Tywyll

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. After the initial charge the weapons were typically discarded or jerked out of their user's hands/stuck in a dead body and they switched to regular side arms. 
 
 
I have no problem with half your str being used for computing damage purposes. My problem is how that interacts with Str Min and the additional OCV penalty it will almost always create. 
 
See to me this feels like they wanted to bring damage in line with unarmed versions of the maneuver and then someone tacked on the idea of comparing it to STR Min, when that wasn't meant to be used this way. Treating the reduced STR as though the character were actually weaker rather than just a damage equation, creating this absurd breakdown. 
 
 
Yes, he is greatly disadvantaging himself for almost no gain...not only is he extremely unlikely to hit, he is also opening himself to counter attack and leaving himself wide open. There is almost no case on the battle-field where this would be worth the risk, making it a garbage maneuver. 
 
 
In that situation you are trading damage for movement. That's sometimes a fair trade because some damage is better than no damage. But if you can't inflict that damage or your chance is miniscule, then you are getting movement for nothing and opening yourself up to counterattack that will most likely succeed. It is not a reasonable trade.  You are better off just taking a full move and not attacking.
 
 
It's a bit iffy on moving through an enemies hex. I certainly wouldn't allow it as a GM, not in a heroic game. 
 
 
No, that is not the case. If I have STR 17 and wield that medium spear, having it dropped to half gives me a -1 penalty when weilding said spear. 
 
 
But you also have your weight and physical momentem...being run into by a linebacker hurts more then if they step into you, and that extra force would be just as dangerous with a sharp pointy thing held in front of them.
 
Anyway, I think we should just agree to disagree. I think this is a stupid rule and I'm not going to use it, while you clearly are happy to use it as is. I see no benefit in continuing to rehash the arguement. 

I can't see the physics of that working out.  The running long jump world record is nearly 3x that of the standing long jump.
 
If I ram a target with a spear at even a moderate speed I'm going to deliver far more force than I can standing still and driving off the ground.
 
 
I must be missing something.  Perhaps I worded something poorly, but I feel like we just said the same thing while theoretically disagreeing with each other.

Well, to me that stuff is cruft, even in a survival horror setting. Because players aren't going to build a base with points but with stuff they find in the wilderness, the construct would exist narratively instead of mechanically...like they do in almost every other rpg. Sure, you could add that in via the full rules, but this is about making a stripped down version for quick play.
 
Ditto with removing the powers. Zombie stat blocks would contain all the mechanics for any power they possessed, listed in normal language. How it interacts with the power system would be unneeded and somewhat detremental to this exercise. 
 
That said, I would love to see a simplified and streamlined version of Hero, but that is a different project I think.

Long, focused aiming at the exclusion of all other activity (hence the DCV penalty).
 
Hero is an effects based game. Getting caught up in the names of the maneuver doesn't serve much purpose I don't think. 

Well, to me that stuff is cruft, even in a survival horror setting. Because players aren't going to build a base with points but with stuff they find in the wilderness, the construct would exist narratively instead of mechanically...like they do in almost every other rpg. Sure, you could add that in via the full rules, but this is about making a stripped down version for quick play.
 
Ditto with removing the powers. Zombie stat blocks would contain all the mechanics for any power they possessed, listed in normal language. How it interacts with the power system would be unneeded and somewhat detremental to this exercise. 
 
That said, I would love to see a simplified and streamlined version of Hero, but that is a different project I think.

So I just learned about a study published in in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology that looked at the decision making processes of shoppers. They found that when shoppers had to choose between 6 jars of Jam or 24 jars of jam, the fewer choices there were the more people purchased. Decision paralysis is a real thing and having limited scope actually helps most people.
 
So yeah, giving most people a book that has a game with all their decisions made is far more likely to bring them to the table as it were then asking them to build it themselves. 

Well, to me that stuff is cruft, even in a survival horror setting. Because players aren't going to build a base with points but with stuff they find in the wilderness, the construct would exist narratively instead of mechanically...like they do in almost every other rpg. Sure, you could add that in via the full rules, but this is about making a stripped down version for quick play.
 
