Hugh Neilson

I think you are drawing  false conclusions here. Your assumption is that if the price is right you should see a certain amount of an ability bought? Do most experience players build solely based on cost? There are several factors that people use in designing characters. Here’s 3 for you; Character Concept, Gaming group and Old Habits. With Character Concept people may not be buying Enhanced Sense because it just doesn’t make sense to them for their character to have it. Like Seeker having Ultra Sonic Hearing. Some people can resist the urge to buy things just because it’s good for a character mechanical wise but not concept wise. Gaming group, I’m not blaming any GM but if you adventures always happen during the day in fair weather, why should you as a player buy any enhanced senses? And lastly Old Habits, people tend to build by there habits no matter what rules change. One complaint of 6th official characters were that they were a cut and paste of 5th but didn’t seem to take advantage of any changes in 6th, notably the divorcing of Figured Characteristics.

It's also not great healing if it just seals up over something that definitely does not belong in there. 

And note that you can toss on limitations like 1/2 DCV and Full Phase (to activate).  This shaves off a great deal of points, altho it might be tougher to include in a multipower that's reasonable.  Even a 1/4 limitation on a 100 point power takes 20 off.

It is somewhat disappointing to see what was an entertaining series turned into just a prologue for the next cinematic event.  I guess that means they ARE  getting better at emulating the source material.

It is somewhat disappointing to see what was an entertaining series turned into just a prologue for the next cinematic event.  I guess that means they ARE  getting better at emulating the source material.

No.
 
 

And so we come full circle.
 
Emphasis added below
 
 
So the rules do not, anywhere, say whether Regeneration is an adjustment power, or is like an adjustment power in interacting with defensive powers, or even is just a variant of Healing which would be halved when applied to defensive powers.  Making that determination is in the province of the GM choosing to use the option of applying Regeneration more broadly, to reduced characteristics other than BOD.
 
You asked for commentary on how we might do this.  Some posters have suggested it could incorporate a halving of effect when applied to defensive abilities, which would imply it is already halved in its "recover BOD" form, since BOD is defensive. 
 
Are you now saying that there actually are real details that specify that regeneration would not be treated as an adjustment power if expanded beyond its sole purpose of recovering BOD in the core rules of the game?  Or are we still discussing a quick comment that one might add the option of regenerating other abilities than BOD, leaving each GM the task of assessing how this would be implemented, should they choose to do so?
 
I built Regeneration per Phase above and it came out to 18 points.  It's 16 for one per turn, by the book.  If we reduced the Reduced Re-Use and added Extra Time, what would happen?
 
1d6 Healing, BOD, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), Persistent (+1/4) is 22 AP.  Self Only (-1), Extra Time 1 Day (-4) makes it 4 points, the same price as Regen.
 
1d6 Healing, BOD, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), Persistent (+1/4), Re-use per turn (+1 1/2) is 37 AP.  Self Only (-1), Extra Time 1 Turn (-1 1/4) would only be 11 points, rather than the 16 by the books, though. 
 
But the range of 4 points for 1/day to 18 points for 1/phase is right.  The more I look at this, the more I am inclined to just build it as Persistent Healing, which (by the rules) IS Regeneration as you can't have Persistent healing, and must buy Regeneration (or, to the discussion above, REC) instead.

Multipowers are Frameworks placed in the game to save points on a build, not Powers. The size of a Multipower Reserve does not invalidate an Active Point Limit on Powers and Multipowers do not provide any savings if you want to run two Powers at full AP.  You can realize some savings if you use Variable slots and run one or more Powers at less than full strength but you can get that same savings or slightly less in other ways.
 
Consider these builds.
 
60- Multipower(60 point Reserve)
6u- 12d6 Blast
6u- 6d6, 6 BODY Entangle
6u- Telekinesis, 40 STR
 
60-Flight 40m, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2)  
60-Resistant Protection (20 PD/20 ED) 
 
This build costs 198 Points and no Power is greater than 60 Active Points. You can run the Flight and Resistant Protection at full power along with one of the Multipower Slots. Pretty standard PC/NPC fare here.
 
