Doc Democracy

I do this as well. The character is automatically assumed to have healed from any previous episode injuries. Not once, to my memory, have I ever had someone still injured when another episode started.

I tend to ignore BODY once the current adventure is over.  Start of next adventure, everyone is hale and hearty.
 
BODY damage, as you intimated, should raise the stakes during the adventure and players should be adapting their tactics to ensure their injured comrades are not unduly exposed to further BODY damage.
 
Doc

Right, if it could go either way, give it to the player character.  If they probably wouldn't make it, let them just barely pull it off, gripping to the edge of the building with their fingernails.  Use a DEX or appropriate roll to get up safely.  This is HERO games, not chump games like real life where you'll probably fail and die.

The answer is about 0.65 seconds. A SPD 6 character running at 40m goes 40m in 2 seconds.  So would go 13m.
 
This will vary with running and SPD of each character in working out how far they move in 0.65 seconds....but as Christopher says, we are not doing physics, we are playing a game.
 
I would fudge towards reasonable feats for heroic purposes, possibly giving harder rolls the bigger the stretch being asked by the player.

Physics doesn't work that way.  Your downward acceleration from gravity will certainly make you fall faster and faster, but the only thing reducing your horizontal momentum from running off the roof is wind resistance.  In most cases involving even superhuman physiques you'll likely hit the ground before your horizontal movement comes to a halt - although capes and patagia and whatnot might change the math some.
 
Not really worth worrying much in a game, but (for example) the fact that a bomb only slowly diverges from the horizontal vector it shared with the plane it dropped from is pretty much the basis of the science of putting falling ordnance on target.    

That would depend on relative heights. If his Running velocity can cover the distance before he falls too far from his basic leap, then he makes it. If not, he slams into the side of the next building somewhere below the spot he was trying for. Maybe he does a move-through on that wall and goes through. The person who bought Leaping always has a better chance of success but Hero is about cinematics not realism.

I am inclined to go all SFX on this and not require additional powers for things that make sense.  A motorcycle running up a ramp would also get no ability to leap over a row of buses?  Evel Kneivel would have been devastated...
 
Now, how far is a really difficult question because water is a real drag, submarines would not leap far and I do think dolphins do have a leap ability that adds to their velocity.
 
I would be meaner than @unclevlad for that reason, I might give him about 5m.

Or an avater of a god of chaos.
 
Why doesn't Batman kill the Joker?  Suppose he has killed the Joker.  More than once.  Every time he does, a short time later, months at most, someone else pops up as the Joker -- always in Gotham City -- and usually kills a bunch of people as his first outing. 
 
Why do you think that in one appearance he was Jack Napier, in another he was Arthur Fleck, another as Jack Oswald White...
 
Kill one, the chaos god bides a while then selects some other poor soul to be the next Joker and possesses him.  The cycle starts again. 
 
Why hasn't the Batman figured this out?  Why is this god of chaos obsessed with him?  Why does he always come back in Gotham City?
 
Why can't DC writers come up with a story at least as interesting as this?

Hugh provoked me to go look at numbers. 
 
If you look at the "full power" here you would have 16m Tunnelling through 13PD.  That is 3+15+24 = 42 points.  Any answer to the cost of the more limited power needs to cost less than this. 
 
If you look at LoneWolf's plan, then the core cost is 28 points, with an additional 12 points that add PD at the cost of reducing movement.  With a -1 limitation that is +12 points that comes to a total of 40 points.  I think the limitation on this power is probably worth more than two points.
 
If you used my custom limitation then you would be paying 28 points...it is the same as the extreme at either end so you might think that you have more flexibility than purchasing either extreme, so perhaps a 1/4 limitation is the right one.  that comes to a cost of 34 points.
 
Doc
 
 
 
 

Seems like a custom limitation "Movement through substance reduced 2m for every +1PD above 6PD".  You simply then have to consider how much that is worth.  +1/2??
 
I think people sometimes look for complexity rather than reach for the obvious solution but this looks nailed on to me.
 
