redsash

Late coming in, but I'd like to comment on the original thread.
 
I agree with @Chris Goodwin that it many ways it has become less complicated for all those reasons, but also the complexity has increased. That is, the rules are generally more consistent and clearer than previous versions, but wow dandy, there's a lot more of them!
 
Complexity is good because it's robust and flexible. But still, like many I haven't made it through the 6E core rules yet; I keep finding little unexpected differences.
 
I have only glanced at the simplified books (I guess that's Champions Now?) not sure how well those scan to a new reader...
 
That said, I recently ran an all-newbie intro session using pre-made characters from the MCU Defenders and it worked very well. But going in, I drastically simplified the character sheets and the game mechanics. No END, no killing attacks, no noncombat movement, combined PD/ED, everyone at 4 SPD (except Spider-Folk at 8), no point costs or any math elements on the sheets. I basically just had them decide on actions and roll.
 
Going through that process made me realize just how complex and flexible the system is, and in many ways, how it's still too complicated. All the different types of rolls is very confusing for new players especially.
 
Roll low, now roll high what? Presence attacks what? Ego attacks what? I mean, there are two ways to break things! No, wait, three including killing attacks. You have to ask the GM which one to use.
 
For a long time I have toyed with the idea of re-scaling Hero game mechanics to support one type of aim-high roll. Then you could let characters buy bigger dice for mutant abilities! d12 for 12 points base, d8 for 8pts, etc. (d6 still costs 5: you get a discount because anthropocentrism 😉

Same answer as the previous thread about Blue Eye Samurai cutting through a tree trunk: a tree has 5 DEF, 8-11 BODY, so 13-16 Killing Damage will do the trick to break it. Bruce Wayne kicks a tree down in Batman:Year One in three blows (at an estimated 8d6, which scans).
 
Uprooting would be harder, yeah: Perhaps require a STR roll with penalty of -13 to -16 (somewhat agreeing with @unclevlad's calculation of 80 STR).
 
I seem to recall a comic book page where Spider-Man (43 STR canonically) uproots a tree. But he probably begged a bonus for Clinging from the GM...
 
To the pedantic thread: I live in a forest with hundreds of uprooted spruce and other conifers; even hardwoods will rip out sometimes in a hard wind. Some trees have taproots, some don't. Even planted fruit trees might not where an apple grown from seed might. Trees be complex!

I have to agree with Ninja-Bear on this just figure out how much STR it would take to break a tree and use that.  If this is a beast using brute STR you don’t have to worry about trying to replant or otherwise keep the tree alive.  More than likely the tree is going to break near the roots when someone tries to pull it up.  There will be some root structure with the tree, but the majority will still be in the ground.  

Mizu had wicked trouble cutting through that tree while practicing focus; it took her several tries. The other ridiculously talented swordsperson in the story also spent some time mastering the same trick. Looked to me like a critical hit or a very high damage roll in the 2- or 3d6 range.
 
She made the sword herself from strange meteoric ore that her teacher -- a renowned master swordsmith -- could not melt. I'd have bought it armor piercing.
 
I long ago wrote up a version of Ogami Itto (Lone Wolf and Cub) with a 2d6 AP Dotanuki that he can get to 3d6 before pushing (+4DC Slashing Stoke). I figured that would be enough to cut through a ship's mast or a tree (5 PD, 8-11 BODY) ; feats he has canonically performed. (As well as cutting the tips from regular Katana and slicing heavy chainmail right off several opponents without drawing blood. Eep!)
 
Alert Readers may recall that Bruce Wayne kicks a tree down in Frank Miller's Batman Year One, although it does take him a couple of blows. Figure 8d6 from STRENGTH 20 and Offensive Strike +4DC would crack an 8 BODY tree in three hits.

Designing an introductory adventure for newbies right now. I did all the characters myself so END is taken into account (weapons bought to 0 END where appropriate, END and REC all set to reasonable levels), but I removed any mention of it from their simplified character sheets. It could very well become a long-term slugfest (I am gating a bunch of MCU characters into a volcano arena in the savage land and dropping ninjas and giant frogs on them until they weep) but if so I will make noises about fatigue when I feel like it.
 