Ditto with removing the powers. Zombie stat blocks would contain all the mechanics for any power they possessed, listed in normal language. How it interacts with the power system would be unneeded and somewhat detremental to this exercise. 
 
That said, I would love to see a simplified and streamlined version of Hero, but that is a different project I think.

Ditto.
 
And to assuage your incredulity earlier:  The production principles were sound, and the demos of the POC batch showed them to be at least as durable as modern "high impact" resin dice, if not moreso.
 
The problem appears to be the outsourcing.  They had a process that worked extremely well, but was insanely expensive.  They outsourced to China (like the rest of the entire earth, apparently-- everyone bags on the amount of pollution coming out of China.  Fact is, it's _our_ garbage.     ).  Since then, apparently no one has been able to deliver on the promise of replicating the process at an affordable price.
 
 

tl; dr - while I think both approaches are viable, I don't see either one as game-breakingly superior.

You could always rename the maneuver for non-melee attacks:  Deadly Aim for archers, Heightened Spell for casters, etc.

Long, focused aiming at the exclusion of all other activity (hence the DCV penalty).
 
Hero is an effects based game. Getting caught up in the names of the maneuver doesn't serve much purpose I don't think. 

I'm agreeing with your idea, just offering up ways to make it (possibly) more appealing to mass market. Namely, have the default rules for modern day gaming in one book with predefinied equipment with hidden builds, etc. Dump all the nonsense like building bases and vehicles and the power system.
 
BUT...
 
Also include some default settings in the book. Yes, an urban fantasy campaign setting could take up a whole book...but also it could be done in 20 pages or less. You exist in a world with monsters that you secretly hunt. Here's your organization, here's some monster stats, here's 10 spells a black witch could learn. That's enough to start playing with. As with everything else in the book, you don't let the player or GM need to pursue their version, you decide for them.
 
Ditto with a Zombie outbreak setting. Here's how it started, spread, and here's several zombie stats. Few roleplayers need more than that to grok a zombie setting. 
 
Etc, etc, etc. Some I'll agree are too complicated for this approach, but others are so much part of the cultural landscape that I don't think they need more than 20-30 pages to be playable. 
 
These mini settings don't have to be big to get people playing, but they do allow the rules to be used by people who would pass over a game set in the modern day that most people don't seem to be interested in.  I suppose that, if this were a kickstarter, these could be the stretchgoals, but I really think you want to have this in the book to appeal to a broader audiance. There is little reason to make an easily digestible and approachable version of HERO if no one picks it up because they aren't interested in the default setting. 

I also find that names like this drive player ability to remember names down to ZERO.  They can play for weeks and not be able to name a single location, deity or NPC when the names are like that.
 
Recently I listened to the Empire of the Summer Moon audio book and the Comanche names were impossible for me to remember.  The rough English translations were real eye-poppers and unforgettable.
 
 

Oh, here's another one for me that has nothing to do with anachronism:
 
Bad names.  If your name is Jim Ward, don't name your wizard character "Drawmij".  If your name is Tom Keogh, don't name your character "Keoghtom".  Don't name the god of insanity "Ssendam".  Don't name your halfling character "Dorfongolf".   You don't have to invent seven languages like Tolkien did, just to name the people and places in your setting, but you should put a little effort into coming up with names that sound reasonable.  There are plenty of fantasy name generators online, and even the worst of these is better than just spelling something backwards.

That takes me right down nostalgia lane.  I work in tech so I'm reasonably savvy for an antediluvian, but I do miss the older editions.
 
Also makes me wish I had volunteered to edit things.  The number of typos is impressive.

This pretty much sums up the problem with HERO System: they have a whole lot of genre books, each with a whole lot of choices to dial in within each book! Maybe this is the worst of both worlds according to the study!
 
Don't get me wrong: I love all of the books, and love looking at what they each have to offer. But this is definitely coming from the point of view of someone who studies the Hero System pretty intently. I love that there are so many books. But this is a problem for anyone who is new to the system (which is what is always lurking in the background of the assumptions I'm making in this particular thread).
 
