (well) adds an ability to the power.  The question of what the default should be, what savings should be available for losing some default abilities and what it should cost to add to the default is a separate issue.
 

A bit of an aside, but I give very little credit to "it's appropriate for my character", "I'm just playing my character" or "that's what the module says".
 
You (player or GM) choose how to design characters.  If they are overpowered or inappropriate for the game, or just ruin the fun for everyone else, that's not on "the character", it's on you for inappropriately designing a character whose fully appropriate abilities are not appropriate for the game.
 
You (the player or GM) chose the character to design and include in the game.  If the character is an a-hole, and drags down the game, then you are an a-hole for building an a-hole character and putting it in the game.  [Some dispensation to GMs as it's often appropriate for an adversarial NPC to be an a-hole]
 
The game is not run by the module writer, it is run by the GM.  Part of the GM's job is to tailor the game to the group's enjoyment.  The module writer cannot envision every circumstance, nor are they perfect, so customize the module to fit your game.  If the module said "kill the entire party here" or "now award them a thousand xp", you'd likely fix that PDQ.  Other things that need fixing may be less obvious.

Especially with Hero branching out to try new things, I really think we need a "game powered by Hero" which takes the above into account.
 
Let's assume Fantasy because that is where the market starts.  What does the game need?
 
It needs to explain the stats.  Maybe not all of them.  Maybe we actually build some as combined stats.  Maybe STR comes bundled with some STUN and some PD and CON comes bundled with some END, REC and ED.  Perhaps everyone gets 10 BOD and 3 SPD by default.  Those need not be the choices, but choices are needed.
 
It needs to provide some races, cultures, archetypes, vocations and/or backgrounds.  62 (above) seems like a lot.  Let's say 4 human cultures and 6 non-human races (you select one of the 10 choices), 12 vocations (segregated into 4 archetypes such as "Warrior", "Mage", "Devoted" and "Rogue" (you pick one) and 15 Backgrounds (pick 1).  If we got to 12 backgrounds and were out of great ideas, stop.  if we had two more great Cultures, add them.  But the number of choices must be manageable.
 
Now, let's make each Race/Culture cost 50 points, each Vocation costs 100 and each Background costs 25.  That's your 175 starting points.  DONE.  Within each, we might have choices (e.g. select 5 skills from this list; select 3 Prayers from the Orisons list and 2 from the Miracles, Minor list).  
 
Now we need to describe the skills, those mechanics taken up in the abilities gained through Vocations and the game play rules.  That's our Rules section.  Too many rules to fit the page count?  Cut something, and take all abilities related to it away. 
 
Now, let's pick a setting.  Maybe this will be a Turakian Age game, or perhaps we start from scratch.  Pick a location in the broader world and provide enough detail to make it a "home base".  MAYBE provide some broader info on the bigger world, but that's space permitting.  We can have a full world book, or new region books, later.  They can even have new races, cultures, vocations and/or backgrounds.  Provide some monsters and some short starting adventures.  Provide an xp system, but all they can do with xp is increase stats, buy new or improved skills or buy new picks from their race, vocation or background.  Don't even offer the option of buying from other cultures, backgrounds or vocations.
 
Get the adventure rolling, and map out a broader "adventure path" surrounding it.  If it sells, we can make Book 2 - more adventure, and some more character options for more powerful characters.  We left room for Miracles well past Minor, and should do so in all "vocation powers" structures.  They want to custom-design abilities and powers and new gear and new monsters and and and and?  Buy the Hero System.  Unlike most games, you can look under the hood and customize the game using the same toolbox the designers worked from.  Want more pre-designed stuff?  If you keep buying the books, we'll keep making the books!
 
But make and sell a game.  Not a "here is the huge system and an enormous list of options for what you can do to build a game within it".  A game already built from that huge system, pre-selecting the options for the gamers.  Is that for sure what they want, and it will fly off the shelves?  Nothing is for sure.  Is it similar to other gaming products, some of which pull in a lot more sales than Hero has in the recent past?  I hope so because that was the idea.

Especially with Hero branching out to try new things, I really think we need a "game powered by Hero" which takes the above into account.
 
Let's assume Fantasy because that is where the market starts.  What does the game need?
 