Now for another build.
 
135- Multipower(135 point Reserve)
 6u- 12d6 Blast
 6u- 6d6, 6 BODY Entangle
12v-Telekinesis, 40 STR
12v- Flight 40m, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2)
12v- Resistant Protection (20 PD/20 ED)
 
This has a cost of 183 Points so a savings of 15 total. If you make the Blast and Entangle with Variable Slots also you only save 3 points. But look what you've lost with that. Yes, you could Multipower Attack with  any two of the Attack Powers at full strength(and 1/4 of the third too) but you do so at the opportunity cost of your movement and defenses. This PC/NPC will most likely use an Attack Power, Resistant Protection and 1/4 of their Flight each round. If that 15 point savings is too much for you campaign, so be it, but IMO the second build does not break the game. I can easily tack Unified Power onto the first build and save 36 points, making it less than the second build.

Marion G. Harmon's Wearing the Cape series has a metamorphic tank.  HTH type, the usual Str, Con, defenses.  The metamorphing part is options like claws, adding more Dex, Spd, and possibly ground movement, buffing Str and defenses, etc.  You can do quite a bit with a 40-50 point multipower with no slot over 20.
 
A step further is a VPP where the control cost is 30, say, and the pool size is 60...with Requires a Skill Roll, it'd be 90 active.  So a trio of 30 pointers, or a nice balance of +10 STR, +5 DEX, +5 CON, +2 OCV and DCV, +2 SPD, and boosts to REC and END.  Or whatever.  
 
I think DCs are more important to keep contained than AP.  Sometimes APs just blow up.  Summon (with a high Amicable advantage especially).  Duplication.  Multiform.  Desolid with selective desolid.  OK, should  a character sheet with anything this big, draw some extra scrutiny?  Probably, yeah. So?  Any character sheet should be carefully sanity-checked on a few levels.

Starting from the end, agreed that these are powers which must be carefully vetted for appropriate campaign use.  No, you cannot have a 450-point Super who spends 400 points on a Multiform to change into a 2,000 point character. and another 25 to have 32 choices of 2,000 point characters.
 
Could you have a Wizard spell in a Multipower that allows a 200 point Fantasy Hero character to take on the form of a 500 point Dragon?  Maybe.  Let's see the limitations on the spell.
 
Multiform - highest points must be the base form?  All that means is that Bruce Banner has to spend points on a 200 INT, every science in the book and massive skill levels.  It's not hard to spend points.
 
Summon - which was created for Fantasy Hero initially - so the Demonologist can never summon a demon more powerful than himself?  That takes out a lot of Fantasy tropes.
 
Review it carefully because it is a Stop Sign, but don't remove options, especially valid options.
 
 
At some point in the 6e SETAC days, I mentioned something about active points and Steve Long indicated that AP is not intended to be capped.  That's an issue to me for frameworks, but OK.  People get too hung up on "Character Guidelines" and treat them as "character maxima".  From 6e v1 p 35, "Some Characteristics tend to be on the higher end of (or even outside) the range" defines "the typical range" used in the note for every item in those guidelines.  None of them are intended as a cap, and my personal view is that AP is the least useful to cap.  Powers with no limitations can be a lot more useful than powers with higher AP and significant limitations.
 
 
This comes down to GM oversight and player reasonableness.  No, you don't get to use Multiform to build a character several orders of magnitude more powerful than the others in the campaign.  You also don't get a laser pistol, force field belt and jet pack in Fantasy Hero.  Build to the game parameters.
 
 
So what?  You can have a 120 point multipower pool with a dozen 60 AP slots and a 120 point Multifporm if you want.  Variable slots provide way more choice.  There is no requirement that every slot be capable of using the entire pool, and many cases where they should not.

