Hugh Neilson

A "personal choice".  Kind of like whether to wear a seatbelt, smoke tobacco, smoke marijuana, drink alcohol, drive 55, urinate in the street, yell "fire" in a crowded restaurant or wear a shirt and shoes to the restaurant?  Clearly we would never DREAM of restricting those rights to personal choice, so how can we possibly mandate mask-wearing?

A "personal choice".  Kind of like whether to wear a seatbelt, smoke tobacco, smoke marijuana, drink alcohol, drive 55, urinate in the street, yell "fire" in a crowded restaurant or wear a shirt and shoes to the restaurant?  Clearly we would never DREAM of restricting those rights to personal choice, so how can we possibly mandate mask-wearing?

A "personal choice".  Kind of like whether to wear a seatbelt, smoke tobacco, smoke marijuana, drink alcohol, drive 55, urinate in the street, yell "fire" in a crowded restaurant or wear a shirt and shoes to the restaurant?  Clearly we would never DREAM of restricting those rights to personal choice, so how can we possibly mandate mask-wearing?

A "personal choice".  Kind of like whether to wear a seatbelt, smoke tobacco, smoke marijuana, drink alcohol, drive 55, urinate in the street, yell "fire" in a crowded restaurant or wear a shirt and shoes to the restaurant?  Clearly we would never DREAM of restricting those rights to personal choice, so how can we possibly mandate mask-wearing?

A "personal choice".  Kind of like whether to wear a seatbelt, smoke tobacco, smoke marijuana, drink alcohol, drive 55, urinate in the street, yell "fire" in a crowded restaurant or wear a shirt and shoes to the restaurant?  Clearly we would never DREAM of restricting those rights to personal choice, so how can we possibly mandate mask-wearing?

Marvel's never had [koffSHAZAMkoff] issues with copyright, have they?

I am still waiting for the canon evidence that Tim is clearly 100% straight. Show me how his sexuality (as an unshakably straight male with zero uncertainties) has been a part of his "core identity" at any time in his three decades of history.
 
He's had a few opposite-sex relationships which basically went nowhere, and which he didn't really seem to focus on, much less prioritize.  That could indicate a greater dedication to other aspects of his life (much like a career-focused individual), but it could also indicate that he wasn't so romantically inclined to the female gender. 
 
How was Tony Stark's alcoholism different?  We saw no indications for many years of Iron Man's history, then ZAP, he's an alcoholic.  Oh wait, he always was, it was just never prominent. 
 
The Hulk's core was Jekyll & Hyde.  But wait, no, we can integrate his personalities.  No, surprise, they weren't integrated - a third personality was created to protect the public.  Oh look, rampaging Hulk who does not realize he is also Banner is back.
 
Bucky is dead.  Dead, dead, dead.  He and Uncle Ben are the only Marvel characters that stay dead.  Oh wait, he's actually alive and has been alive and working behind the scenes all these years.
 
Thor is a persona  Dr. Don Blake takes on when he "possesses the power of Thor" because he is Worthy.  No, wait, he really is Thor and switches identities with Dn Blake.  Oh, fooled you - there is no Don Blake, he's just a construct created by Odin to humble Thor.  Oh, but it turns out ANYONE worthy can still wield the hammer and be granted powers like Thor's - but they aren't Thor's because he does not -de-power.  Well, until another writer changes that.
 
For some inexplicable reason, Tim Drake's sexuality is considered more canon than a lot of other canon, despite being far less central to the character's portrayal over the years than many elements of other characters that have simply changed over time.
 
 
 
Clearly I was fooled by the fan fiction in the 1960s and 1970s, wherein he was not depicted as superhumanly strong.  Although I will admit the Golden Age examples are less fair as "canon" was not really valued all that much. 
 
Although the Spectre was the ghost of Jim Corrigan for a long time.  Until he wasn't, but instead was the Wrath of God, affixed to a mortal soul.
 
Remember when Swamp Thing was really Alec Holland?  Until it was revealed that he wasn't in the '80's?  Until he was again in the 2000's?  Which version is true canon, and which are just fanfic gone wild?

