JasonPacker

I can see where it might seem that way - but I prefer to think of as being more detailed.

The problem is entirely mine - and it's that the rules are qualitative, "You can't blow a man-sized hole in a door or wall with a single bullet; you can't open a safe with a karate chop" rather than quantitative, for example "objects with the classification of <X> take 1/5 damage from normal attacks, and cause damage to the objects doing the damage. Their PD is doubled against most killing attacks, but halved against attacks that <have some special feature>. Objects with classification <Y> can take no more than 1/5 of their BODY in damage from a single attack that has Beam as a limitation, with the rest of the damage passing through, possibly injuring other objects or people behind."

I think I must have been misunderstood. I agree with all of that, I just don't think it's the best way to model either extra time or extra effort. More damage makes some sense for extra effort, but should probably be modeled with Pushing, not with a maneuver. Extra time shouldn't impact the damage your attack packs, but the effect of that hit - by reducing the penalties for hit location for example to allow you to land a blow in a x2 Stun location (for normal damage) or a high stun/body multiplier location (for killing) instead.

And yet, even in a heroic game they fall to a GM Fiat style of rule (beam, real weapon, etc) instead of just having a system that's internally consistent enough not to need sweeping exceptions. That'd be my goal - an attack/defense/damage system that remains consistent across as many variables as possible.

Yeah, I'm falling out of love with haymaker in general. I think that extra effort and time ought to be represented by a maneuver, but not by adding damage classes necessarily. And I'll give you that "should" is variable. So, for the sake of argument, I'm looking at realistic attacks in a realistic setting.

A skilled Bando practitioner does a kick (offensive strike), at STR 15, with 2 extra DCs bought in his martial art for 9d6 N. Same STR 15 guy haymakers a blow with a battleaxe (base damage 2d6 K) for 3d6+1 K. With a Great Pick, he gets only 2d6+1 K, but Armor Piercing - so maybe that's good if the safe is Hardened, but irrelevant to the axe. Neither one should cause a bullet-proof safe a bit of worry, but both could, with just a little luck, whittle it away with no negative impacts to the attacker (though there are optional rules for damage to weapons that ought to apply, and ought to apply to people hitting hard things as well).

I definitely like the idea of a system that better models what really happens with the mechanics, instead of with exceptions that place the decision in the hands of GM fiat. It would need rules for how specific damage types interact with different material types, how much damage is the maximum that can be inflicted by a type of attack (the rest blowing through or otherwise not being effective) and what happens to folks on the other side of that inanimate object - how much is the damage reduced. A single, consistent system would be ideal.

IPE is really about charging you for a power that nobody can tell you're using. If you're biting someone's neck, that's going to be pretty obvious. I'm thinking "causes no pain" might well fall under special effects. Linking in some power that causes the character to become docile and a willing participant is almost a requirement.

Perhaps a similar -1/4 limitation to Beam and Real Weapon, something like "Unarmed Attack" with the implications that it can be leveraged as part of the suite of Martial Arts maneuvers, but as it is hands and feet there are implied limitations to the effects on inanimate objects beyond a certain sturdiness of construction.

Are you looking for the sort of early vampire mesmerism that allows the vamp to get in close to do the bite in the first place, or the more Anne Rice vampire "all I could hear was the pounding of the blood in both of our veins" style? It sounds like the latter, and that would be a linked mind control, I would think, with a very limited effect.

Okay, this has been fantastic. I had very limited memory of what Beam and Real Weapon did as limitations - I remembered the no spread, must use a full power, but not the narrow damage interpretation for Beam, and the maintenance issues of Real Weapon, but not the damage limitations. Martial Arts (and all unarmed attacks) just need that same limitation to be assumed, and I should be good to go. I will admit, I had hoped for a more "mechanically pure" means, akin to what GURPS does with making objects Diffuse or Homogenous. But this is at least a step in the right direction to a more legitimate reason than book-defined GM fiat.

