Ninja-Bear

Sounds to me more like desolid, but with limitations. The entangle would stay for other characters, but the Druid would pass through. 

Could be and in some games would work fine. However after watching the movie and if I wanted to make them as in the movie then I wouldn’t buy TNS. 

That right there; that is precisely what I would do.
 
We use it for Vampires: susceptible to sunlight.
 
We use it for werewolves: vulnerable to silver.
 
We use it for monsters: double damage from luchadores.
 
We use it repeatedly for individual characters, but we rarely consider that its broad-spectrum use on an entire type of being (all witches are  susceptible to water) is not just a points-saving measure, and not just a restriction on a particular set of characters, but one of the foundation stones upon which your universe is built.  You are not just defining a character, but a world.
 
"All gargoyles turn to stone in the sunlight" is something we have trained ourselves to look at as a weakness in gargoyles.  With the _mandate_ that gargoyles must all take that exact limitation, what have done is not weaken gargoyles, per se, but instead you have given the sun the power to petrify gargoyles!  You have established a universal law of "how this world works."
 
As this incredibly expensive power construct you  are pursuing....  Well is what it does _worth_ what it costs?  Only you can answer that, of course: what is the value of being able to see pixies as opposed to the value of not being able to see them?
If the cost is unjustified, or this is something that you want to be relatively attainable, it makes more sense to choose the "the world works thusly" route and all pixies are mandated to have the disadvantage "visible in the presence of X magic" (cost to taste) then create a simple spell- maybe a change environment (where the change is that Pixies are visible in this area; and it has built-in AOE, so..) as opposed to a penalty skill level or whatever-
 
Side note: while I am cool with the fact that Change Environment can now grant skill levels or impose PSLs, I feel this has caused too many to absolutely throw away the memory of Change Environment's chief purpose: altering a given area specifically to take advantage of someone's power build, and specifically to trigger Disadvantages and Power Limitations:  "if I create a wind vortex, your gliding should be strong enough and fast enough to carry all three of us to safety!"  Or "don't worry!  I know that Camenbert Man gets too soft and runny to fight when he overheats!  I will use my "create a zone of intense dry heat" power!"  Though honestly, given the number of threads over the years asking if CE had a real purpose, of how to model what it does, etc-  I suspect a fair number of people never actually figured that out to start with.  Oof-- especially the discussions about pinning down the "mechanics" of CE.  The mechanics were chosen by the player of the affected character when he selected the Disadvantage or Limitation.  That is where you look to see what happens when CE is used.
 
I expect it stems from the need of many to know "exactly how."  "I _know_ that Pyrojet's cone of incineration doesnt work in a vacuum, but _how_  doesnt it work?  _Why_ doesnt it work?!  Points, levels, penalties, shades, degrees!"
 
Well, the various characters and creatures were effected exactly,as it said they were affected on the character sheet.
 
Yes; I agree that a grassy slope covered in ice should _probably_ have an effect on everyone, at least to some extent.  I already confessed to having no beef with that.
 
I am regularly incensed, however, over the complete forgetting of it's baseline ability in favor of specific numbers and "affects everyone exactly like this and in no other way" mechanics.
 
But back to the point:  if, in your universe, all members of X should equally and infallibly suffer Y when exposed to Z, well this is precisely the Limitation / change environment Schtick we used for what?  Thirty-odd years?  Before someone decided it just didnt work and needed to be "fixed."  A mandatory So sad: "member of X, so exposure to Y causes Z."  Then simulate X with judisciuos use of Change Environment.
 
And that is how I _would_ handle it, personally.
 

This bears repeating, several times! 

It seems that there are people who feel that even though you play an OSR, you can change the XP rewards to suit your tastes.

That does sound odd since (well its Wikipedia) is listed as weighing 2-4 lbs and 8 ft long. But remember in 4th you calculated STR min by ACT pt and if you wanted it lower you had to buy and Advantage. Also, he might’ve considered that the average player would be 15 STR. I’d just lower the STR min myself.

This bears repeating, several times! 

Another non-game mechanic reason can be character concept. Sometimes a MP or a VPP just better suits the kind of character you want to play. It "looks" or "feels" right to you. CP efficiency isn't necessarily the be-all/end-all of character design.

Ditto.
 
It was suggested to me by a GURPS player (a year or two before I had read GURPS myself) who had joined our Atomic Rockets campaign to incorporate the idea; I had no real objection to the idea (remember I am the guy who openly mocks the mythical "perfect balancing" of points; it wasn't hard to convince me).
 
That was during the first or second edition ot GURPS, and I have yet to find it unbalancing, and quite often find it delightful.  Perhaps it is just the name "Quirks," but I find that in general, Players who will periodically forget their Character's dependence on anti-muto medications or their crippling agoraphobia will never forget to lean into their little one-point Quirks.
 
I have found it so not-unbalancing that for a while, I allowed up to ten Quirks, but the Players going overboard (playing them,up as if they were 20-point Psych Lims- while consistently forgetting their 20-pt Psych Lims!)) that I backed off of that eventually.  I find 3 or 4 works best with my group of Players, and 5 doesn't really slow things down, so that is my own cap.
 