Why would it be the assumed default? The comics did not present characters as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or transexual for 50 - 80 years.  It basically presented them as asexual.  Sexuality was simply a topic which was not addressed, beyond some characters having (or pining over) boyfriends/girlfriends, and a few being married.  I recall a letter to one book some years back complaining that, even in a line that targeted "mature readers", the characters were presented in, as I recall, some mystic mindscape as lacking genitalia.  The letter writer indicated that, in his view, "real people have genitals".
 
The statement that the characters' sexuality is "not relevant" suggests that one should not care whether Tim Drake is heterosexual, bisexual or whateversexual.  If it's not relevant, it does not matter - regardless of whether he is straight or not.  The level of complaint indicates the extent of relevance to the person making the complaint.

I remember in a chat here on the website with Steve Long, someone asked him a question about how many official Champions characters were gay. He answered to the effect that he never went out of his way to define a character's sexuality, because that would almost never affect their motivations for becoming a hero (or villain). Moreover, in contemporary Western society homosexuality is rarely a serious complication any more. Steve said that if a character's sexual preference isn't specified, a given game group who want to use it can define it however would work for them.
 
Both the comics writers and the fans are making more fuss over this than is necessary, pro or con. If you're writing a story with romantic drama, the emotions matter a lot more than the plumbing.

Like I said, comics have never let consistency tie them down, and it was especially true the further you go back. 

I am still waiting for the canon evidence that Tim is clearly 100% straight. Show me how his sexuality (as an unshakably straight male with zero uncertainties) has been a part of his "core identity" at any time in his three decades of history.
 
He's had a few opposite-sex relationships which basically went nowhere, and which he didn't really seem to focus on, much less prioritize.  That could indicate a greater dedication to other aspects of his life (much like a career-focused individual), but it could also indicate that he wasn't so romantically inclined to the female gender. 
 
How was Tony Stark's alcoholism different?  We saw no indications for many years of Iron Man's history, then ZAP, he's an alcoholic.  Oh wait, he always was, it was just never prominent. 
 
The Hulk's core was Jekyll & Hyde.  But wait, no, we can integrate his personalities.  No, surprise, they weren't integrated - a third personality was created to protect the public.  Oh look, rampaging Hulk who does not realize he is also Banner is back.
 
Bucky is dead.  Dead, dead, dead.  He and Uncle Ben are the only Marvel characters that stay dead.  Oh wait, he's actually alive and has been alive and working behind the scenes all these years.
 
Thor is a persona  Dr. Don Blake takes on when he "possesses the power of Thor" because he is Worthy.  No, wait, he really is Thor and switches identities with Dn Blake.  Oh, fooled you - there is no Don Blake, he's just a construct created by Odin to humble Thor.  Oh, but it turns out ANYONE worthy can still wield the hammer and be granted powers like Thor's - but they aren't Thor's because he does not -de-power.  Well, until another writer changes that.
 
For some inexplicable reason, Tim Drake's sexuality is considered more canon than a lot of other canon, despite being far less central to the character's portrayal over the years than many elements of other characters that have simply changed over time.
 
 
 
Clearly I was fooled by the fan fiction in the 1960s and 1970s, wherein he was not depicted as superhumanly strong.  Although I will admit the Golden Age examples are less fair as "canon" was not really valued all that much. 
 
Although the Spectre was the ghost of Jim Corrigan for a long time.  Until he wasn't, but instead was the Wrath of God, affixed to a mortal soul.
 
Remember when Swamp Thing was really Alec Holland?  Until it was revealed that he wasn't in the '80's?  Until he was again in the 2000's?  Which version is true canon, and which are just fanfic gone wild?

Exactly.  Few long-term comic book characters are controlled  by their creators.  Many of their creators are retired or even deceased.  Was it FanFic when Roy Thomas wrote the Invaders and the All-Star Squadron?  He was a fan in the 1940s who became a writer in the 1960s. What's with Batman hating guns?  Originaly he carried a gun and even machine gunned a crowd from his plane.  Superman did not start out so squeamish around killing either, nor could he fly or see through walls.  He gained a lot of powers we now consider canon over time.
 