The Third Imperium - don't try to replicate the mechanics of Traveller, but do port in that sweet, sweet setting. Shadowrun - I've yet to see it done well, and was just this evening considering whether I wanted to invest some time in trying to detail a good Hero adaptation of the astral and spirits in that vein. Star Frontiers - an old favorite, a little goofy, a little two-dimensional, but full of good memories for me. And I, too, would love to see Glorantha done right.

Yup, I bring it up every now and again on my own blog, on G+, and definitely on reddit (there's a /r/herosystem subreddit that's very quiet, and in the /r/rpg sub) - always when appropriate. I'd like to think I've steered some hardy adventurous sorts to Champions Complete or MHI in the last few months with my plugs.

So, I'm not in love with the system presented in 6E2 for dealing with damage to inanimate objects. They're assigned a PD and ED, and a BODY score, which makes sense in the broadest way. What they don't do is work seamlessly with the power levels in even modest hero-level play without the in-built GM fudge rule - if it doesn't make sense, don't allow it. Don't let a guy karate chop open a safe. Don't let a single bullet open a man-sized hole in even a flimsy interior door. Has anyone done anything with this to adapt the rules to more accurately reflect how inanimate objects might behave? Perhaps something whereby objects were assigned advantages based on construction - both material and relative dimensions ("thickness")? I'm toying with the notion of assigning Damage Reduction - either Normal or Resistant depending on the material or construction of the object. That would deal with the offensive-striking through an iron portcullis, but I'm not sure about the shooting your revolver at the same iron bars... So, anyone got any ideas on this? Tried out something that worked well for you? Had something you tried blow up in your face? Interested in seeing what I come up with?

Me neither. I found it with a google search when searching here proved to be fruitless after the move to new software.

This is a little out-dated, but it is remarkably thorough for Star Trek. Will require conversion from 5th edition, but that's not too terrible a chore. I have a hard copy of Cyber Hero for 4th edition packed away somewhere, but honestly my favorite Shadowrun conversions haven't required much work. Name some weapons to retain flavor. Build powers for spells and summoning to fit the fluff if not the mechanics. And racial templates. Oh, and I'm a sucker for any version that stats up the Net/Matrix/Whatever as another dimension...

Would it be enough to combine Absolute Range Sense, Absolute Timing and Eidetic Memory (perhaps with Bump of Direction) with a high level of enhanced perception across the normal spectrum of senses, and a ridiculously high Criminology and Deduction skills?

I think it's a brilliant idea. I think I'd recommend Champions and MHI - the two new targeted flagship products.

Well, adding to the general discussion on effectiveness equations, I think that SPD ought to be a multiplier, not additive, and probably only multiply against offensive power, not defensive. So (SPD/2) * (DC + CV) perhaps as part of the equation. And END should figure in as a ratio of END to END used per turn (minus REC), to determine how many turns you can go without requiring in-turn recoveries (with an upper limit - if the ratio turns out to be over 25, cap at 25; If END costs all bought to zero, assume 25; If charges, figure in autofire and cap at 25 turns worth of ammo) 'Fraid I'm rapidly leaving "simple" behind...

And you immediately feel exhausted, so you do what you have to do. Hide for 30 seconds. Take a shot, and then take a recovery. Take another shot, then another recovery.

This is the number one charge levied against Hero as a problem, and it's such a ridiculous premise. Even games that require two dice require basic addition and subtraction. I just will never understand.

Except that END is now 5 for 1, so roll 21, multiply by 5, then divide by 2 and get 52.5 Then, unless the return rate is changed, you get 25 END back at the end of each turn. Not bad for a 60 active point attack, but hardly the end of the world.

Yes, an occasionally interesting and always strongly opinionated blog, if I recall correctly.

I know I'm late to the party (333 pages!) but has anyone done anything with Dungeons and Drag Queens yet?

I'm prepared to be shot down here, but aren't we into the territory of special effect at this point? If your version of "night vision" is that you project your own wavelength that you can see bouncing off of things, you have different result than if your version is eyes as big as saucers.