Derek Hiemforth

As I see it, we are arguing over the precise value of a limitation which is significantly more limiting than normal range (so should not be -0), yet less limiting than having no range at all (so should not be -1/2).  What is left besides -1/4, which is where "Limited Range" evolved from in the first place?
 
That leaves me feeling like Derek - why are we overthinking this when we have an existing mechanic for "not full range but not no range either".  I'd also allow Extra Time to be used, but that's tougher as it applies mainly to extended ranges, and is Only to Activate.  Will the end result be markedly different than "limited range; longer range takes more time to set up"?

It's really a question of how far you think it's worth getting into the weeds.  I guess I don't see the value in it for this application. 

I kind of feel like we might be overthinking the plumbing, here.  This just sounds to me like a slightly unusual version of Limited Range (-¼).
 
It's not as bad as No Range; it's not as good as standard range. To me, that sounds like Limited Range.  Granted, it's limited in a different way than the typical application of Limited Range, but the fact that it can (eventually) get out to standard range is offset by the fact that it starts out at No Range, and has to take time (and the cost of Mobile Perception Point) to get out to the full range.
 
So I dunno... I think I'd just build a Clairsentience with Mobile Perception Point, slap Limited Range on it, and call it good.   

I kind of feel like we might be overthinking the plumbing, here.  This just sounds to me like a slightly unusual version of Limited Range (-¼).
 
It's not as bad as No Range; it's not as good as standard range. To me, that sounds like Limited Range.  Granted, it's limited in a different way than the typical application of Limited Range, but the fact that it can (eventually) get out to standard range is offset by the fact that it starts out at No Range, and has to take time (and the cost of Mobile Perception Point) to get out to the full range.
 
So I dunno... I think I'd just build a Clairsentience with Mobile Perception Point, slap Limited Range on it, and call it good.   

I kind of feel like we might be overthinking the plumbing, here.  This just sounds to me like a slightly unusual version of Limited Range (-¼).
 
It's not as bad as No Range; it's not as good as standard range. To me, that sounds like Limited Range.  Granted, it's limited in a different way than the typical application of Limited Range, but the fact that it can (eventually) get out to standard range is offset by the fact that it starts out at No Range, and has to take time (and the cost of Mobile Perception Point) to get out to the full range.
 
So I dunno... I think I'd just build a Clairsentience with Mobile Perception Point, slap Limited Range on it, and call it good.   

If "count the BODY" became a core mechanic, I think it might drop Hero below a reasonable amount of variability in the dice.  For example, some folks already struggle with the fact that, in practical terms, you're likely to see fewer results with a 3d6 roll (most results will be between 6 and 15) than with, say, a d20 (where all results from 1-20 are equally likely).  Obviously, this is a bit of apples and oranges because one is a curve and the other is flat, but still... About 85% of the time, a 3d6 roll is only going to give you one of 10 results (with the middle of even that range coming up much more than the ends).
 
With "count the BODY," we'd see even fewer distinct results. Instead of only 6 possible outcomes on each d6 (all equally likely), we'd have only 3 possible outcomes, and 2 of them would only come up 1 time in 6.
 
Part of what I like about Hero is that characters seem pretty competent, and that I as the player can gauge my chances of success pretty well (i.e., it's fairly predictable).  But I wonder if this approach would make characters seem too competent, and make results too predictable...

Great!  Sounds like you've solved it for your game.  As long as you and your players are good with your approach, then all is as it should be! 

<NITPICK>
An 8- roll is about 25% success, and an 11- roll is over 60% success...
</NITPICK>
 
I agree that it's a sizable swing, though.

<NITPICK>
An 8- roll is about 25% success, and an 11- roll is over 60% success...
</NITPICK>
 
I agree that it's a sizable swing, though.

If "count the BODY" became a core mechanic, I think it might drop Hero below a reasonable amount of variability in the dice.  For example, some folks already struggle with the fact that, in practical terms, you're likely to see fewer results with a 3d6 roll (most results will be between 6 and 15) than with, say, a d20 (where all results from 1-20 are equally likely).  Obviously, this is a bit of apples and oranges because one is a curve and the other is flat, but still... About 85% of the time, a 3d6 roll is only going to give you one of 10 results (with the middle of even that range coming up much more than the ends).
 
With "count the BODY," we'd see even fewer distinct results. Instead of only 6 possible outcomes on each d6 (all equally likely), we'd have only 3 possible outcomes, and 2 of them would only come up 1 time in 6.
 
Part of what I like about Hero is that characters seem pretty competent, and that I as the player can gauge my chances of success pretty well (i.e., it's fairly predictable).  But I wonder if this approach would make characters seem too competent, and make results too predictable...

You should hire a dog walker.... 
 
These sorts od things seem,to occurr to you regularly when the dog is leading you about the neighborhood.
 