That may not be the story you want to read.  Maybe you don't want to see Superman and Lois sharing a bath either.  But that does not invalidate the story.  Tony Stark was not an alcoholic in Tales of Suspense.  Or was he, but we just did not KNOW he was an alcoholic?  By #128 of his own book, he was most definitely an alcoholic. The creator of Wolverine envisioned him having claws in his gloves,not embedded in his body, and his adamantium skeleton only showed up around #126 of X-Men, when he's been around since #94 (plus the Giant-Size and Hulk appearances before) so that's also fanfic.  So is Peter Parker's appearance.  Stan Lee once noted that the only thing Romita could not draw was Peter Parker, "the little nebbish".  Stan noted he ultimately accepted that Peter grew up from nerdy, awkward teen to a pretty good-looking guy.
 
Someone once wrote to the Justice League book in the 1970s suggesting Aquaman have "the strength of a whale". In later years, it developed that, due to evolution to deal with the ocean pressures, Atlanteans were much stronger and more durable than surface men.  Fanfic?  It wasn't part of the character for decades.  I recall an issue where Aquaman was hunted through Seattle by an assassin.  The assassin had clearly won - he's kept Aquaman out of the water for well over an hour, and we all knew by canon that he needed to go underwater at least every hour.  Only he didn't - it depended on his environment, and in heavy rain in Seattle, he could last a lot longer than an hour.  Pure fanfic, right?
 
For years, we criticized comic book movies because they were not true to the characters - the writers weren't fans.  We still see that in the criticisms of many DCU movies, not so much Marvel.  But when writers are fans, and they develop the characters, now fan fiction is a bad thing instead?  [EDIT:  Sorry for the thread drift towards the title of the thread itself 😇]
 
 
How many long-term romances has he had, making it clear that he is most definitely straight and this is a complete, jarring change?  High schoolers go with the crowd.  Have kids grown out of mocking, bullying or ostracizing those who are different?  Do the football teams welcome homosexual guys?  Are a couple of trans cheerleaders the norm? Were any of those nine alternate future Tim's married with kids, much less clearly straight and not, say, bisexual? People struggling with understanding their sexuality are hardly unusual. 
 
 
Show me the character history that says "for sure he is straight".  Or any issue of Tales of Suspense that suggests Tony Stark has a serious drinking problem, rather than being a casual or social drinker.
 
 
Having not read the story, I'm not clear how this "big reveal" comes out, so I'm not prepared to pass judgment on the writer quite yet. But we do not see every minute of any comic character's life.  I have no great desire to see them in the bathroom, for example, and while Reed and Sue have a child, I don't recall ever seeing them engaged in more than a pretty chaste kiss. I do know they have been in a long-term straight relationship.  But I have not seen Tim Drake's long-term relationship with any romantic partner, really.  Maybe he just has not had enough interest in the various girls he has had shorter-term relationships with?

Exactly.  Few long-term comic book characters are controlled  by their creators.  Many of their creators are retired or even deceased.  Was it FanFic when Roy Thomas wrote the Invaders and the All-Star Squadron?  He was a fan in the 1940s who became a writer in the 1960s. What's with Batman hating guns?  Originaly he carried a gun and even machine gunned a crowd from his plane.  Superman did not start out so squeamish around killing either, nor could he fly or see through walls.  He gained a lot of powers we now consider canon over time.
 
That may not be the story you want to read.  Maybe you don't want to see Superman and Lois sharing a bath either.  But that does not invalidate the story.  Tony Stark was not an alcoholic in Tales of Suspense.  Or was he, but we just did not KNOW he was an alcoholic?  By #128 of his own book, he was most definitely an alcoholic. The creator of Wolverine envisioned him having claws in his gloves,not embedded in his body, and his adamantium skeleton only showed up around #126 of X-Men, when he's been around since #94 (plus the Giant-Size and Hulk appearances before) so that's also fanfic.  So is Peter Parker's appearance.  Stan Lee once noted that the only thing Romita could not draw was Peter Parker, "the little nebbish".  Stan noted he ultimately accepted that Peter grew up from nerdy, awkward teen to a pretty good-looking guy.
 
Someone once wrote to the Justice League book in the 1970s suggesting Aquaman have "the strength of a whale". In later years, it developed that, due to evolution to deal with the ocean pressures, Atlanteans were much stronger and more durable than surface men.  Fanfic?  It wasn't part of the character for decades.  I recall an issue where Aquaman was hunted through Seattle by an assassin.  The assassin had clearly won - he's kept Aquaman out of the water for well over an hour, and we all knew by canon that he needed to go underwater at least every hour.  Only he didn't - it depended on his environment, and in heavy rain in Seattle, he could last a lot longer than an hour.  Pure fanfic, right?
 