It needs to explain the stats.  Maybe not all of them.  Maybe we actually build some as combined stats.  Maybe STR comes bundled with some STUN and some PD and CON comes bundled with some END, REC and ED.  Perhaps everyone gets 10 BOD and 3 SPD by default.  Those need not be the choices, but choices are needed.
 
It needs to provide some races, cultures, archetypes, vocations and/or backgrounds.  62 (above) seems like a lot.  Let's say 4 human cultures and 6 non-human races (you select one of the 10 choices), 12 vocations (segregated into 4 archetypes such as "Warrior", "Mage", "Devoted" and "Rogue" (you pick one) and 15 Backgrounds (pick 1).  If we got to 12 backgrounds and were out of great ideas, stop.  if we had two more great Cultures, add them.  But the number of choices must be manageable.
 
Now, let's make each Race/Culture cost 50 points, each Vocation costs 100 and each Background costs 25.  That's your 175 starting points.  DONE.  Within each, we might have choices (e.g. select 5 skills from this list; select 3 Prayers from the Orisons list and 2 from the Miracles, Minor list).  
 
Now we need to describe the skills, those mechanics taken up in the abilities gained through Vocations and the game play rules.  That's our Rules section.  Too many rules to fit the page count?  Cut something, and take all abilities related to it away. 
 
Now, let's pick a setting.  Maybe this will be a Turakian Age game, or perhaps we start from scratch.  Pick a location in the broader world and provide enough detail to make it a "home base".  MAYBE provide some broader info on the bigger world, but that's space permitting.  We can have a full world book, or new region books, later.  They can even have new races, cultures, vocations and/or backgrounds.  Provide some monsters and some short starting adventures.  Provide an xp system, but all they can do with xp is increase stats, buy new or improved skills or buy new picks from their race, vocation or background.  Don't even offer the option of buying from other cultures, backgrounds or vocations.
 
Get the adventure rolling, and map out a broader "adventure path" surrounding it.  If it sells, we can make Book 2 - more adventure, and some more character options for more powerful characters.  We left room for Miracles well past Minor, and should do so in all "vocation powers" structures.  They want to custom-design abilities and powers and new gear and new monsters and and and and?  Buy the Hero System.  Unlike most games, you can look under the hood and customize the game using the same toolbox the designers worked from.  Want more pre-designed stuff?  If you keep buying the books, we'll keep making the books!
 
But make and sell a game.  Not a "here is the huge system and an enormous list of options for what you can do to build a game within it".  A game already built from that huge system, pre-selecting the options for the gamers.  Is that for sure what they want, and it will fly off the shelves?  Nothing is for sure.  Is it similar to other gaming products, some of which pull in a lot more sales than Hero has in the recent past?  I hope so because that was the idea.

The challenge of Damage Reduction is in the pricing.
 
If I'm in a 12 DC Supers game, I might have 22 PD and 22 ED.  That costs 40 points, and an average 12d6 hit will pass 20 STUN past my defenses.  Make the extra defenses resistant, and now I pay 60 points.
 
For the same 60 points, I can have 2 PD and ED, and 50% Physical and Energy damage reduction.  I'll take more BOD.  Small attacks will do more STUN, and bigger ones will do less.  This feels reasonably priced.
 
But in an 8DC game, where I might have 15 PD and ED, 6 Resistant, I pay 32 points.  A typical attack gets 13 STUN past my defenses, and I'll take a bit of BOD.
 
Paying 60 for the same Damage Reduction, and sticking to 2 PD and ED, a typical attack still gets 13 past my defenses, but I spent almost twice the CP.  That pricing doesn't feel quite as equitable.

The challenge of this limitation is that it will be enormously campaign-dependent.  If the character did not have these extra defenses, how often would he take BOD damage?
 
 - pretty much never?  Then the limitation is pretty much never going to reduce the value of the extra defenses.  This would be, for example, a Super in a 12DC game who already has 20 rDEF and is tacking this on top.
 
 - all the time?  OK, now perhaps we have a limitation.  Would a typical attack get enough BOD through that he would normally take 5 or less BOD from the hit, so that limitation really means half of the defenses may as well not be resistant at all?  Or would a typical attack blow 10+ BOD past his defenses so he will typically reduce BOD damage by the full 5 points anyway (bringing us back to "not very limiting").
 