There used to be individual one-book games back in the day, and they sold. But that was before there was a HERO System toolbox. They were marketed as being built with the HERO System, but the system itself hadn't yet been published. I'm curious what that would look like today, where the system has been published (along with a gazillion other books!). I think a one-book game would look good being taught and played at conventions, and in marketing of some sort. This would probably all be online because I don't really think HERO System will ever make a good showing at game shops anymore. But that's part of what can hopefully be figured out by the folks who are carrying the torch for DOJ and are interested in doing the work that the owners apparently aren't able to do. This is, of course, a whole other can of worms that we should probably save for another thread.

There is no limitation to the cost of the pool.  However, the control cost and the pool cost have been decoupled.
 
The maximum AP of any power in the pool is equal to twice the base cost of the reserve.  Since the highest AP spell considered in my example was 60 AP, the base control cost is 60 AP/2 = 30.
 
The pool itself is real points.  As only one spell will be in the pool at any one time, and the highest real point cost of any spell (in my example, the real point cost of each of the four spells) is 22 points, the pool costs 22 points.
 
The pool cost itself cannot be reduced by limitations, but the pool only needs to be big enough to cover the Real Point cost of the powers.
 
The decoupling of the size of the pool (governing real points available) and the maximum AP of any power in the pool (2x the control cost) was a significant change to the VPP in 6e.  In 5e, if I wanted a VPP of 60 AP attack powers, all of which were OAF, I had to buy a 60 point pool even though the powers only had a cost of 30 real points each.  Green Arrow should really be firing two arrows with every attack to fully use his pool.
 
In 6e, the pool cost of 30 would allow one 60 AP, 30 Real Points power at a time, so GA can only pull one arrow out of the quiver at a time.

Thanks for the clarification, OP. 
 
On a touch screen on break so I can't get much down:
 
All the thoughts and suggestions coming from everyone here are great.  Honestly, I think it's a matter of how much complexity you want to achieve / are willing to accept. 
 
If it was me, I would stick with the ratio idea.  I hadn't put a lot of thought in it when I tossed it out originally, but the more I think about it, the more I find it to be a fairly clean solution; knowing that you're powering magic with it makes it even more appealing to me. 
 
Gotta run;  good luck! 

You're forgetting why we were complaining and calling it a concept tax.

Well, I don't want to do it as Multipower for various reasons, chief being the overhead of how Multipowers work (sharing the reserve, powers turning off when you switch slots, needing to have the same limitations, etc). So its not a MP at all.
 
Essentially, it's a minor magic system. The character can cast X spells a day and has a list of Y spells that function differently. He can do (for example) 6 spells a day, regardless of which of them he picks. He knows 4 spells but could buy more later that would also share the charge pool.  
 
While I could force him to buy an END reserve to represent it, last time I opted for that, I got dogpiled for 'taxing' a concept. That's not why I'm doing this differently however, I'm doing it differently because the magic is different for this character than for others and I want that to show that difference mechanically. Unlike a normal caster in my world who can recover their magic juice over time (from their REC into their END pool), this type of magic has a hard limit on it's uses per day. 
 
Now, having said all of that, I have now seen that a continuing charge doesn't shut off when you switch powers in the reserve, so that makes me slightly more ameniable to the idea of trying to force these abilities into a MP. However, I'm still left with other problems (namely shared limitations, AP limits, etc) so I'm not sure I want to go that route. 

So I just learned about a study published in in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology that looked at the decision making processes of shoppers. They found that when shoppers had to choose between 6 jars of Jam or 24 jars of jam, the fewer choices there were the more people purchased. Decision paralysis is a real thing and having limited scope actually helps most people.
 
So yeah, giving most people a book that has a game with all their decisions made is far more likely to bring them to the table as it were then asking them to build it themselves. 

Here's a package example from old FH game:


 
The other item was that package Disads were always full price.  That was the point of packages versus templates.

Every player I've showed 4th edition FH to wants the package deals back in the game.

Mqan I miss Package Deals.  made building characters so easy....

Oh no, I remember. This sounds exactly the same to me though. In what way would it be different? I have a concept of a magic system that ought to work via charges, but now your suggestion is to pay more points to make it work, especially if the pool was really large and needed to fully recover every day. In what way is your suggestion NOT a concept tax?