Frankly, they are perfect for those "but if only I had two more points!" moments.
 
I recall the preface of the first GURPS book I bought (Basic-  3e, I think) where SJ specifically named Champions as one of his inspirations.  There is a lot of overlap in style of the two systems; it only seems right to borrow a little bit in return. 
 
 

No doubt; no game is immutable, particularly if something stands in way of enjoying the game.
 
I hit me as I was reading your reply that the most likely reason I never got into the old school revival is that, between Champions 2e and Traveller LBBs and pocket box Car Wars (and Truck Stop) as my go-to games even today, there is no "revival" for me.  I didnt leave the Old School.
 
Help!  I'm stuck out here with John Connely!
 
 

Agreed completely.
 
It was simply that my earliest experience with D and D- to include my second try a couple of years later, with a DM who used every published module he could get his hands on- boiled down to kill it and take its gold.  Ultimately, those were the only ways to gain XP.    much like I always felt a random "encounter" could be "you see tracks" or "you see two cubs playing on a distant meadow,"  I always felt that "defeat" was not necessarily a synonym for "kill."
 
unfortunately, nothing in the early material backed the idea up. 
 
 
 
once PCs could,be given an XP value, it got really ugly with certain players.

I think it also comes down to how advancement works. If you only get advancement for killing then killing is the goal. If only gold is for advancement then killing is less emphasized but still there. Interestingly Holmes  has that XP can be awarded for outwitting a monster and I believe overcoming an obstacle. It really comes down to how you reward the players actions.

Why loot? Perhaps your players are explorers? Perhaps they are trying to find a lost road, town or Civilization? Perhaps they’re trying to chase down a (or many) Macguffins before Big Bad does? I have Silver Elves as in Elves that carry silver because silver is effective against magical monsters in D&D. You could have a patron which feeds info the players.

Why loot? Perhaps your players are explorers? Perhaps they are trying to find a lost road, town or Civilization? Perhaps they’re trying to chase down a (or many) Macguffins before Big Bad does? I have Silver Elves as in Elves that carry silver because silver is effective against magical monsters in D&D. You could have a patron which feeds info the players.

Extra Dimensional Movement Usable Against Others-Only vs. Galactus. 😁

If the concept you want for your character involves a relatively small number of Powers, and you want the character to have access only to those defined Powers, a Multipower can be more economical in Character Points than a VPP, and sufficient to match the concept. OTOH if the concept is that the character has a very large range of Powers, and/or is able to improvise new Power constructs to fit changing circumstances, a VPP is more flexible and may actually cost fewer points than a multitude of Multipower slots.

I just now read in the Agents section of Champions 3rd where High Class Agents are built around 100 pts and can give Heroes a rough time. I never thought of the basic Viper agent as High Class. No wonder Warboar had a tough fight! 

I also looked over the Gadgets! book. I think its interesting on seeing things such as ALD and buying Does Body for it. What I can now appreciate is how they explained how they came with the point cost. 

[Edit:
Okay, this is wierd:
 
I wrote this days ago, but apparently it didnt post.  Because the phone doesnt have a click and drag to clear the editor in an instant (is there _nothing_ good about a touch screen?!), I have opted to leave it here for historical value.  ;D   ]
 
 
 
Math errors,,spelling errors, typos, and random omissions.
 
I didnt look that closely at 6e (I spent a couple of months of my very limited "spare time" just reading it, so I wasn't going to go back for any recreational pedantry), but if it doesn't have any, then it would be the first edition not to.
 
This has been one of the longest-rumming fan in-jokes ever.  It predates Seeker-smashing by three editions.
 
_________
 
In response to your noticing the increased cost and therefore increased points caps that go along with the increased complexity (and ultimately, a lot of that complexity comes from the perception of "increased options" that has been brought about by the increased codification of how various thing 'must' be done, etc- a sort of self-propagating complexity increaser.  ), the end result is that today's adventurer is yesterday's superhero.
 
 

 
 

Sounds like you're largely on track.
Constant
Uncontrolled
Sticky (see p. 345 6E1)
AoE Radius
 
Uncontrolled specifies you define the END pool, which will dictate how long it lasts.  But note that this combination is a +2 advantage, so for a Sight flash, each die is 15 points.

Well there is this new fandagled thing called the internet. I wouldn’t say the majority of players are OSR but a there is a share it seems of OSR players from 5e

I thinkI figured out how they built weapons with skill levels. They added the cost of skill levels directly to the Base cost of EB then applied Advantages then do the Limitations.

Its taken me years but I think I’m getting it!

Its taken me years but I think I’m getting it!

That’s why lately I ask myself or the player have you seen it? Or read it? I’m trying to emulate fiction. Last game my son asked if he could use his arrow to stab a goblin. Well, I figure Legolas could do it in the movie. So gave him a minor penalty to hit and damage. He hit and was satisfied and so was the rest of the players. 😁