Ninja-Bear

Making it act like the second suggestion I gave (double active points to dispel) would leave it in the game with a function, but reduce its absolute nature and allow certain concepts to be built.

RDU Neil I agree with what you say and at least for me, I’ve been factoring in game play to judge game mechanics. Also I try to judge players experiences too. With that, I try to choose mechanics which are easier for players to grasp and me to explain/remeber! ?

Just reading this argument over, as I inadvertently started it, I like it because it is exposing some of the hidden assumptions about the game.
1) That there is some universal, perfect way to build a character from a set of common mechanical denominators... which there isn't, no matter how reductive you make the mechanics, even though it is heavily implied by the design.
2) That builds can be divorced from SFX and still be meaningful/coherent in actual play... which is never the case if you are actually role playing, and not just doing abstract calculations.
3) That building a character is separate from the game you are playing in, and that there is some kind of generic way the characters are portable to every other Hero game.  Simply not the case.
4) That Limitations are rules for helping to "define" a specific power, rather than what they are, desired methods/situations in which a numerated power is reduced or made ineffective IN GAME PLAY, and the player WANTS IT THAT WAY! (A whole different thread)
5) That game play can somehow be purely mechanical and not exist on a rule and judgment level, where "what makes sense and feels right" is decided in a shared imaginary moment between players, not on paper, in numbers or programmed code.
 
Hero has always been a war between two games... the game of building a character, vs. the game of actually role playing the character in a group, with a story, a shared world, etc. There are many things that can be mechanically pure and consistent in the former (adjustment powers mechanically affecting other powers) that can completely break the latter ("What? That makes no sense?!")? Hero has spent so many years and words and pages on the former, but very little on the latter... so it makes sense that people think of it this way.
 
I know there are people who love just messing around with the rules and seeing what kind of builds they can come up with that are "legal" and cram the most in for the least. I also know that just because it can be done by the rules, doesn't mean it makes it anywhere near a table or actual play. The mechanics will surely affect the play experience, but people seem to balk at it going the other way around, that actual play should affect how mechanics are interpreted and used. Hero is still stuck in these horrible arguments because it was built before game designers understood that rule and mechanics are judged by the resulting game play they help manifest. Game play is the goal of the game creation. Hero is still in the old school model of mechanics first, with the expected game play nebulously defined at best. It tried, pretty well for its time, to have aspects of mechanics built to reflect a certain outcome... the idea of nine panel pages and actions that reflected it... and the idea that the mechanics at the time were specifically written to reflect a Bronze Age style of comic book fighting... but it was limited, and still had too many war game aspects, and the more genericized the system became, the more it lost touch with its resulting game play.
 
If you are going to build a house, do you...
1) Look at the tools and materials you have, and build whatever kind of house they allow for?
2) Design a house, then get the tools and materials that will best help you make that house a reality?
 
Too many Hero arguments exist with the former mindset, instead of the latter... which is where it really gets dicey. Hence why I used the word "interpret" in the title of this thread. The only way you get the house you want (the role playing experience) is to allow for interpretation, not just "This is what the rules say."

So, the implication is that, while never explicitly stated, the attack that ends your phase, and despite their being an explicit rule that you can only attack once per phase... that actually you can have an attack for every separate power you have? That doesn't seem intuitive... more like rules lawyers reading a lack of clear "no you can't" as a "can." I remember when it was stated in 5th Edition, and it was an appalling ruling, IMO, and luckily our group basically ignored it.
 
And as Lucius just demonstrated, this is a min-maxing nightmare I'd never want to deal with in game.

Why do the wings have to shrivel up and go away?  The Drain could simply make them so weak they cannot be used for any purpose, or remove their connection to the brain, so they cannot be directed and hang limp.  They are still there, but the power is Drained.

Believe it or not I'm all in favor of having fun at the game table. This includes making on the fly rulings in the interest of time.  But when it later turns out that the on-the-fly rule wasn't actually needed because there was already a specific case rule that overrides the general rule I try very hard to point it out to everyone for future use.

I like to use accurate as a flurry of punches. It represents many punches thrown but one hits.

Its a pretty rare circumstance that a non-flying brick grabs a flying-brick. That's probably the reason Steve didn't spell out the common sense ruling for this case in the books. Regardless, the rule above should override the general grab vs movement rules which are not superpower centric - they usually assume normal characters.

Sean I would add restrainable as your wings could be fouled but you still could run, swim and jump.

Yeah, like everything else in the Hero toolkit, adjustment powers are just a mechanic to represent various effects in the game world.  Drain doesn't mean leaking off power somehow, it means reducing the power temporarily through some means.  Poison, Weakonite, magical spell, the touch of the dread Fplhoog monster, whatever.  That doesn't make superpowers a commodity or fluid some taps into.

Aren't Superman's powers drained by Kryptonite?  Can't your ability to breathe be taken away, for example if you are in a vacuum, or get punched in the solar plexus?  Can't your sight be taken away with a blindfold or smoke?  Is a strength-reducing drug cocktail going to work on someone whose strength works by touch telekinesis?
 
So, in this one game I ran superpowers were an interaction between your genetic code and your ability to draw zero point energy from the Universal Matrix (the structure underlying all reality).  Thousands of years ago our planet was dosed with a virus that removed the cell bodies that could channel the zero point energy and replaced them with Mitochondria – sufficient to power the processes of life but not enough to manifest powers by gene interaction.
 
