Ninja-Bear

True, but then how many times have we built something and figured out that it was massively unbalanced? 

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.

250. It worked well enough for "1st issue" versions.

Well I wasn't trying to make a theological argument one way or another.  My point was simply that just about everyone back then had a shared ethical understanding, so no explanation was needed.  They were called evil, everyone knew what evil was, and thus no greater argument must be had.  Today that is not the case, so you have all kinds of discussions about what evil AKSHUALLY is, and how each person has their own ethical system that they insist upon, or at least presume.

Which is why creating such a "race" is so Evil.

Boy, you folks like to overthink.   It could be as simple as a race of monsters that eat human flesh.  We really don’t like having anyone above us on the food chain.  You can keep the relationships simpler.  

That's the key phrase here, I think, because it describes the situation perfectly.  Especially because so many classes of complication should generally be very rare;  I'm thinking primarily about Dependence, Susceptibility, and Vulnerability.  Accidental Change requires multiple forms, so that's often not available.  

I definitely have to agree. Even with 5th edition or before I reduced the number of disadvantages characters had to have. I usually had Champions characters have 250 point base and 100 in disadvantages, dropping 50 points of disadvantages. This meant that characters didn't have to be hunted by everyone, which was the most common disadvantage characters took to get the numbers up.

IMO, requiring such a high ratio of character build points come from Disadvantages diluted their impact. When I first read Champions, I thought, "Wow, this game has some role playing hooks built right into the system!" When I first built a character, I thought, "How am I going to cram in X number of Disadvantages on this sheet and keep the character in concept?" If you only have meaningful disadvantages, then you don't need as many to define a character, and that side of the character sheet starts looking more diverse among characters in the group. It also makes life easier for the GM.

Hero's The Atlantean Age is inspired by Greco-Roman culture and mythology, and has among the highest maximum power levels I've seen for the genre. Character types include true divine-blooded demigods. Three of the statted NPCs are 1,000 CP+, and have truly superhuman Characteristics, e.g. Strength of 40, 60, and 80. Magic spells run up to 300 AP, and DC can be as high as 18-20. But Normal Characteristic Maxima still apply. Spells are built with more Limitations than are typical for superhero powers, and are bought in a different, unique structure that tends to add up to higher cost. Mundane equipment is free, but magic items cost Character Points.
 
Playing in the setting blurs the line between Fantasy and Supers, to the point where the difference is more style and environment than character stats. But those characters still can't be compared to supers on a point-by-point basis.

Well, I have some Champions characters without any Resistant Defenses so Fantasy would be stronger in that sense. 

See, I'd have had him dump the Coke on the PC first, then the McDonald's shake.  And say, "Coke always gives me the shakes."  Might as well throw a bad pun in there when you can.

All good items - historically, these have not been presented so much as "campaign guidelines and dial settings" as extrapolated from sample characters - typically, characters whose expected usage (expected to go one on one against a single PC; expected to be a tough fight for a team of PCs,; etc.).  I've sometimes questioned whether those "back of 1e|" characters were intended to be reasonable solo villains (tougher than any one PC, but easily taken down by the team), with the expectation that PCs, at least starting PCs, would be more like those "wimpy" Geodesics.
 
As players, we built more towards going one on one against Shrinker, Pulsar, Dragonfly or Green Dragon.

Ok @Duke Bushido, we’re on the same page. What I meant by for immunity for free was that there was a build that to represent true immunity, you buy Desolid to represent. The fact that you do not take damage, which happens with Desolid. You take a limitation of you cannot move through solid objects. I.e you still have to use a door you don’t just ooze under it. If you want to Affect the Real World, iow hit someone then you must buy Affects Real World. It’s quite expensive.

That is correct:  in the examples I listed, each character used it to create a gelatinous or semi-gelatinous form.  Strain himself through a chain link fence or a chickenwire barrier; no problem.  Through a solid object?  No; not at all.  The general rule of thumb I gave was "anywhere you can fit your eyeball through."
 
 
 
 
No.  I said as much above, but in fairness to everyone, I said _a lot_, so the details may have gotten lost.
 
At least, no; not if he wants to be able to attack without buying the Affects Solid advantage.  Of course, he is still free to buy conventional defenses that are only accessible in this form, but if he has declined the Invulnerable that comes with Desolid, he cannot then find a way to back into it.  
 
 
 
In the examples given?  Yes; most definitely.
 
Why?  Two concurrent things:
1)  the character defines this form as a super-pliable self due to whatever SFX they have chose.  That is to say that they are still interacting with the "solid world" and are not truly intangible.
 
2) the character has voluntarily surrendered the invulnerability Desolid offers.
 
The mindset here is that the invulnerability is derived from the idea that if you are not interacting with the physical world, then it should not be able to interact with you.  If you remove that aspect, the power becomes just a new way for you to interact with the physical world.  If you are interacting with the physical world, well, then it can interact back at you. 
 