Also removed SPD -- everyone is at SPD 4.
 
I did the same math as someone earlier -- standard characteristic maxima put running velocity right at real-world Olympic record levels.

One of the issues I have with the CON/BODY/STUN thing is that you have two conditions equating to temporary unconsciousness, governed by different stats and different mechanisms. So one can be Stunned or knocked unconscious, and recover from either with a bit of time, but only the second state is mitigated by one's Recovery stat, and even then only in certain narrow circumstances. (Try explaining that to your would-be D&D converts.)
 
Looking at the (long) vehicle damage thread I commented on yesterday: many folk have problems with vehicles getting dinged up as they take BODY (and lose, for example, a little speed) and then suddenly exploding as they reach 0 BODY. No differentiation between taking 1 BODY and losing half the vehicle's maximum BODY in one blow. Compare to the optional disabling rules for characters.
 
It seems to me that modifying the disabling rules could help both systems. If you take more than a third or half your STUN in one blow, for example, that could be the threshold for "Stunning" and perhaps could be resisted by an EGO roll (representing willpower withstanding the pain of a bruising blow, with penalties to the roll based on the amount of damage [hey that gives us a mechanism for bruises, too]). In fact EGO makes more sense than CON for withstanding damage effects in most circumstances: a strong-willed character will often keep fighting until they are dead, thoroughly unconscious, or well past exhaustion. BODY tracks actual damage, STUN tracks pain, END tracks exhaustion. Resistances resist poison. What's CON for again?
 
Similarly with vehicles, where one or two body damage would not necessarily effect the vehicle's performance, but a "disabling" blow of a third or half Max BODY would cripple a system. Maybe a driver or passenger with the Mechanics skill could make a roll to resist? ("Sounds like that last hit compromised the baffle-gab flywheel. Gear down! Gear down before it fails entirely!")
 
This would certainly scale better from unarmored motorcycles to large tough vehicles -- one (and by "one" I mean a berserk Hulk analog; see post in that other thread) can break a tank practically in half without compromising it's combat ability at all, then destroy the main gun on a second tank with 2 Body damage.

Ah thanks!
 
Still, I would allow IR but not UV to see in a cave, no matter what sense organ you're using to pick up those wavelengths. No starshine down there but bodies radiate  heat and rocks reflect it just fine.

Hi-Beam Headlights: Suppress natural darkness 4d6+1 (standard effect: 13 points), Area Of Effect (128m Line Explosion; +1/2)
OAF Fragile (Headlight; -1 1/4), No Range (-1/2), Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2)
19 Active Points
6 Real Points
   

I agree with Duke and dsatow here. The quotes are for emphasis.
 
Anytime you are creating a simulation (or model if you prefer), you must make some simplifying assumptions. If you could recreate reality without making some simplifying assumptions, you wouldn't be creating a simulation/model--you'd be creating...well...reality. 
 
The trick is to find out what you can simplify (or take out) and still create an accurate enough simulation.
 
It reminds me of the old physics joke where a farmer goes to his physicist friend and asks them if they can find a solution so that his cows give more milk. The physicist goes away for a couple of days and comes back saying that they have a solution, but it only works for spherical cows in a vacuum.
 
While the gist of the joke is that cows aren't spherical or live in a vacuum, the reality (pardon the pun) is that, if the shape of the cow and its respiration isn't important to how much milk it gives, then the model could be valid. (I realize a cow that can't breathe, like one in a vacuum, isn't likely to give milk, but if the breathing doesn't contribute to how much milk it produces (only keeping it alive), breathing can be removed from the model and being in a vacuum doesn't matter (in this case).)
 
So, it seems to me that the crux of the problem is what simplifying assumptions you can or need to make regarding darkness and light and whether or not the model it produces is good enough for what you're trying to model. It's not likely we will ever find the perfect solution--just one that's good enough for an individual GM or their table.
 
Lee

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...

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.

Final builds. Gandalf's spell gets stronger as the books wane on...
 
