[Odsh]

To me the strange thing is not the amount of different status effects, but how they sometimes differ from the new Edge system that supposedly replaces the fastidious dice pool modifier arithmetic.

If you are attacked by an invisible enemy and want to attack back, what does the defender get in this edition apart from a situational point of Edge?

But with the status effects, you can attack with a heavily disabled arm (-4 dice), from full cover (-2 dice), a target that frightens you (-4 dice), with a bow while being prone (-4 dice), immobilized (-3 AR), lightly fatigued (-2 dice), confused (-X dice), mildly blinded (-3 dice), chilled (-1 dice) and zapped (-1 dice)...

[Xenon]

If you are attacked by an invisible enemy and want to attack back, what does the defender get ...

Attacks automatically fail against targets you cannot see.

[Odsh]

If you are attacked by an invisible enemy and want to attack back, what does the defender get ...

Attacks automatically fail against targets you cannot see.

Really? In previous editions you attacked blindly with a -6 modifier if I remember correctly.

EDIT: found an older discussion regarding this topic:

Beyond what's there: Being unable to see your opponent surely will be awarding the conditional Edge to your target.  And depending on the circumstances, the GM might even not permit the attack to be made in the first place.  Unless your attack is some kind of area attack, and/or you have circumstantial evidence of at least the correct area the target is in.  (there's empty footprints standing in that puddle, or there's a phantom void moving through the smoke, or etc)

(I'm quoting what I agree with, but there wasn't a consensus from what I read).

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

To me the strange thing is not the amount of different status effects, but how they sometimes differ from the new Edge system that supposedly replaces the fastidious dice pool modifier arithmetic.

Yep... the system is not at all consistent about whether it wants to get rid of dice modifiers or not.  It appears like the decision to go ahead and do so (or at least minimize them) was made later on in development and there wasn't time to go back and re-evaluate the entire rules set in light of the decision.  But, because I was not involved behind the curtain there, I cannot know for sure.

If you are attacked by an invisible enemy and want to attack back, what does the defender get in this edition apart from a situational point of Edge?

By RAW, nothing.  However, the RAW is implicitly expecting the GM to invoke Rule Zero, which gives the "RAI" of whatever consideration the GM deems fit.

Attack automatically misses, as Xenon suggests?  I'd say that's SOMETIMES appropriate, but as the invisible enemy comes closer and closer I'd say "automatic miss" becomes less and less appropriate... bordering on "never appropriate" when a Close Combat context is reached.

If you are attacked by an invisible enemy and want to attack back, what does the defender get ...

Attacks automatically fail against targets you cannot see.

Really? In previous editions you attacked blindly with a -6 modifier if I remember correctly.

EDIT: found an older discussion regarding this topic:

Beyond what's there: Being unable to see your opponent surely will be awarding the conditional Edge to your target.  And depending on the circumstances, the GM might even not permit the attack to be made in the first place.  Unless your attack is some kind of area attack, and/or you have circumstantial evidence of at least the correct area the target is in.  (there's empty footprints standing in that puddle, or there's a phantom void moving through the smoke, or etc)

(I'm quoting what I agree with, but there wasn't a consensus from what I read).

I completely agree with that SSDR guy you quoted!  He's a genius in his own mind!

But seriously... yes.  6e got rid of the blanket -6 dice in all cases when attacking blind (or was it -9 dice? whatever. who cares.  there was 1 rigid number) and now it's a case of "GM discretion".  That's a theme in 6e   Depending on the context, I could see anything between "automatic miss" (firing "back" at incoming rounds from an invisible sniper 1000 meters away) to "invisibility does nothing for you whatsoever" in the case of drones/critters that are directing their attacks via primarily non-visual sensory input (dogs, pit vipers, bats, ultrasound drones, mages using astral perception, traps where a shotgun blasts in the direction of where a tripline is set, etc).

[Odsh]

I completely agree with that SSDR guy you quoted!  He's a genius in his own mind!

 

Depending on the context, I could see anything between "automatic miss" (firing "back" at incoming rounds from an invisible sniper 1000 meters away) to "invisibility does nothing for you whatsoever" in the case of drones/critters that are directing their attacks via primarily non-visual sensory input (dogs, pit vipers, bats, ultrasound drones, traps where a shotgun blasts in the direction of where a tripline is set, etc).

Makes perfect sense. I just want to avoid the "I win" button that an unresisted Invisibility would confer. There is indeed a big difference between an invisible sniper and an invisible attacker that punches you in the face.

[Xenon]

As I read it;

If your target is harder to see (perhaps because of partial lightning, you are trying to shoot through smoke, you got something in your eye - like a splinter, pepper punch, seven-7 etc, affected by a flashbang or within range for a flash pak, or whatever) you seem to typically get -3 dice.

If your target is much harder to see (perhaps because of dim lightning, wearing sunglasses during partial lightning, severe glare, you are caught inside the area of a smoke grenade, heavy rain, heavy snowing, close to a flash pak, target is at a far range while not using a scope, or whatever) you seem to typically get -6 dice.

If you are unable to see your target (perhaps because of total darkness, blinding glare, blindfolded, caught in a raging blizzard, failed perception against target trying to hide or invisible, target fully behind cover, eyes destroyed, holding a flash pak in front of your eyes, close to a flash pak while using low light, target is at an extreme range while not using a scope, or whatever) then your attacks typically seem to automatically fail.

[Odsh]

You're comparing situational modifiers with the Blinded I, II and III status effects. While I agree this makes sense, strangely they are not handled in the same way by the rules.
I would also be careful when comparing Invisibility to Blinded III. For instance, you may not "see" the invisible guy, but you may still "see" his footsteps in water puddles. So it really depends...

[Xenon]

Yes I am. But this seem to the intention.

And yes, in some cases you will just get a -6 or -3 modifier (because of reasons). Having said that, in most situations you still need to successfully spot your target (in some way) before you can hit it.