Doc

I do not like that particular hobby-lingo (i.e., "murderhobo") and the accompanying overall trend of overanalyzing Player Characters in tabletop roleplaying games that usually resulted in more harm than good. There's too much finger-wagging while geeks try to police (if not one-up) other geeks. This "movement" (and even that is somewhat of an imprecise label) has lead to the informal-yet-widely accepted shunning of certain character types that fail to fit within a surprisingly narrow band of criteria and an implication that bringing a bit of the THAY-A-TUH to the table automatically makes the collective experience better. There should be considerable latitude in permissible character archetypes. Look, if everyone is having fun playing peripatetic warriors and rogues who support themselves through acts of violence...why the need for an intervention? Or a scolding? As long as the players are cooperating and all concerned parties can differentiate between reality and fiction, who cares how people find their fun?
 

Back in the day, the Star Trek RPG (old enough that no one had to ask "which series") stimulated a great article about the tropes needed to get the feel of Star Trek.
 
The Prime Directive - we don't interfere.
 
Integrity - Starfleet Academy is filled with tests of character and opportunities to flunk out, so those who make it through all have high inegrity.
 
"Take me and free my men." - the Captain would trade his life for any crewman.
 
But it also discussed the tropes the GM had to honour.
 
That integrity leads to challenges, but success and not failure.
 
When the Captain walks into a hopeless situation to save that random crew member, it's not really hopeless- there is always a way to turn the tide.
 
"Phasers, Sir?  Ye've got 'em - I managed to restore one bank."
 
I'm amazed how often I read GM diatribes of their players who refuse to follow genre tropes, and instead gravitate to murderhobos who don't trust or care about NPCs.
 
Then we dig a little deeper.  Heroes show restraint?  They lose the combat and the villains win.
 
Heroes don't kill?  The villain comes back, this time causing even more damage to anything the PCs/players care about.
 
Trust an NPC?  You get betrayed.
 
Those genre tropes the heroes follow cause them challenges, but they also come back to the heroes' benefit, not their detriment.  If the GM won't follow that trope, why would the players follow their genre tropes?

It was the height of the Silver Age, comics did not, on the whole, take themselves seriously at that time.  There were some classic stories during that time that gave rise to stories that were more adult, where the art was actual art and a desire to create things that would merit collecting. 
 
It is sad that this drive for quality shrunk the market and priced out multitudes of future comicbook readers.
 
I held out against Baxter versions for years, until it was all I could buy but continuity and crossovers pushed me to buying only back issues and trade paperback collections.
 
 

Yeah, it worked in the movie for batman to not save Rachel, because it got her out of the picture and gave us Two Face.  But it was a bad Batman story, because Batman utterly failed and Joke won (over and over).  Its like Superman murdering Zod by twisting his neck slightly after a 10 minute battle where he couldn't harm Zod at all, next to people too stupid to get up and walk away from the death beam.  Heroes find a way.  Especially Batman.

Are you talking The Dark Knight Returns? Because Batman doesn't take the Joker out in that. 
 
 
IMHO, Joker works best as a foil to Batman. He's an intelligent villain who's psychopathic focus is on the concept and reality of Batman. Some of the recent stories have kind of shown some different sides to him. Batman: Three Jokers was an interesting concept, but seemed a bit half-baked. There seemed to be more story that should've been told for that. Whereas Batman: Death of the Family kind of dealt with the horrors of Joker knowing too much. The recent Batman stories have teased a Joker: Year One storyline that could be fun, so long as they keep the badger in the bag. We don't really need a definitive origin for the clown. He works better when we're guessing what's real and what's been slathered together in that squirrel's nest he calls a mind. I dig the villain, but then I also like a chunk of the Bat's rogue's gallery. 
 

If I am, I am doing an incredibly bad job of saying things!! 🙂
 
I have read a LOT of Batman and fewer Joker stories.  I have read great Joker stories and some awful ones.
 
I think, in the good stories, more than any other member of the rogues gallery, Joker is the antithesis of Batman. It is that direct contrast that often makes the story a good one, the opposite throwing the heroic into sharp relief.
 