As to why, in these cases, I allow "affects solid" as a default, we will need to first answer this:
 
 
 
Yes, but I was not clear enough with my intent in that, given the way you appear to have understood it.  Let my try to tidy up my path a bit, if you can bear with me:
 
 
Even after I attempted to explain that in the cases I was seeing as permissible (and I did fudge for my own convenience by using cases of which I was already aware), the characters had voluntarily surrendered the invulnerability _and_ the pass through solid barriers aspect, so yes; I simply let them have "Affects Solid" as the default condition of this build: no advantage needed.
 
This was met with at least one instance of "no; you shouldn't do that because that is a very expensive advantage and no one should have it for free."
 
I took this to mean one of three things:
 
Those of this position missed where I had said these characters opted out of invulnerable,
 
Those of this position did not grasp why the Affects Solid advantage is so outrageously expensive,
 
Or
 
Those of this position expected that I was somehow gaining something worth a couple hundred points in this exchange.
 
I say a couple hundred points because-- well, this doesn't sound like an unreasonable character:
 
RKA: 60 pts
Energy Blast: 60 pts.
 
With no other modifiers, that is 120 points of offensive powers.  Bought at +2, that is a 360 it expenditure, or 240 "extra points" required to make it "fair" for my character to have Desolid.
 
So what kind of defenses can you get for that sort of pointage?   75 points of Damage Reduction still leaves a considerable bit of change to spend.   More than enough to snag a hundred points of resistant defense.  
 
So if you are a "points equals fair" guy (and, without venom, I cannot fathom why, especially after years and years of discussions here, anyone can still seriously entertain this notion, but it is as entrenched as mitochondria in animal cells), then you should be expecting to gain a rough equivalent in defense due to your Desolid.
 
You don't, though.  You get so much _more_ than that!  You get actual invulnerability to everything except a common SFX _or_ a handful of esoteric ones.  You are still free to buy additional defenses for "only against x," but that is a different conversation, of course.  Although it is worth noting that not only _can_ you do that, with a 240 point defense budget, you can certainly afford to so it, because _by the book_  (Desolid: cannot pass through walls: -1. ), that almost-perfect invulnerability is _20 points!  Twenty!  That's it!
 
So on the surface, the argument is to balance 20 points of defense should cost 240 extra points on your offense (which, again, demonstrates that even the rules do not (and arguably never have) support the idea that equal points enforce equal balance).
 
So if it isn't about points, then what is being balanced by this outrageous upcharge?  The only other thing left is the superior defenses offered by the Desolidification.  This seems fair, in a meta or narrative sense: if most enemies cannot touch you, it seems reasonably fair that either you cannot touch them or that you have precious few options, or a variety of weak options.  Paying three times as much to touch your oponents will enforce at least one of those options.
 
It should also be noted that the only way to enforce this balance / fairness is to make the character, in this example, pay six times as much for his two attacks as he paid for this single defense.
 
Again, this is the rules openly demonstrating that actual play balance has _nothing_ to so with a points / points relationship.  At higher power levels-  with characters throwing around five or six offensive powers, this gets even more out of skew--
 
And as an aside, I am _not_ advocating for yet another conversation about how this must be "fixed" so that points equals points equals balance.  I am advocating that everyone open their eyes and minds a bit and _stop trying to do that_, because not only is it not going to happen without regressing to two character abilities ("affect universe" and "resist universe"), but that every attempt to do so thus far has made things worse and more complicated.  However, repeated attempts to sway that opinion have left me feeling like the only athiest at the Vatican, so I don't do it as much as I used to.
 
The aside.... Well, aside, the entire goal I was pushing for with the defenses comparison was to make the two points that with the perfect defense offered by Desolid having been voluntarily surrendered, and that same defense having been the reason for the mandatory offensive upcharge, I saw absolutely no logical reason to make that to charge mandatory.
 
I admit that the point got muddied somewhere along the way (it really is difficult to just "glance back upstream" on the phone and find my way back all while holding a train of thought), I attempted to go into it a bit more here.  Again, sorry for any confusion.
 
 
 
It's your turn, here.  I don't understand what you are asking.
 
 
 
I appreciate the example, but honestly (and it could be the lateness of the hour), but I am not getting it.
 
To clarify the question I _think_ is being asked inside the example, though:
 
His limitation is "doesn't actually desolidify" or, if it helps, "remains solid."  Accordingly, yes; he can still hit an opponent.  By the same token, he can also be hit by an opponent.   Seems reasonable, as he has given up the feature that might sensibly mandate the extreme upcharge in the name of "fair play."
 
 
I know this was for Doc; I hope you don't mind me tacking a swing at it, though:
 
To answer the unquoted question first (for logic reasons):  kind of.....
 
 You were buying a _ratio_ though:  the ability to move X inches through Y BODY in a Phase.  Thus, if you bought the ability to move 10" through 10" BODY in a Phase, you could move 20" through 5 BODY or 1" through 100 BODY.
 
