Hugh Neilson

It seems like a better build might be Clairsentience with Extra Time.  That would also allow each range increase to have steadily increasing Extra Time increments.  The extra time simply reflects how long it takes the perception point to get where it's going.  The pricing seems like it would be much more in line with the value of the ability.

I recall reading an article suggesting that there was never a better climate for the US to move away from gun culture and better regulate firearms.  Within a period of months, prominent members of both the Left and the Right had been seriously impacted by gun violence.  That was in 1981, when both the murder of John Lennon and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, which disabled James Brady, were still fresh.  It took another 12 years just to pass the Brady Bill imposing a 5-day waiting period to allow a criminal background check.  In between, the US passed the Firearms Owners Protection Act in 1986, loosening regulations.  [https://time.com/5169210/us-gun-control-laws-history-timeline/]
 
I will suggest the inability to meaningfully restrict ownership and use of firearms in the US traces back to the same issues with COVID-19 measures like masks, social distancing and vaccination.  US culture sets a significant priority on the rights of the individual over the responsibility of the individual to others, and to society as a whole.  Most other nations have adopted a balance which places a less significant priority on individual rights, with a greater balance towards responsibility to the broader society.  The results include a greater acceptance that the right of the individual to own and carry firearms is subordinated to the right of society to reduce the risks and incidence of gun violence. In the same manner, it results in a greater willingness to accept restrictions like masks for the benefit of others, even if they result in inconveniences compromising the rights of the individual.

I recall reading an article suggesting that there was never a better climate for the US to move away from gun culture and better regulate firearms.  Within a period of months, prominent members of both the Left and the Right had been seriously impacted by gun violence.  That was in 1981, when both the murder of John Lennon and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, which disabled James Brady, were still fresh.  It took another 12 years just to pass the Brady Bill imposing a 5-day waiting period to allow a criminal background check.  In between, the US passed the Firearms Owners Protection Act in 1986, loosening regulations.  [https://time.com/5169210/us-gun-control-laws-history-timeline/]
 
I will suggest the inability to meaningfully restrict ownership and use of firearms in the US traces back to the same issues with COVID-19 measures like masks, social distancing and vaccination.  US culture sets a significant priority on the rights of the individual over the responsibility of the individual to others, and to society as a whole.  Most other nations have adopted a balance which places a less significant priority on individual rights, with a greater balance towards responsibility to the broader society.  The results include a greater acceptance that the right of the individual to own and carry firearms is subordinated to the right of society to reduce the risks and incidence of gun violence. In the same manner, it results in a greater willingness to accept restrictions like masks for the benefit of others, even if they result in inconveniences compromising the rights of the individual.

I recall reading an article suggesting that there was never a better climate for the US to move away from gun culture and better regulate firearms.  Within a period of months, prominent members of both the Left and the Right had been seriously impacted by gun violence.  That was in 1981, when both the murder of John Lennon and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, which disabled James Brady, were still fresh.  It took another 12 years just to pass the Brady Bill imposing a 5-day waiting period to allow a criminal background check.  In between, the US passed the Firearms Owners Protection Act in 1986, loosening regulations.  [https://time.com/5169210/us-gun-control-laws-history-timeline/]
 
I will suggest the inability to meaningfully restrict ownership and use of firearms in the US traces back to the same issues with COVID-19 measures like masks, social distancing and vaccination.  US culture sets a significant priority on the rights of the individual over the responsibility of the individual to others, and to society as a whole.  Most other nations have adopted a balance which places a less significant priority on individual rights, with a greater balance towards responsibility to the broader society.  The results include a greater acceptance that the right of the individual to own and carry firearms is subordinated to the right of society to reduce the risks and incidence of gun violence. In the same manner, it results in a greater willingness to accept restrictions like masks for the benefit of others, even if they result in inconveniences compromising the rights of the individual.

OTOH the budget for producing comic books is hella smaller than movies. Particularly special-effects-heavy ones. Comics can provide the most spectacular effects with just paper and ink.

weighlifters?

You would think superhero movies would get the same level of cultural appreciation today that comic books received from the literary community in their first 25 or so years of existence, wouldn't you?
 
 
Oh, wait...

You would think superhero movies would get the same level of cultural appreciation today that comic books received from the literary community in their first 25 or so years of existence, wouldn't you?
 
 
Oh, wait...

If you are using Aid, consider making it Standard Effect.  3/d6 will cap out with two uses anyway, as will the dice most times, and this will reduce die-rolling during combat.
 
Would this be Aid (fire & forget, with a gradual fade) or Boost (maintain with continued END costs for the meta-ganger)?  Boost seems to fit better with the tactical choices you want to create.

There are advantages to using D-listers.  Make a change to the icons, and watch the furore.  But we can make Shang-Chi a flying energy blaster and people are quite happy with it.  There's a greater ability to adapt the characters to the medium, and to anticipated audience reaction.  We want more female characters?  OK.  Makkarri, Sprite and Ikaris are female now.  Would that have worked with Flash and Cyborg?

There are advantages to using D-listers.  Make a change to the icons, and watch the furore.  But we can make Shang-Chi a flying energy blaster and people are quite happy with it.  There's a greater ability to adapt the characters to the medium, and to anticipated audience reaction.  We want more female characters?  OK.  Makkarri, Sprite and Ikaris are female now.  Would that have worked with Flash and Cyborg?