Recently the virtochondria have been reintroduced to some individuals, allowing them to manifest powers.  Their powers can be weakened by anything capable of disrupting their link between the Universal Matrix and their genetic code (or boosted by anything strengthening that link - do not forget an inherent power can not be Aided either).
 
I’ve long argued that all Adjustment powers should be required to have a well defined SFX that explains how they work.
 
You could build a Friction Field that logically reduces all movement, but if another character’s powers are based on negating friction they might be unaffected.
 
You would certainly get a cost break for this, but the point is it would be mandatory to have.

Or depending how he buys/defines it, he could have lockout on a slot too.
 
(Hyperman I know you know but I mention it for people who may not not know)

To the Angel's flight, or wings, legs are part of the typical character, but their Running can be Drained.  

I like glass cannons for villains - dangerous but relatively easy to stop.  Not so much for players who get narked if they spend half of all combats unconscious.
 

There have been discussions over the years of the roll low mechanic for combat.  Many, and I have been one of them, have espoused the view that we would be far better off starting over and rolling high because that tends to make more sense to more people: high = good.  Not only that, but the target number would be a 10, which is a much friendlier number than an 11.
 
Now whilst I have seen the argument made for combat, it does not seem to apply to skill rolls: people seem perfectly happy with them because the high = good is already built in – you just look at the skill roll you need to roll under.
 
The mechanic for combat and skills is in fact exactly the same but they feel very different, at least to me.
 
Now I’m sure this has been kicked around the park before, but why not treat combat rolls like skill rolls?  Here is a tweak on that concept:
 
You have a combat skill roll based on your OCV and DCV.  The Attack skill  is 11+OCV, and you have to roll under that to hit: this is slightly different from how combat works at present in that you can roll high and hit a very low DCV, but in practice this rule change will usually only affect characters without increased combat stats (usually NPCs) and speed overall combat.  It also gives a ‘miss’ mechanic if you want it, and is more in line with the way skill rolls often work.  If you do not like it, skip that bit.
 
Roll 3d6 and work out how much you succeeded by i.e. your skill less your roll and that is the DCV you can hit.
 
Example: You have and OCV of 5 so your combat skill is 11+5 = 16.  You need to roll a 16 or less to potentially hit anything.
 
If you roll a 13 you can hit a DCV of 16-3 = 3 or less
 
One nice thing about this approach is that you can also switch it around easily and use Defensive Combat Skill (DCS) or Defence Skill.  This would be 10+DCV (yes, 10, because there is an advantage in Hero to being the attacker).  The same mechanic then applies.
 
Roll 3d6 and work out how much you succeeded by i.e. your skill less your roll and that is the OCV that can hit you.
 
Example: You have a DCV of 4 so your combat skill is 11+4 = 15.  You need to roll a 15 or less to potentially avoid a hit.
 
If you roll a 10 the difference is 15-10 so an OCV of at least 5 is required to hit you.  (You can turn this around using the same numbers: if you had an OCV of 5 then you have a combat skill of 16, and a roll of 12 means you can hit 16-12 = 4 DCV or worse.  I use 12 because we are ‘reversing the burden’ – a good DCS roll is the same as a bad OCS roll)
 
You can use defence rather than attack to reduce the burden on the DM or you could use both in a climactic duel: each party rolls their OCS when attacking and the defender has to match the success with their DCS roll to avoid damage.
 
Mechanically this is exactly what we are doing at present but it feels cleaner to me, just presenting it that way, and it feels like more of a unification of skill and combat mechanics.
 
Thoughts?
 

I did play a few games in the setting outlined in Digital Hero #39: H.G. Wells' original War of the Worlds, in which Martian walking machines invaded Britain at the dawn of the Twentieth Century. The different factor in this version of the world, is that the toxic black smoke used by the Martians, which was lethal to the vast majority of humans, in a tiny percentage of them actually triggered the development of superhuman powers, which they used to fight the Martian machines. So, we had late-Victorian society and steampunk-style tech mixed with four-color superheroics, against the overarching plot of alien invasion.
 
Sadly it didn't last long enough to really develop.
 
EDIT: Allow me to include the illo of my favorite hero from the article, by our own Sketchpad: the mighty Britannic!

Found this article in a 1985 issue of "Daredevil Adventures", written by George MacDonald himself!  It is for converting old Daredevils adventures to Justice Inc., but should be useful for Pulp Hero, also.  There is a lot of DD material floating around the interwebs. Enjoy this bit of pulpy nostalgia!
 
Converting Daredevils Adventures To Justice Inc.pdf
 
 

I take a different approach. I think to myself WWAAD: What would Aaron Allston do? (if he were alive) and then I build that.

Except my way is the best/right/only. ?

Let me add that I just got Champions Powers. Worth the money! 
 
Btw feel free to ask any questions about the system but be prepared for about a dozen different answers ?

Ummm Cassandra that’s what OIF: objects of opportunity is. 
 
Steve Long usually makes it a multipower with one slot a Blast and another a RKA. 

Oh, I know.  No worries.  I'd hope it obvious I was joking around too.

Ummm over compensating? ?

Bolo I believe that if he wanted to use martial arts down the road with those giant hands, then you should have fine manipulation. ?

Hyperman I’m not against using CE for however I believe that even in 6th, Images is the only legal way to build light. Also I am in agreement with you that if you want to use the Light spell to be attached against a target (like a monster) then mobile or UAA is the way to go. “I cast my light spell on that ogre so everyone can see (target) him”.  But if we’re only looking at using your staff to cast light, like Gandalf in LotR movies, then No Range is fine plus OIF for staff.