Because it was a ratio, you were always _garaunteed_ to be able to move through any object _eventually_ (barring hardening, etc.). There was never really a worry about buying enough to make it through.  The only concern was life support (under most GMs I encountered, _especially_ after the drowning rules appeared in Coriolis Effect) and any senses to keep you from being surprised when you popped through (though, for whatever reason, very few people actually bought such senses unless they were in line with some other part of their character concept).
 
In practice, most people bought enough to duplicate their normal rate of movement through a pet target number for BODY (usually somewhere between 10 and 20 BODY) and many took a minor custom disadvantage that prevented them from exceeding the speed of their normal-preferred movement. 
 

A couple more...
DCs in an attack.  This is significantly separate from character points.
Max DCs, as well as how often the GM will throw KAs out there against the players.  This has a major influence on how invest in defenses.  
And we've talked about it here, but it's still perhaps something of a fringe notion/consideration...SPDs.  
 

I think the general rule (and this can be genre appropriate) should be, have I seen this in the source material? For Super heroes, comics and early cartoons is the default. So flying 100 mph and grabbing someone is fine UNLESS for some reason you want more realism.

I have to admit that, reading the initial posts of “what?  Instant acceleration?  Why, it would tear them apart”, I was envisioning a campaign Session Zero much like:


 
GM:  OK, tell us a bit about your characters. 


 
[Duke, of course, is so polite and unwilling to hog the spotlight that he waits for everyone else to go first.]


 
Player 1:  My character is the last survivor of an alien civilization.  He’s super-strong, super-fast and super-tough. And he can fly and shoot laser beams out of his eyes!


 
Players and GM Chorus: Super-cool!


 
Player 2: My character was altered in a strange accident, and can now become a being of living flames.  She can attack with the flames, they protect her from damage and they even make her lighter than air so she can fly.


 
Players and GM Chorus: Marvelous-cool!


 
Player 3: Hey, my character was changed in a strange accident too.  He was attending a science display when he was accidentally bitten by an irradiated, DNA-altered Bat!  He has all the powers of a bat – proportionate strength and speed, bat-sense and he built artificial wings that allow him to fly! Now he fights crime while attending high school, your Friendly Neighbourhood Bat-Man!


 
Players and GM Chorus: Double-homage-cool!


 
Player 4: My character is just a normal guy, but he was trained by an ancient cabal of wizards. He wears an array of mystical artifacts given to him by the ancient cabal, and can warp reality itself with his mighty spells and mystical knowledge.


 
Players and GM Chorus: Magic-cool!


 
Duke: My character can fly at incredible speeds, and is capable of imparting that speed to others at will, through direct or indirect physical combat.  [Awaits Speedy-cool response.]


 
Player 1: But what about the physics of high velocities?


 
Player 3: Wouldn’t that rapid acceleration tear someone apart?


 
GM: We’ll have to break out the physics textbooks to ensure that these abilities are treated with full realism and scientific accuracy – how else can we possibly pretend to believe a man can fly?

 
 
I am a big fan of starting any new game/system with its rules as written. Until I see how it plays, and integrates with all of the other rules, assessing the impact of some tweak is dicy at best.

It is a comfort thing for him, I think.
 
As I understand it, he only bought the book a few months ago, read it a couple of times, and is five or six sessions into his first campaign.  It isnt so much that he is a rules absolutist (I am told; i haven't actually played with them yet) as much as it is "we are sticking by the rules until I am comfortable making judgment calls."
 
So I am not expecting _much_, but Dude!  Forever GM since 88 or so?  I will leap through a hoop or two (even uf I have to set them on fire myself!) To be _player_ once in a while. 
 
 

@Duke Bushido, I’d thought you would’ve made an elastic type character. You know, since you’re stretching your self to play a different edition. 🤪 Sorry but I couldn’t help that bad pun. Have fun.
 
And remember this for your GM, Steve Long told me he’d never send the game police if you alter the game. So as commendable it is that he’s sticking to RAW, if you guys truly want to change a rule, then by all means, do it.

Isn't three pages a single normal Duke post?  🙂

Thanks, Folks;
 
I appreciate the help.  I have the information need: there is no rule saying the grabbed target is required to take damage.
 
 
That is all I needed; thank you.
 
 

See, this is where the Power Skill comes in for me. When making power stunts, I tend to have "stunt powers" cost extra END and RSR to perform. If they get too abusive (like using several times in a row), I require them to take the stunt as a new power. It's worked well over the years, and allows the players to test their heroes' powers in new directions. 
 
 
For me, I'd allow something like "grabbing X and removing them from the field" as a new maneuver that doesn't need a power structure. IMHO, it's no different from performing other combat maneuvers like a Move By or Multi-Attack. Yes, it should have mods, but I don't believe that it should cost points. It's too much of a staple in the supers genre, which should mean that anyone can use it freely. Mind you, your campaign may vary, I just respectfully disagree with it costing points.

I don’t have a problem with Desolid as Invulnerable . But to take a limitation so you have an advantage? That is going against the spirit of the rule. 

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.