For years, we criticized comic book movies because they were not true to the characters - the writers weren't fans.  We still see that in the criticisms of many DCU movies, not so much Marvel.  But when writers are fans, and they develop the characters, now fan fiction is a bad thing instead?  [EDIT:  Sorry for the thread drift towards the title of the thread itself 😇]
 
 
How many long-term romances has he had, making it clear that he is most definitely straight and this is a complete, jarring change?  High schoolers go with the crowd.  Have kids grown out of mocking, bullying or ostracizing those who are different?  Do the football teams welcome homosexual guys?  Are a couple of trans cheerleaders the norm? Were any of those nine alternate future Tim's married with kids, much less clearly straight and not, say, bisexual? People struggling with understanding their sexuality are hardly unusual. 
 
 
Show me the character history that says "for sure he is straight".  Or any issue of Tales of Suspense that suggests Tony Stark has a serious drinking problem, rather than being a casual or social drinker.
 
 
Having not read the story, I'm not clear how this "big reveal" comes out, so I'm not prepared to pass judgment on the writer quite yet. But we do not see every minute of any comic character's life.  I have no great desire to see them in the bathroom, for example, and while Reed and Sue have a child, I don't recall ever seeing them engaged in more than a pretty chaste kiss. I do know they have been in a long-term straight relationship.  But I have not seen Tim Drake's long-term relationship with any romantic partner, really.  Maybe he just has not had enough interest in the various girls he has had shorter-term relationships with?

At this point, aren't many characters limited to fanfiction?  The original authors/creators are not writing Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman any more, and Stan Lee isn't overseeing the classic Marvel characters.

Exactly.  Few long-term comic book characters are controlled  by their creators.  Many of their creators are retired or even deceased.  Was it FanFic when Roy Thomas wrote the Invaders and the All-Star Squadron?  He was a fan in the 1940s who became a writer in the 1960s. What's with Batman hating guns?  Originaly he carried a gun and even machine gunned a crowd from his plane.  Superman did not start out so squeamish around killing either, nor could he fly or see through walls.  He gained a lot of powers we now consider canon over time.
 
That may not be the story you want to read.  Maybe you don't want to see Superman and Lois sharing a bath either.  But that does not invalidate the story.  Tony Stark was not an alcoholic in Tales of Suspense.  Or was he, but we just did not KNOW he was an alcoholic?  By #128 of his own book, he was most definitely an alcoholic. The creator of Wolverine envisioned him having claws in his gloves,not embedded in his body, and his adamantium skeleton only showed up around #126 of X-Men, when he's been around since #94 (plus the Giant-Size and Hulk appearances before) so that's also fanfic.  So is Peter Parker's appearance.  Stan Lee once noted that the only thing Romita could not draw was Peter Parker, "the little nebbish".  Stan noted he ultimately accepted that Peter grew up from nerdy, awkward teen to a pretty good-looking guy.
 
Someone once wrote to the Justice League book in the 1970s suggesting Aquaman have "the strength of a whale". In later years, it developed that, due to evolution to deal with the ocean pressures, Atlanteans were much stronger and more durable than surface men.  Fanfic?  It wasn't part of the character for decades.  I recall an issue where Aquaman was hunted through Seattle by an assassin.  The assassin had clearly won - he's kept Aquaman out of the water for well over an hour, and we all knew by canon that he needed to go underwater at least every hour.  Only he didn't - it depended on his environment, and in heavy rain in Seattle, he could last a lot longer than an hour.  Pure fanfic, right?
 
For years, we criticized comic book movies because they were not true to the characters - the writers weren't fans.  We still see that in the criticisms of many DCU movies, not so much Marvel.  But when writers are fans, and they develop the characters, now fan fiction is a bad thing instead?  [EDIT:  Sorry for the thread drift towards the title of the thread itself 😇]
 
 
How many long-term romances has he had, making it clear that he is most definitely straight and this is a complete, jarring change?  High schoolers go with the crowd.  Have kids grown out of mocking, bullying or ostracizing those who are different?  Do the football teams welcome homosexual guys?  Are a couple of trans cheerleaders the norm? Were any of those nine alternate future Tim's married with kids, much less clearly straight and not, say, bisexual? People struggling with understanding their sexuality are hardly unusual. 
 
