Bodkins Odds

I thought the flight came from the Fleischer cartoon.

IDK, all the Change Environment needs is a SFX change. The EDM seems like a kludge to me. Especially since the other players would still be in the original dimension. Also, wouldn't the TK need AoE and Uncontrolled?

It's even good for such powers in a Mutlipower. Or do you House Rule it so that the reserve gets drained when any of it's slots do? Because that could break utility belt Multipowers. And a Powered Armor could easily be a Focus, OIAID, or a Multiform. Any of which could be combined with Unified Power. What if it was an organic powered armor instead of a machine with discreet systems, like Guyver? Whether it's a Powered Armor isn't the important factor here; whether draining one power should logically drain the other is. I could even see a discreet systems PA have Unified Power on, for instance, a Blast and an RKA If those are merely two different settings for one energy beam projector.

I'd say a bit more like the old BD&D line: Include character creation rules, setting specific default combat rules, GM utilities: premade mooks, villains, NPC heroes, vehicles, and equipment, a solo adventure with a premade character for players to learn the basics of play, a group adventure, and an introduction to roleplaying section. Not necessarily in that order. I'd start with the premade character & solo adventure, then the character creation rules, then the combat rules, and then put the GM stuff & group adventure in the back.

I agree. The rules configuration that the setting was designed against should be the rules that are presented as the default in it's complete book. Yes, it's very feasible. See the other thread, you'll find that people can in fact respond to your post.

Aside from a few powers being defined differently, and some minor changes to the advantages, the only real mechanical changes after character creation are that KA's have a 1/2d6 stun multiple and regular defense protects against there stun. The first of which is merely a fix for the old "stun lottery." The latter of which is only a minor change from the old "1 point of resistant defense let's your normal defense work against killing stun" rule and reduces the number of special cases in the damage rules. TL;DR: Unless they read this thread or you tell them yourself, they'll never notice. Especially if you make all of the NPC rolls from safely behind your DM screen. Oh, I suppose they might get confused if you forget to convert the NPC movement powers back into hexes. Unless you've already house ruled meter based movement powers.

isn't this already handled by the fact that it's a limitation? If you apply it to two powers then it's only going to shave one-fifth off the points of two powers, but if you apply it to five powers then (assuming they're worth roughly the same) it's as if one of them was free.

I also use Stretching with Does Not Cross Intervening Space for teleporters with MA.

This would be nice.

Yes, but they either got more of a point break (50%) or they weren't put into the EC at all, even if they conceptually fit. Not to mention the numerous powers that weren't allowed in ECs at all.

"The makers of Azarath and Metrion are proud to introduce, Zinthos. New and improved Zinthos gives you exactly what you need, exactly when you need it, and because it's blue Zinthos goes with everything." No, it was just a Marvel licensed version of the standard Hanna-Barbera geeky teen superhero formula. It, generally speaking, had the same plot lines as Wonder Wheels, but with less motorcycles and more orange rocks.

Both, they merely can't exist at the same time. Oh, and Bruce is the one with anger issues's, they just leak out into Hulk who doesn't know how to handle them. Hulk just want to pet kitty, but kitty go squish too easy.

I for one, also love the GURPS magic system, and I find making to hit a contested skill role (even with spells) has a certain elegance to it. Not that I dislike the HERO way of doing it; I wouldn't play HERO if I did. I imagine the GURPS spell system works even better if you use the 4th Edition power system to make magic related Advantages and Perks. I am surprised that they didn't add rules for making abilities for the traditional Psionic & Magic systems as part of their new Power rules though. Also, the Magic system is probably the only place in the whole of GURPS where skills defaulted to other skills for game balance reasons instead of real life logic.

I actually find the Shadow Destroyer a bit more interesting than PnP Doctor Destroyer because, while he's definitely evil enough to destroy whole worlds to please his dark gods, he's still not as boringly over the top evil as the unrepentant unstoppable Nazi scientist who's practically immortal and is also, mechanically speaking, a magicless Doctor Doom clone, namely the real Dr. D. I've even used Shadow Destroyer in a character's background before. which is something I only do with villains that interest me. Besides, what's not to like about an evil, competent, alternate universe Defenderp? I actually found Doctor Destroyer more enjoyable in CO than the PnP, simply because Cryptic new better than to delve too deeply into his ridiculous backstory. He simply is. Like a force of nature. And his appearance in the Resistance arc gave him an interesting Lawful Evil vibe that he definitely doesn't have in the PnP setting. EDIT: Also, in addition to the costume editor (which was almost worth the subscription cost on it's own) I find that the newer content such as most of the adventure packs & comic series, the Fatal Error missions, and the rampages are very fun and make the game worth playing even if you've manged to get bored of both the regular missions and of flying, swinging, running, or superjumping around (I'm not a huge fan of CO's teleport). And yeah, Cryptic's Gravitar design isn't very good (although she is fun to fight).

At least one player in my group would take at least 150 and would try for more until they stopped being able to think of any. I prefer the psychological trick of docking character points for not having enough complications combined with the much lower complication minimums in 6e. Uncapped diminishing returns on complications merely encourages building characters like Pete from Darths & Droids. I do have one major complaint with Complications though: I think a lot of the example complications were built too severely and should have been toned down in 6e, but thankfully the new frequency and severity rule make that more obvious to new players. It's now much easier to notice, for instance, that you probably don't want a 20-point Code vs Killing unless your name happens to be Bruce Wayne. Even most characters with a similarly absolute CvK won't want the 20 point level, because very few people with a Code vs Killing would want to be put into a situation were they might have to actually kill someone every three or four sessions. And in games where the GM has made CvK an everyman complication you probably don't want it at all, because the GM clearly doesn't want the player characters to kill anyone and, therefore, it should rarely, if ever, be an issue. That last point is something I've noticed that even a lot of GMs missed, at least when running earlier editions, and should probably have a paragraph devoted to it if they ever release a revised sixth edition. In fact, the over-estimated values of the example complications are why, sometimes, the minimum of 75 points in complications are too high for a 400-point supers game. Thankfully, this is true much less often than it was when you were required to take 150 points in disads. Aside from the minor point inflation this generally works better than selling back stats. PS. I've never really considered points in disadvantages to be equivalent to character points. The point costs are, I believe, solely for the purpose of comparing complications with other complications and to the complication limit. This was one of the reasons why I disliked the,"stack as many disads as you can to get more points" approach. PPS. You could easily remove the point penalty for not taking complications altogether and have the limit merely be a soft guideline for how many complications players should take, but then a certain kind of player wouldn't take any at all unless the GM forced one on him in play and then wouldn't roleplay them. Those same players will gladly take, and roleplay, their complications if you tell them that they'll be docked points for not taking a certain amount. In short: people are strange. PPPS. I can tell you from experience that selling back senses is a can of worms that you don't want to open. Physical Limitations oddly manage to handle it better than the buyback rules (and don't give PCs extra points to play with either). The point costs of base senses are screwy.