This is why it's "RTF and nothing but the RTF" for me.   

Updates
The Furious Ogre style
Named for the almost all out offence that it pumps out, many say it emulates the ogres that inhabit the mountains and deep forest
Martial Strike
Offensive Strike 
Sacrifice Strike
Takedown
Martial Dodge  
Martial Block
Weapons- any, but favours BIG two handers or weapon and shield (sword and board).
 
 
The Eldritch Shield style
A very defensive style, that was developed by mages who were tired of having to use magic to defend themselves.  It is big on defensive moves to get them out of trouble
Martial Block
Martial Dodge
Defensive Block
Defensive Strike
Takeaway
Nerve Strike
Add Basic Strike
Weapons- favours small one handed weapons.  
 
Golden Sword Style
Another balanced style.  Their is a friendly rivalry with those of the Splendid Sword Style over which is superior
Defensive Strike
Fast Strike
Martial Block
Sacrifice Strike
Martial Disarm
Add weapons- Favours twin weapons or single weapon

For anyone interested in the Bear-Bull-Bee-Butterfly martial styles mentioned above, here's the write-up I did back in 2000.  This was (of course) for 4E.   
KillerBs.pdf

For anyone interested in the Bear-Bull-Bee-Butterfly martial styles mentioned above, here's the write-up I did back in 2000.  This was (of course) for 4E.   
KillerBs.pdf

For anyone interested in the Bear-Bull-Bee-Butterfly martial styles mentioned above, here's the write-up I did back in 2000.  This was (of course) for 4E.   
KillerBs.pdf

This is an absolutely awesome idea! If I ever get to run FH again, I am definitely nicking it!

I waited to see if anybody else was going to say it but the voices in my head won’t wait any longer.....
 
  Do you mean to say that I could have a character who would “float like a butterfly and sting like a bee”?

     ****I’m very sorry, sometimes it’s not easy being me.****

I'm not sure what you mean by the "Hero Stat Block."  Can you clarify?

I like this idea.  I'd suggest only putting the Talent descriptions and the critical "how this actually works in play" information in the main part of the book.  The "under the hood" details of how the Talent was constructed from other Powers and such, I would put in an appendix at the back of the book (or maybe even put it in a free PDF download for folks who are interested, and don't put it in the book itself at all). 

I think this is the best answer: Don't get too hung up on the mechanics of "aborting to Drain," and focus instead on the SFX of "stopping an incoming attack." While area-affecting attacks can't normally be blocked, a grenade is certainly one that falls under the common sense exception.

Seems like a reasonable SFX for Aborting to Block, or even Dodge, against an attack with a physical manifestation. If the attack misses due to the aborted action, it's shot out of the air.

I'd say the OP's 6 points per level is probably reasonable if the increased mass is going to be ignored.  Now you are just buying the stats, with "costs END", which would be 6 points per level.  Although even then, you could also be Limiting them with Unified Power and/or Linked.

I remember that article.  Now I'll have to hunt it out because I definitely want to incorporate it into my own games ( I can see a mage with a dagger using the Bee style for the DCV!)

For anyone familiar with AD&D 2nd Edition, The Complete Fighter's Handbook, by Aaron Allston, had the concept of "fighting styles." It pointed out that melee combat could be boiled down to one of four approaches at any given time:
A one-handed weapon in one hand and a non-weapon (typically a shield) in the other, which it called "Weapon and Shield" style. A one-handed weapon in each hand, which it called "Two Weapon" style. A one-handed weapon in one hand and nothing in the other, which it called "One-Handed" style. A two-handed weapon, which it called "Two-Handed" style. Years ago, I brought this concept to Fantasy HERO using Martial Arts and Combat Skill Levels.  I named the four styles Bear Style (weapon and shield), Bull Style (two weapon), Bee Style (one-handed), and Butterfly style (two-handed).  Bear style got its name from the straightforward style of a weapon and shield attack, Bull style from the fact that two swords resembled two horns of a bull, Bee style from the unpredictable darting movement of a bee (similar to the evasive approach of one-handed fighting), and Butterfly style from light patterns on the flashing blade of a duelist with a two-handed sword seeming to dance like a butterfly in flight.
 
You could buy levels in a style, and they applied whenever fighting in that fashion, no matter the weapon or whether you had any of the martial maneuvers for the style.  If you were really skilled in a style, you could buy Bear Style, Bull Style, Bee Style, or Butterfly Style as a martial art, and each had maneuvers that reinforced the "feel" of that fighting style. For example, Bull Style had the highest-damage maneuvers, because the SFX included the idea that you were striking twice (even if not actually using Multiple Attack (or Sweep, as it was known then). Bee Style had maneuvers that were lighter on damage, but excellent for DCV, etc.
 
They were a fun addition.