You're not missing anything, exactly; it's just that the +¾ level of Takes No Damage From Attacks is unique to Mental Paralysis Entangles only, which is why it isn't listed as an option along with the +¼, +½, and +1 versions.  It's a special case.
 
It doesn't follow either of the rules of the +1 level of TNDFA. It follows the rules described on 6e1 p217 under Mental Paralysis.

Starting from the end, agreed that these are powers which must be carefully vetted for appropriate campaign use.  No, you cannot have a 450-point Super who spends 400 points on a Multiform to change into a 2,000 point character. and another 25 to have 32 choices of 2,000 point characters.
 
Could you have a Wizard spell in a Multipower that allows a 200 point Fantasy Hero character to take on the form of a 500 point Dragon?  Maybe.  Let's see the limitations on the spell.
 
Multiform - highest points must be the base form?  All that means is that Bruce Banner has to spend points on a 200 INT, every science in the book and massive skill levels.  It's not hard to spend points.
 
Summon - which was created for Fantasy Hero initially - so the Demonologist can never summon a demon more powerful than himself?  That takes out a lot of Fantasy tropes.
 
Review it carefully because it is a Stop Sign, but don't remove options, especially valid options.
 
 
At some point in the 6e SETAC days, I mentioned something about active points and Steve Long indicated that AP is not intended to be capped.  That's an issue to me for frameworks, but OK.  People get too hung up on "Character Guidelines" and treat them as "character maxima".  From 6e v1 p 35, "Some Characteristics tend to be on the higher end of (or even outside) the range" defines "the typical range" used in the note for every item in those guidelines.  None of them are intended as a cap, and my personal view is that AP is the least useful to cap.  Powers with no limitations can be a lot more useful than powers with higher AP and significant limitations.
 
 
This comes down to GM oversight and player reasonableness.  No, you don't get to use Multiform to build a character several orders of magnitude more powerful than the others in the campaign.  You also don't get a laser pistol, force field belt and jet pack in Fantasy Hero.  Build to the game parameters.
 
 
So what?  You can have a 120 point multipower pool with a dozen 60 AP slots and a 120 point Multifporm if you want.  Variable slots provide way more choice.  There is no requirement that every slot be capable of using the entire pool, and many cases where they should not.

Those of us who are patient and will watch it later, in a less expensive format, are a target market for:
 
 - the discount theatres running blockbusters only after they run their course in the larger theatres;
 - lower-cost streaming options which will have the movie after it has run its "must see it opening night/week" course; and
 - lower-cost DVD options once the "must own it on release day" crowd has paid a premium price.
 
If it never makes it to those formats, we'll watch something else.
 
Economics tells us "charge what the market will bear".  Reducing the price for later viewing because the business can still make some more bucks after those prepared to pay a premium price for earlier viewing is good business sense.
 
Even if you have a family of four, you can watch something else today and stream Black Widow in 6 - 9 months at a lower cost, eating home-popped popcorn on both occasions.
 
My wife and son want to go see it next week (on the 2-week anniversary of vaccine dose #2) in the nearby theatre which was within a month of opening when the pandemic closed everything down.  That theatre intends to run some screenings of its movies with social distancing.  It will be interesting to see which model, if either, commands a premium price.  We streamed WW II on Boxing Day (we traditionally go to the movies on Boxing Day).  I doubt the movie cost was markedly different from three moviegoers at the theatre, but the popcorn and beverages were a lot cheaper, and pausing for a restroom break was an option.  Come to think of it, parking and getting back home after the movie were also a lot easier...although this theatre is in walking distance, and a nice walk in July would be nice.

You seem to approach this from the starting point that the purpose of Aid is to provide a constant enhancement for multiple characters’ abilities.  I disagree, for two reasons, and I submit that it’s primary purpose is to provide a short-term boost, not a long-term to permanent enhancement.


 
First, Aid was not in Champions initially, and was never added.  It first appeared in Fantasy Hero, which I credit to a desire to add enhancement spells like D&D’s Strength – short term, one target. 