There are advantages to using D-listers.  Make a change to the icons, and watch the furore.  But we can make Shang-Chi a flying energy blaster and people are quite happy with it.  There's a greater ability to adapt the characters to the medium, and to anticipated audience reaction.  We want more female characters?  OK.  Makkarri, Sprite and Ikaris are female now.  Would that have worked with Flash and Cyborg?

I had similar feelings when Guardians of the Galaxy came out. I mean, these guys are a D-list title at best. Why give them a movie?
 
It turned out all right, and I expect this will too.

Emphasis added.  If "pretty close" is good enough, it's OK to be "pretty close, even if it's a little too expensive".  That is more consistent with advantage and limitation pricing in general (7 charges gets the ;limitation for 8 charges, not 6 charges).
 
The OP has already suggested a simple expression based on that rationale:
 
 
There are a variety of -1/4 range-related limitations in the RAW.  They are all "more limiting than the standard range rules but less limiting than having no range at all", which leaves no options other than -1/4.  That is a simple approach which is priced in the ballpark, so I see no problem stopping there - apply a -1/4 limitation and move on.
 
With a SPD 2, the power as described reaches its full range in 109 turns, or 21.6 minutes.  With a higher SPD, it will get there faster - under 5 minutes at SPD 5, for example.  If that were pure extra time, it would be a -1 1/2 to -2 1/2 limitation, halved to -3/4 to -1 1/4 as it is Only to Activate.  But it's less extra time if it's not going out to the extreme edge of its range, and the sensor can perceive along the way as well, which may be advantageous (for example, I know if there are any dangers on the way to the extreme end of my range), and requires no Extra Time.
 
Looking at something several km away is unlikely to take place in combat conditions, making Extra Time a lot less limiting than it would otherwise be.  Find a safe location within 20 km of the target and manifest the perception point. So that Extra Time really is not going to be very limiting, very often.  As a minor limitation, I'm back to -1/4 being pretty reasonable.
 
I would not say the power loses more than a fourth of its overall effectiveness, and even that is probably generous,  but -0 seems overly stingy so...oh look!...we are back to -1/4.

Another advantage of the Eternals was their relative "unknown-ness" which makes it easier to make one character gay, change the gender of three others and tack a disability on to one.  Much like Shang-Chi had to gain flight and energy blasting abilities so he will not be a "stereotypical Asian martial artists bolted on to the Avengers as a token to cultural diversity".
 
Odd that The Eternals may be the most "woke"/diverse Marvel movie to date, yet its central premise includes the much more physically diverse Deviants as the automatic Bad Guys, compared to the much more homogeneous and "normal standard of beauty and attractiveness" Eternals. 
 
I wonder how audiences would react to Karkas (the monstrous Deviant with the heart of a, poet) and Reject (the deviant rejected for his hideous appearance of a normal white male).  But the reconfiguration of the Deviants for the movies (making them snarling monsters rather than humanoids with different appearances; apparently only Warlord Kro possesses the ability to even speak) lets us deem all Deviants evil monsters suitable for violent ends at the hands of our much more physically attractive heroes.
 
Perhaps this shows how far we really haven't come, in reality, for all of our desire to show an embracing of diversity.

Compare this fellow - 40/40 defenses, 8 DC attack - to his counterpart - 20/20 defenses, 16 DC attack.
 
They have equal SPD and CV.  DefenseMan will roll an average 28 STUN, getting 8 past defenses. OffenseMan will roll an average 56 STUN, getting 16 past defenses.  I'd say the advantage is with OffenseMan, not DefenseMan.

That is not how clairsentience works.  The mobile perception point simply allows you to move it without restarting the power.  Normally if you want to move your perception point you have to stop the power and restart it again.  That may mean making a new targeting roll to properly place the perception point but more importantly any limitation you put on it to start it would have to be done again.  For example if you put extra time you have to spend that time to bring it back up.  Mobile perception point does not increase the range at all.  So no range makes clairsentience useless.  You could probably use a ¼ limitation no initial range, but No range does not work.

Compare this fellow - 40/40 defenses, 8 DC attack - to his counterpart - 20/20 defenses, 16 DC attack.
 
They have equal SPD and CV.  DefenseMan will roll an average 28 STUN, getting 8 past defenses. OffenseMan will roll an average 56 STUN, getting 16 past defenses.  I'd say the advantage is with OffenseMan, not DefenseMan.

Funny...the big complaint about 6e was its continuation of the trend of depth of coverage of corner cases, interactions, etc., repetition of issues in different places and beating issues to death with clarifications, causing the books to bloat outwards until finally reaching 2 volumes.
 
The complaints in CC are that it doesn't cover my favorite corner case, doesn't reprint things where I would like to see them and doesn't clarify my pet issue.
 
MORAL:  if you try to make everyone happy, nobody likes it.

Seems like a reasonable SFX for Aborting to Block, or even Dodge, against an attack with a physical manifestation. If the attack misses due to the aborted action, it's shot out of the air.

Just as the drain, it could be SFX for a Block.  It is a defensive action, despite using an Attack Power.  SFX should trump.

Just as the drain, it could be SFX for a Block.  It is a defensive action, despite using an Attack Power.  SFX should trump.

Seems like a reasonable SFX for Aborting to Block, or even Dodge, against an attack with a physical manifestation. If the attack misses due to the aborted action, it's shot out of the air.

Seems like a reasonable SFX for Aborting to Block, or even Dodge, against an attack with a physical manifestation. If the attack misses due to the aborted action, it's shot out of the air.

Seems like a reasonable SFX for Aborting to Block, or even Dodge, against an attack with a physical manifestation. If the attack misses due to the aborted action, it's shot out of the air.