Ninja-Bear

I forgot that I picked up Powers D6 too. It is Supers using the famous D6 system. Never ran it though.

Savage Worlds has their Supers too. Necessary Evil and the updated Superhero Companion. There is also Supergame 3e (which is really unknown) Four Color? Which is a retro clone of MSRPG. I picked up (and waiting to be printed) Guardians-which is based on the old OD&D. The reason I picked this up is that my boys like throwing the “funny” dice. And I also at one time picked up a 3d6 Supers game too.

Your guess that it's like a Haymaker is correct: maneuvers listed as 1+1 "require a Full Phase plus one Segment and land at the end of the Segment after they’re begun."  (HSMA p.6).

Off the top, Reaper Chronoscope comes to mind. I know there are a few other companies that make modern miniatures.
 
https://www.reapermini.com/miniatures/chronoscope

What is a D&Der's favorite fast-food joint?
 
 

I prefer the "pushing is not something anyone and everyone can do if they are willing to spend the END" model. It's a rare moment for especially heroic actions, not a quick way to tack on an extra 2 DCs in the hopes of ending the fight faster.

Never really had a game player playing a vampire.  A clever vampire could wipe out a city, probably easier than a village as cities do have infrastructure underground.  But would it?  Vampires are predators, intelligent predators.  They know they need a human population to prey upon.  They know they have vulnerabilities and they know rogue predators stimulate extreme, organised responses.
 
It is in a vampire's best interest to be in a position of power, preferably behind the scenes due to longevity.  It is in a vampire's best interest that the city regularly finds and deals with "the most recent vampire plaguing the city".  It is in a vampire's best interest to have as few competitors present in the city.
 
So, a vampire, in control, can expect a city to continue running.  A vampire out of control can be expected to be hunted down and dispatched. A vampire in control who is killed might result in a territory war, probably good for the city, OR an out of control vampire organisation which might spiral out of control as masses of new vampires rampage.  Which could result in a ruined city, people fleeing during the day and burning things in the night.
 
Now a haunted city, full of hungry vampires, holds a valuable artifact with which a brave adventurer, ready to combat these bloodsuckers, might enrich himself...

A surprisingly detailed mini for an iconic AD&D 2e monster ->
 
 

I'll take an expertly crafted railroad over a puny sandbox overgrown with hardy weeds any day of the week.

I always say "If you need to railroad, make sure it has a well-stocked dining car."

I would drop the categories of transformation and damage negation.
 
The multiple categories is an unnecessary complication merely intended to increase the cost of Transformation attacks when it should be a limitation to only partly transform a target.  Especially in the light of the justification for transform -- if you can kill them then you can change them -- it is needless and, I suspect, ignored by many if not most GMs.
 
EDIT: Grailknight brought to my attention that this is not clear: I mean the "categories" like Mental/Physical/Spiritual.
 
Damage Negation fills no missing niche and is just another way of defense that is at best questionably costed and redundant.

I remember Blazing Away! The description noted that, while it was not effective at hitting targets, it counted as an extremely violent action for, IIRC, +4d6 to a PRE attack.

I didn't remember this thread, though

I dare say that's what most GMs do in practice. There's too much CU to use in the average campaign; GMs must decide which sections and characters to use, and leave the rest in the background.
 
But that's how comic books operate, too. (Or did, anyway.) Take the Marvel U, for instance. The Fantastic Four have their stable of regular and semi-regular villains like Dr Doom, Galactus, the Mole Man, assorted aliens, etc. Spider-Man and Daredevil have their street-level villains, which the X-Men seldom if ever encounter because they're fighting Sentinels, other mutant factions, and such ilk. None of them are likely to fight Nightmare, Dormammu, or Dr Strange's other mystical foes. And so on.
 
Sure, change-of-pace stories happen: The X-Men go into space, Spider-Man fights a demon, or Thor fights robots. But that's the point: Change of pace. Heroes usually stick to their niches.
 
So pick what style of heroes and team you want for your campaign and pick the set of villains and background to support it. Say the rest doesn't exist or just ignore it. Like, unless you're running a Mystic Masters campaign most of the mystical side of the CU effectively shouldn't exist. Unless you really want to make anti-mutant prejudice a big part of the campaign, you can (and probably should) ignore IHA and the MInuteman robots and, conversely, Kinematik and his mutant supremacists. And unless you want to actually run an alien invasion story arc or out-to-space story arc, the alien races might as well all not exist... jnless one of your players specifically wants to play an alien character.
 