Without knowing how bloody the game will be in general, and how likely this character in particular is to take BOD past his other defenses, it's pretty tough to value the limitation.
 
Let's approach this from an alternate build.  If he made half of the defenses non-resistant, that would be a -1/2 limitation on half the defenses, and they would never block KA BOD.  It seems pretty tough, with that in mind, to think that this limitation would be worth more than -1/4 on the full defenses.

If a Shield only provides OCV for Blocking, players will not use shields.  They do not want to use their scarce actions to Block.
 
If a Shield first provided Block as a half-phase non-attack action (a Move action in D&D parlance), or a free action, with larger shields providing OCV bonuses to block, people would use shields, but combat would take longer because there would be more rolls.
 
To me, the DCV bonus is SFX for action-free blocking in game and a mechanical compromise for playabiity.

If a Shield only provides OCV for Blocking, players will not use shields.  They do not want to use their scarce actions to Block.
 
If a Shield first provided Block as a half-phase non-attack action (a Move action in D&D parlance), or a free action, with larger shields providing OCV bonuses to block, people would use shields, but combat would take longer because there would be more rolls.
 
To me, the DCV bonus is SFX for action-free blocking in game and a mechanical compromise for playabiity.

If a Shield only provides OCV for Blocking, players will not use shields.  They do not want to use their scarce actions to Block.
 
If a Shield first provided Block as a half-phase non-attack action (a Move action in D&D parlance), or a free action, with larger shields providing OCV bonuses to block, people would use shields, but combat would take longer because there would be more rolls.
 
To me, the DCV bonus is SFX for action-free blocking in game and a mechanical compromise for playabiity.

Yah, this isn't a free speech issue.  Dobbs (among others) asserted that the products and services of Dominion and Smartmatic were unreliable.  That becomes defamation.  Free speech would cover the accusations of improprieties at polling places, for example, but do not permit this type of speech.
 
Also:  some types of trolling are not protected.  Smear posts like "this place is a ripoff, they'll take your money and disappear" are actionable...if you can find the poster.  Individual, isolated smear posts tend to have minimal impact, but in other cases it's a severe problem that has ruined businesses.  Heck yeah, that's actionable.  The allegations against Dominion and Smartmatic immediately rose to actionable because of the reach of the medium (Fox) to millions of people.  Now add that it got repeated ad nauseum.  NOW, add in that:
 
a)  it was asserted in places where those machines weren't in use, or were in minimal use and therefore couldn't have been the issue
b)  the courts threw out all the allegations, but the assertions continue.  This goes beyond opinion.
 
In the very early stages, possibly a retraction would've been sufficient.  That stopped being adequate a LONG time ago.  The case for Dominion/Smartmatic is beyond a smoking gun.  It's as if Timothy McVeigh had recorded making the bomb, driving to the Murrah building, walking away to a safe distance, then smiling into the camera as he goes "now watch this!!"  This is why NewsMax cut off Lindell's rant, why Dobbs was canned, why Guiliani's broadcasters inserted a disclaimer during his own podcast...without telling him they were gonna do it.  Fox News will probably survive even a 10-digit judgment;  NewsMax might not survive a much smaller judgment.
 
And yeah, as Simon pointed out:  the First Amendment is asserted *all* the time in wildly inaccurate ways.  Probably not possible in practice, but requiring some basic understanding of civil liberties as an actual requirement to vote is worth considering, IMO.  The problem is, of course, what you would require on such an examination.
 
One of the better, introductory, basic classes I took in high school was a common law course.  I think a one-year, required-to-graduate class covering common law, basic rights (and what they don't cover), and the fundamentals of money management would be a Very Good Thing.
 
 

It also doesn't mean that any media outlet is required to give everyone a platform for their speech. The First Amendment only applies to government repression of speech. Fox News is a business that has to sell itself to survive. Their management has every right to cancel any program they believe threatens their business.
 
 
This is proving to be the only way to get contemporary media and public figures to consider the consequences of their actions. Hit them in their wallets.

"Free Speech" does not mean "Freedom From Consequences" though.