I agree with @Christopher R Taylor that writers got into a bit of a bidding war in how far they could take chaotic evil and a lot of that almost glories in the anarchy rather than in the heroics necessary to remedy it.
 
In the Dark Knight film, when Joker left Batman with the dilemma of which of two bombs he would choose to defuse, who he would allow to die, classic Batman would have had a contingency to cut the Gordian knot and prevent both bombs.  THAT is why he is a SUPERhero, not one of your run of the mill heroes.
 
The Joker gives the writer free rein to imagine excesses, it is his job however to ensure he gives the Batman a way to rein that it.  any sacrifice should be personal. If it came to it, Batman would die and save both people.  I hate that they wanted to make drama by having the Hero fail.  If I pulled that crap in a fame, my players would string me up and it demonstrates to me, again and again that the big studios fundamentally do not understand superheroes.
 

If I am, I am doing an incredibly bad job of saying things!! 🙂
 
I have read a LOT of Batman and fewer Joker stories.  I have read great Joker stories and some awful ones.
 
I think, in the good stories, more than any other member of the rogues gallery, Joker is the antithesis of Batman. It is that direct contrast that often makes the story a good one, the opposite throwing the heroic into sharp relief.
 
I agree with @Christopher R Taylor that writers got into a bit of a bidding war in how far they could take chaotic evil and a lot of that almost glories in the anarchy rather than in the heroics necessary to remedy it.
 
In the Dark Knight film, when Joker left Batman with the dilemma of which of two bombs he would choose to defuse, who he would allow to die, classic Batman would have had a contingency to cut the Gordian knot and prevent both bombs.  THAT is why he is a SUPERhero, not one of your run of the mill heroes.
 
The Joker gives the writer free rein to imagine excesses, it is his job however to ensure he gives the Batman a way to rein that it.  any sacrifice should be personal. If it came to it, Batman would die and save both people.  I hate that they wanted to make drama by having the Hero fail.  If I pulled that crap in a fame, my players would string me up and it demonstrates to me, again and again that the big studios fundamentally do not understand superheroes.
 

If I am, I am doing an incredibly bad job of saying things!! 🙂
 
I have read a LOT of Batman and fewer Joker stories.  I have read great Joker stories and some awful ones.
 
I think, in the good stories, more than any other member of the rogues gallery, Joker is the antithesis of Batman. It is that direct contrast that often makes the story a good one, the opposite throwing the heroic into sharp relief.
 
I agree with @Christopher R Taylor that writers got into a bit of a bidding war in how far they could take chaotic evil and a lot of that almost glories in the anarchy rather than in the heroics necessary to remedy it.
 
In the Dark Knight film, when Joker left Batman with the dilemma of which of two bombs he would choose to defuse, who he would allow to die, classic Batman would have had a contingency to cut the Gordian knot and prevent both bombs.  THAT is why he is a SUPERhero, not one of your run of the mill heroes.
 
The Joker gives the writer free rein to imagine excesses, it is his job however to ensure he gives the Batman a way to rein that it.  any sacrifice should be personal. If it came to it, Batman would die and save both people.  I hate that they wanted to make drama by having the Hero fail.  If I pulled that crap in a fame, my players would string me up and it demonstrates to me, again and again that the big studios fundamentally do not understand superheroes.
 

It has been mentioned a few times, some folk wanting to use the dice rolled to count BODY as if a normal attack, some content to use the BODY healed for knock back purposes.
 
I think for simplicity purposes, you roll the dice, find out how much BODY people will be healed or will be used to determine knock back.
 
Personally, I think that if you create a wave of healing energy, then it will heal and knock back regardless of whether there are people to heal or people to knock back in the affected area.
 
The big takeaway is that it is pretty much a GM call on how they want their game to run.
 
Doc

I am not a huge fan of the more heavily narrative systems but I do get frustrated by the 40 year-old game skeleton of the HERO System.   There are things to learn from what has happened in the gaming world in those decades.
 