 
Show me the character history that says "for sure he is straight".  Or any issue of Tales of Suspense that suggests Tony Stark has a serious drinking problem, rather than being a casual or social drinker.
 
 
Having not read the story, I'm not clear how this "big reveal" comes out, so I'm not prepared to pass judgment on the writer quite yet. But we do not see every minute of any comic character's life.  I have no great desire to see them in the bathroom, for example, and while Reed and Sue have a child, I don't recall ever seeing them engaged in more than a pretty chaste kiss. I do know they have been in a long-term straight relationship.  But I have not seen Tim Drake's long-term relationship with any romantic partner, really.  Maybe he just has not had enough interest in the various girls he has had shorter-term relationships with?

I don't see how this is fake diversity.  The character of Tim Drake has been around for 32 years, but Tim Drake the character has only been in the hero business for maybe 3 years.  Moreover, most of his previous girlfriends are no longer canon for the him because their have been like 3 DC reboots since his his introductions.  So a teenage boy goes 3 years without having any same sex romantic relationships, and that is suppose to be proof positive that the boy has absolutely no interest in guys?  That is not how it works in the real world.  A lot of bisexuals don't have there first same sex romance until they are in college or later (sometimes much later).  At the end of the day a character's sexual orientation is whatever the writer says it is, and the current writer has decided that Tim Drake can be romantically interested in at least some guys.  So, his LGBTQ status is as real as anything else in the story or in Tim Drake's cannon.
 
 
New writers coming onboard with stories they already want to tell and then proceeding write the those stories is currently the norm.  This how it works now and has been for quite a while.  In a sense most major comic books are now fanfiction, in that there writers grew up reading them and are fans of the books for which now write.  This is not having some sinister agenda, this is just writers having stories that they wish to tell, and it is a natural thing.

OK, now I think I at least get the issue.  I don't agree with your perspective on it, but I get the issue.
 
Starting with a 12d6 Blast, no frills, I can use the Blast at any time.  If I do not use it, nothing happens and I spend no END.  In any phase, I can select any target I want for the Blast, spend END, make an attack roll and, assuming I hit, do damage.  Then it's done until I use it again.
 
Now, let's add Constant.  Same starting point - I can use it whenever I want, but if I hit, it locks on and, as long as I keep pumping END into it, it stays on.  It damages that target, and that target only, every phase.
 
But if I add your new "advantage", I paid +1/4 for precisely nothing.  The power is available to be used whenever I want to use it, just like it was before I applied the advantage.
 
Now, let's tack on some limitations to the basic Blast.  It requires a full minute to kick up (-1 1/2), during which I can do nothing else (-1/4).  While activating, I am at 0 DCV (-1), must Gesture (-1/2) and Incant (-1/2).  This is a super-limited power, dropping the cost to 13 points.  Is it useful in combat?  Not really - it takes a full five turns to make it available and I can do nothing else during that time.
 
Add Constant and it costs 19 points.  What did the extra 6 points get me?  Well, if I ever do manage that full minute of preparation, and hit, I can keep damaging that one target as long as I keep pumping END in.  That is quite advantageous...but if that target is KOd, or I just want to change targets for other reasons, or if I get stunned and the power stops, I need another minute to be able to use the power again.
 
Now, as I understand your proposal, I can instead take "Constantly available" for +1/4 instead of Constant for +1/2.  Now my power costs 16 points.  For 3 points, instead of needing a full minute of uselessness whenever I want to kick the power in, all I need to do is spend a minute gesturing, incanting and concentrating in the shower in the morning, and now the Blast is available any time I want, just like the No Frills blast.  That is, effectively, a -2 3/4 limitation for "has to spend a minute maintaining this power once a day".  You don't have to do it again if you want to change targets, or if you have to shut the power down (since it was never "up" in the first place).
 
 
Applied to my basic 12d6 Blast, it is in no way advantageous.  It changes nothing.  It means I can use the power normally, just like I could before.  Applied to a power with a pile of "before I can use it, I have to..." limitations, it is hugely advantageous, not because it is an Advantage, but because it mitigates the Limitations on the power.  Extra Time is halved when it is only required to activate a power, not to maintain it.  Concentration, Gestures and Incantations are doubled if they must be maintained throughout the use of a constant power.
 