3       Torch: Suppress natural darkness 3d6, Area Of Effect (16m Radius Explosion; +1/4) (11 Active Points); OAF (Torch; -1), Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), 1 Continuing Fuel Charge lasting 1 Hour (-0)
 
7       Gandalf struck a blue light from the end of his magic staff: Suppress 5d6, Area Of Effect (16m Radius Explosion; +1/4), All Darkness Effects (+1/2) (26 Active Points); OAF (Staff; -1), Costs Endurance (3 END to maintain; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4)
 
5       Flashlight: Suppress natural darkness 4d6+1 (standard effect: 13 points), Area Of Effect (16m Cone Explosion; +1/2), Thin Cone (-1/4), Mobile (12m per Phase; +1/2) (16 Active Points); OAF Fragile (Flashlight; -1 1/4), Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), 1 Continuing Fuel Charge lasting 1 Hour (-0)
 
Weaponized Flashlight, all slots OAF (-1)
6       Suppress natural darkness 4d6+1 (standard effect: 13 points), Area Of Effect (16m Thin Cone Explosion; +1/4), Mobile (12m; +1/2) (19 Active Points); Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), 1 Continuing Fuel Charge lasting 6 Hours (+1/4)
3       Sight Group Flash 1d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (7 Active Points); Linked (Dispel; -1/2)
2       +5 PRE (5 Active Points); Linked (Flash; -1/2)
4       Hand-To-Hand Attack +2d6 (10 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/4)
 

My pleasure. It was bugging me 🙂
 
 
 
You don't even need the AoE, since Dispel and CE handle AoE the same way. Technically you can dispel the darkness on a single target with 12AP (which fits the effect of a long-range narrow beam spotlight).
 
 
 
Yes, the math still works out the same with Standard Effect: 3pts/d6.

My pleasure. It was bugging me 🙂
 
 
 
You don't even need the AoE, since Dispel and CE handle AoE the same way. Technically you can dispel the darkness on a single target with 12AP (which fits the effect of a long-range narrow beam spotlight).
 
 
 
Yes, the math still works out the same with Standard Effect: 3pts/d6.

The reason I do not like Aid as the base for this power is all to do with those outside the area of effect looking in.
 
If I am a sniper on top of a roof, 200m away.  I am in complete darkness and can see very little.  When the target walks into the room and turns on the light (to light their own environment) I am still in complete darkness and would not be able to target someone in the neighbouring room without a light but am really only dealing with range penalties for the target in the lit room.  How does the Aid solution provide the sniper with the ability to see in the room?
 
There is also the issue that generating light makes you visible from a long way off by people nowhere near the area of effect.
 
Doc

According to the Nightvision description, compensating for normal darkness (-4 Sight PER) takes 8 Active points, or 5 Real Points with [-1/2 only to counteract natural darkness]
So why not do that with Aid? You don’t even have to break any rules to get it cheap.
 
Crappy penlight/cell phone light:  Aid  Sight PER vs Darkness 1d6, One Hour Fuel Charge (Battery; +0); OAF Fragile (-1 1/4), Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-4 to Stealth & Concealment; -1), Only to counteract darkness modifiers (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4). Active: 6, Cost: 1
(Note: Jiggle it an extra phase or two to max out the constant Boost for +3 vs darkness. Not really useful as illumination for others unless they’re right beside you.)
Shoplight Lantern:  Aid  Sight PER vs Darkness 2d6, One Hour Fuel Charge (Battery; +0), Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +1/2); OAF Fragile (-1 1/4), Side Effects, Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-6 to Stealth & Concealment; -1), Only Restores To Starting Values (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4). Active: 18, Cost: 4
Light Spell:  Boost  Sight PER vs Darkness 2d6, Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +1/2); OAF (Staff, Amulet, etc; -1), Side Effects, Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-6 to Stealth & Concealment; -1), Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2), Only Restores To Starting Values (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4). Active 18, Cost: 4
 
That last interests me because it models Gandalf’s light spell best. He’d keep the light low to reduce the side effects and long-term END loss, but he could crank it up if he wanted too.