The same goes for the "thousands of supers around the world" issue. For decades, 90% of Marvel stories happened in the Greater NYC area. Heroes were more likely to visit the Kree Galaxy than, say, Nebraska. Or even major countries like India or France. DC spread things out further by at least giving different home cities to heroes, such as Metropolis, Gotham City, Star City, Central City, yadda yadda. But those heroes tended to have their own favored sets of villains, too.
 
Dean Shomshak
 
 

@assault, how about an Eldar Worm? 

I've been toying with the idea of a low-magic Rolemaster 2e campaign. I'd limit the professions to fighter, thief, warrior monk, alchemist, healer, and seer. I may just ditch the realms of power rule and just classify spellcasters as arcane.

Lately I’ve been poking around about first level characters and their fragility . And there seems to be a white washing of it. 1 level isn’t so deadly , it’s really the players fault. The player shouldn’t have engaged in combat for example. However if you suggest ways to mitigate it then you’re not playing the game right. (Not everyone feels this way of course.)

How about giving the players different skills, so they have unique roles? One could be a hunter, while another could be pirate, etc.

I've been thinking of doing some old style D&D, except adjusted towards Swords & Sorcery.

Characters are humans, and not spellcasters. In fact, I've been considering making all PCs be human fighters, who spend most of their time fighting humans.

Alignments would be Lawful, Neutral or Chaotic, except the group needs to heavily tend towards one of these.

Naturally all this would set up howls of protest about how it's boring, etc, if I described it in a more D&D oriented forum.

All humans seems fine to me. Nonhumans in D&D tend to either be stereotypes, or deliberate subversions of the stereotypes, to the point of making it seem pointless to play that type of character anyway. Certainly, most of the stereotypes can be played as human.

The bigger problem is the "fighters only" bit. Obviously people are going to want to play rogues, but that seems more trouble than it's worth given what can be handled as skills in current D&D. And besides, Thieves were only introduced in Greyhawk. They weren't in the original boxed set...

Ultimately, it boils down to whether or not there is enough scope within the Fighter class to provide a reasonable range of PCs. I'm inclined to think there is, if you poke the players with a big stick made of suggestions.

(This character is a Scythian-flavoured Amazon from the steppes. This one is a shield maiden from a vaguely Germanic/Scandinavian culture. This one was trained as a gladiator by a decadent civilization....)

Hero would do it better, obviously, but D&D players are far more common.

You can do the amorphous body with Shape Shift as long as you don't want to go through a solid object. It even has an example of going flat to go under a door.

It's a matter of how one considers things.  None of these are rules, they're purely options because there are (almost) no rules, only exceptions.  And you don't need all of them to make a character;  you need all of them to build the character *you want*.  Those are massively different.
 
From another perspective...why do you need a book to hand you the spells?  Why not construct them using the existing spells as models?  You *can* extract some general principles to use, if you've got an analytical bent.  Yeah, unfortunately, they're obscured and confused by the numerous cases where they fail, but it can be done.  Of course, I had...however many years on 3E and 3.5 boards doing this, so I may have a bit of a head start.....
 
 And the classes?  Mostly they're just like SFX on Hero powers...nothing more.  Most of em, done badly...but the core classes are badly constructed, so I suppose it's not a surprise.  I'm speaking *overall*...not necessarily everything individually.  
 
But to take this back to Hero...the massive difference is you *can* build a perfectly good character with nothing but the PF PH, and you'll know how to play.  Worst problem can be spells selection...because low level casters are so terribly nerfed.  Hero?  You have 6 hours of reading to do.  The mechanics are scattered over two HUGE, badly laid-out books.  5E is nominally shorter, but not any better for finding some rules.  The options can easily be dizzying...and there's no real assistance, as we've talked about.  

We always used extra DCV levels to represent that. I’ve always used Armor to represent a partial Desolid body.
 
You could by Tunneling to represent that or in 6th Alternate Movement would work.
 
And I would allow it too.

I notice a lot of players who want the game run "rules as written" are either rules lawyers or power gamers, mainly because they think they've found a way to maximize their own fun instead of the group as a whole.
 
I know I'm painting with a broad brush, and there are other reasons for the RAW argument, but I'm also writing from personal experience.

No, they made it a 5pt power with a mandatory -1/2 limitation.  

I think some suffer from mental paralysis: special effect is presenting a gray areas of the rules and they are frozen trying to come up with the "correct" rule.
 
That and psy lim: Must overly complicate a build due to fear that the build doesn't account for every minute outlying once in a blue moon occurance.

I mean the 4th Ed rule book could’ve had a simple suggestion with HA saying something that although the cost is 3 pts, it should be treated as a 5 pt ACT point power for the consideration of Game Balance.