 
Why not?  The rules discuss taking Physical Manifestation on "a Power like HKA if it’s defined as creating claws or a weapon — the claws “remain in existence” between Phases even if the character can’t use them."  They then suggest a look at Time Limit, which has already been noted upthread.
 
 
OK, there is something I am unclear on, but we'll come back to that.
 
At its base, I would say RKA, Physical Manifestation.  In a fantasy game, I would likely pop on the usual spellcasting limitations and add "Time Limit", the rules mechanic specifically created for allowing the use of an Instant power to extend outward over longer than the Instant action it would normally require.  If Time Limit + the various limitations equals or exceeds the cost with no limitations and no Time Limit, I would simply drop both the advantage and the limitations, and apply a smaller limitation for the need to re-create the Sword at some later time.  If it's fairly easy to break the sword and require you to use all those limitations to get it back, that limitation could be higher, but I don't see it ever being more than -1, as an OAF could be broken or taken away, and could not be conjured back up again with a minute of inconvenience between combats.  It feels like the ease of recovery makes it more comparable to an OIF, or a variant of Restrainable, so -1/2 instead of Extra Timne, gesture, incant, concentrate, etc.
 
That one unclarity - my model above means that attacking with the sword requires you use an attack action each phase.  If the sword just attacks every phase on its own, without the need for any action on your part, this is starting to seem a lot more like Summoning an Automoton or, alternatively, making it Constant and Uncontrolled, with a cost reduction for the requirement to make an attack roll each phase in order to hit.  I'd look to "Requires a Roll" for guidance in pricing that out.  Here I would not allow Physical Manifestation, instead treating "break the sword" as the "reasonably common and obvious set of circumstances that will turn it off or negate it."
 
But the more the sword can function independent of any Actions on your part, the more it feels like it is a separate character, whether a Follower or a Summoned Automaton.
 
Now, if you are still hooked on a (pretty low cost) advantage for "turn it on and off at will once all conditions to activate are met once" model, tell me how you would apply it to a defensive spell or movement spell?  Start with +10/+10 rDEF with the same 1 minute "casting time", but now once he casts it, he can switch the mystic shield on and off so he can pay no END between combats.

Given all the Batman and Robin gay jokes over the years, picking a Robin to come out as bi seems a little tone deaf.
 
The big question for me is whether the change comes with good storytelling or is just tacked on for wokeness brownie points. If there's a good story to be told, then it's fine IMO. If it doesn't add anything to the story, then no point in introducing it IMO.

The problem that OP is running into is mainly one of definition.  Fundamentally, he's looking to have various setup/activation Limitations on an ability...but not have them be quite as Limiting as they are by default (e.g. they're not required every time the ability is used).  As has been stated in multiple ways by multiple people in this thread, there are a number of perfectly rules-legal ways to approach this idea....what you do NOT need to do is start creating your own rules.  You also do not need to alter the duration of the ability in question, since that is explicitly not what you're after for an effect.
 
Easiest (IMO):  based on how often the character needs to go through the setup/activation process for the ability, reduce the net Limitation for all of the activation process (e.g. Incantations, Gestures, Extra Time, etc.) based on how much the character is limited.  Use Conditional Power or Limited Power instead of the individual setup limitations.  The value for the Limited Power Limitation may be -0...or could be up to -1/2 or -1, depending on how Limiting it is to the character.  If it's something that the character needs to do when they wake up in the morning and then the ability/abilities are ready for the day, then it's likely just flavor and worth -0.  If it's something that the character needs to do within 5 minutes of using the ability and is time-prohibitive to perform in active combat, then you could be looking at up to a -1 depending on GM input.
 
Invoking some slightly tweaked rules from the supplements, you get another perfectly viable option:  Time Limit.  As with Differing Modifiers, OP is not understanding the intent of the Modifier here....in particular the implication of applying Time Limit on an Instant Power.  This has been established by Steve and is intended for precisely what has been described. My main hesitation with using this approach is that it increases the Active Cost of the ability without actually providing any Advantage to the ability itself (again, we're not looking to Advantage the ability, we're looking to lessen the Limitation(s)).
 