In Spectaculars there are environmental elements that need to be addressed.  powers work narratively some if the time and not in others - for example, SpiderGuy can (narratively) swing down and gum up all the CCTV with his webshooters but looking to hinder BigBadMonster needs (more gamist) engagement with the mechanics.  There were disconnects in the system for me but I hit a more heavily superheroic "feel" to the game more often than I do playing Champions.
 
HERO has focused so heavily in balancing the power system in character creation, it has neglected making those powers feel more superheroic during play.  I have ideas and trying to put them into words, and when they are good enough, I will share them.
 
Doc

There is limited value in referencing real life history as we are playing in a reality where the gods are verifiable real, where there are many different sentient species with varying modalities and some so alien that their morality may be incomprehensible.
 
The idea that there is true evil, not people doing evil acts, is difficult in our relativist normality, where we might even choose to watch a movie humanising the Joker.
 
The existence of absolute good, or absolute evil is difficult to comprehend. We tend to do poor approximations because we are stuck in our heads.
Though the telling of historical stories is interesting and a reason I keep reading!  🙂

I would be content with creating a barrier of water.  I would be content with the SFX being "water" and applying the usual environmental effects.  It would be DEF 0 with enough BODY to soak up damage, should people decide to try destroying it rather than swimming through.
 
If the barrier was in a hole, then once the DEF of the barrier was overcome, the water would still exist and fill the hole.
 
Doc

There's the "White Knight" reality from DC's Black Label line that has a "heroic" Joker...

If they killed off the Joker, then the comics would have Joker knock-offs filling the space.  Batman is an archetype and his stories need opposing archetypes for him to work.  If not the Joker then some other character of a similar archetypes who might as well be called the Joker.
 
I don't like comic book continuity, it skews too many things as time goes on and the players neither age, grow or change.  If there was no continuity, then there would not be 1000's of Jokercrelated deaths over decades, just the potential victims in this story.
 
I like superhero stories, always have.  I don't mind them re-using villains in the same way I don't mind them using the same heroes, I know what I am expecting. The same as when the daleks or cybermen turn up in Dr Who.
 
In a superhero game, I only repeat a villain if the players demand it, otherwise I undermine their successes.
 
The problems with Joker and Batman stem mostly from continuity which demand they explain things and connect them to stories from before.  The need for grimdark nonsense drives some of it.
 
As for the neural health thing, there is an argument that anyone who commits a drive is mentally ill.  Folk use crazy and mentally ill epithets too easily (in comics AND real life).  I take the comic-book diagnosis of Joker's mental illness with the same scepticism as when he us declared medically dead, open to question.
 
To me, he represents an archetype of fear and chaos which manifests in a variety of ways.  I enjoy the stories that emerge from putting such an archetype into a place like Gotham and how it's archetype of justice and retribution engages with those results while sticking to a principled refusal to take a life.
 
Doc
 
 

If they killed off the Joker, then the comics would have Joker knock-offs filling the space.  Batman is an archetype and his stories need opposing archetypes for him to work.  If not the Joker then some other character of a similar archetypes who might as well be called the Joker.
 
I don't like comic book continuity, it skews too many things as time goes on and the players neither age, grow or change.  If there was no continuity, then there would not be 1000's of Jokercrelated deaths over decades, just the potential victims in this story.
 
I like superhero stories, always have.  I don't mind them re-using villains in the same way I don't mind them using the same heroes, I know what I am expecting. The same as when the daleks or cybermen turn up in Dr Who.
 
In a superhero game, I only repeat a villain if the players demand it, otherwise I undermine their successes.
 
The problems with Joker and Batman stem mostly from continuity which demand they explain things and connect them to stories from before.  The need for grimdark nonsense drives some of it.
 
As for the neural health thing, there is an argument that anyone who commits a drive is mentally ill.  Folk use crazy and mentally ill epithets too easily (in comics AND real life).  I take the comic-book diagnosis of Joker's mental illness with the same scepticism as when he us declared medically dead, open to question.
 
To me, he represents an archetype of fear and chaos which manifests in a variety of ways.  I enjoy the stories that emerge from putting such an archetype into a place like Gotham and how it's archetype of justice and retribution engages with those results while sticking to a principled refusal to take a life.
 
Doc