Others have proposed equally valid ways to approach it -- pick whatever works best for your taste/flavor....just try to avoid creating or altering core rules when there's no need to do so (and apparent lack of understanding/misunderstanding of the rules being modified).
 

Thank you for this example. With it I can give you my take on the power and what I feel you're looking for. But I freely admit that I may be wrongin my interpretation and/or it may not work for you.
 
You describe an Attack Power that you can prepare and then assign to a target in a manner close to the RAW effects of Constant. .
 
The preparations can be many things but they have one thing in common. They are Limitations on the Power and always will be because normally you don't have to do these things to use a Power. Gestures and Incantations have reduced value if they have to be used to maintain rather than just activate a Constant power and Extra Time is a lesser value if only required for the power's first use. So if you want to lessen the benefit of these Limitations , you don't need to reinvent the wheel, RAW has you mostly covered and you can modify it to fit the edges. But one thing that isn't true, none of those Limitations (except DoT clicking at every 6  hours or longer) let's you fire and forget. It takes an Advantage to do that.
 
As for the lasting effect of the power, there are several ways to do this. Continuing Charges  will work.  Time Limit(Advantage) + Constant is another solution. As is Damage over Time. But I don't think any of these precisely fits wat you are looking for and I interpret that in two parts.
 
One, you feel that the Limitations on the Power do too much to offset the cost of the Advantages. I think Duke Bushido covered that pretty well. I have only one thing to add, those Limitations don't affect the Active Points of the construct in question. We just had a discussion about Active Points in another thread.
 
Or two, and this is more speculative, you want some way limit ability of Constant Powers to affect multiple targets. For this I'd suggest a custom modifier to Constant (Technically it's a Custom Limitation that behaves like Constant except..) - Only one instance at a time. This will let you fire your Power at one target and later move it to another(1/2 Phase Action?) but not have one attacking each opponent you can afford the END for. 
 
Hope this helps. If I'm way off base give me another example and I'll try a different angle if I can or explain my reasoning if I can't.

I think this is the best approach. Honestly, it sounds like many applications of this general effect would fall into the realm of "I want to get Limitations for having to do preparations at a time of my choosing, when I'm completely safe and not pressed for time, and then use the power without the restrictions of those preparations whenever I decide I need it."
 
Which is totally fine, but also seems potentially close in spirit to "I want an invisible, desolid 'focus' that I can teleport to my hand."   There's nothing wrong with that either, but the answer is to just chalk it up to SFX and not take a CP break.
 
So in the end, I think you're probably looking at either no Limitation value  (just SFX) or maybe something like Only in Alternate ID or some application of Limited Power for -¼.

Maybe I am just obtuse, but I do not see why "time limit" is not the answer.
 
So Cosmic Energy Fist: +xd6 Hand Attack, Extra Time (full phase), Concentration, Incantations, Time Limit.
 
You take a phase to get ready, concentrating and muttering a prayer.
 
From 6e v1 p346, you now have a Cosmic Fist that will
 
until the time limit expires.
 
 
If you want it to stick around for an hour, Time Limit will be more expensive.  Once it reaches the point that the Time Limit and all those Limitations result in a real cost greater than leaving Time Limit and all those limitations off, you chalk it up to SFX and get rid of the advantage and limitations. Or you agree with your GM that having to do all that stuff in the morning and then have the power all day is a -1/4 limitation on the power.
 
Is there some specific mechanic that this does not provide which you are looking for?  Can you articulate it?

Maybe I am just obtuse, but I do not see why "time limit" is not the answer.
 
So Cosmic Energy Fist: +xd6 Hand Attack, Extra Time (full phase), Concentration, Incantations, Time Limit.
 
You take a phase to get ready, concentrating and muttering a prayer.
 
From 6e v1 p346, you now have a Cosmic Fist that will
 
until the time limit expires.
 
 
If you want it to stick around for an hour, Time Limit will be more expensive.  Once it reaches the point that the Time Limit and all those Limitations result in a real cost greater than leaving Time Limit and all those limitations off, you chalk it up to SFX and get rid of the advantage and limitations. Or you agree with your GM that having to do all that stuff in the morning and then have the power all day is a -1/4 limitation on the power.
 
Is there some specific mechanic that this does not provide which you are looking for?  Can you articulate it?

*Patience 

Actually, that sums it up rather well, Derek!