 
Next, it folded into the system rules commencing in 4e, where it caused significant issues, in part because it was blended with Healing.  Imagine 1d6 Aid, All Stats below starting maximum, Self Only, Only to Starting Levels, Constant (taken for a high metabolism speedster).  Sounds pretty innocuous until applied to recover an average of 3.5 STUN and 7 END every phase by a 6 SPD character.  Even if he is at -45 STUN.


 
5e curtailed that. Steve looked at it pretty close for 6e, with part of the analysis being the theory that self only, 0 END Aid should cost less than just buying the stat up since it required actions.  


 
So now, we ended up with 2d6 Aid, 0 END, Self Only that cost 9 points, required 2 phases and added 12 CP  Tack on Constant and it’s the same 12 points that buying the stat would cost, although it’s halved for defensive abilities, so still not dead on.


 
But that's really just a baseline, as it  is not, in my view, the intended use of Aid (or, put another way, its purpose in the toolkit).  Let’s look at that another way.  I want a magic Belt of Giant Strength that adds +15 to my STR.  Will you suggest:


 
(a)   +15 STR (15 AP), OIF Belt (-1/2), 10 points; or

 

(b)   2.5d6 Aid STR, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2) (30 AP), OIF belt (-1/2), Self Only (-1), 12 points?


 
Points aside, I am thinking that, if you want to always have +15 STR, you buy +15 STR, not an Aid Power.

 
I am going to speculate, as he does not write designer notes, that Steve removed the Increased Maximum from Aid, at least in part, because it was an orphan mechanic within the system.  Logically, it should also have been available for Drain, and Transfer, and anything else that caps in similar fashion.
 
So where are we now?


 
Well, if I want to add 30 STR to my entire team, I could buy +30 STR, Usable by up to eight Others (+1), must be within Reach to grant the powers (+0) for 60 points.  This simply takes my "I want more STR at all times so I buy extra STR"

concept to "I want my teammates and I to have +30 STR all the time".
 
To Aid 30 points, I need 5d6 Aid, probably AoE (+1/4) to get all in reach, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), for 67 points.


 
Pretty comparable.  The Aid is unlimited in the scope of how many I could add STR to.  I could get super-cheesy with either one and slap on a ton of limitations since I expect to apply the effect out of combat.  This seems to be working.

 
So what does your +1 “increased maximum” add to the game?


 
Well, the Aid becomes 2.5d6 Aid, probably AoE (+1/4) to get all in reach, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), Double Maximum (+1) for 49 points.  If you give me “takes a turn to reach full addition” for that UBO at -1/4, it costs 54 points, so still pretty comparable.  At -1/2, it’s 45 points.  No way is it more limiting than that.


 
So I can already build your “long term multi-target powerup” without Aid at all, much less increased maximum.  Why do I need increased maximum in the game?



But we kept Increased Maximum for Absorption.  Why?  Probably because Absorption is a very different power.  No dice, just 1 CP per 1 BOD in the attack.  So what is that?  Well, I guess it’s a limited form of Aid.  It’s 0 END (+1/2), Constant* (+1/2),  Self Only (-1), increase limited to BOD of physical or energy attack that strikes him.  It costs 3 CP per die (thanks to Standard Effect), so that “limited by physical or energy attacks” must be a -2 limitation.  It's a lot tougher to take advantage of that Increased Maximum, which is another reason maintaining it is less of a big deal.


 
* Arguably it’s Triggered by being hit by an appropriate attack, and Limited to the BOD of that attack, so even more complex to build.


If we really want to take a radical approach, maybe with UbO, we did not need Aid at all.  It's just a limited form of UbO.  But that's like trying to make Regeneration a limited form of Healing, and we know how well that worked out!

You seem to approach this from the starting point that the purpose of Aid is to provide a constant enhancement for multiple characters’ abilities.  I disagree, for two reasons, and I submit that it’s primary purpose is to provide a short-term boost, not a long-term to permanent enhancement.


 
First, Aid was not in Champions initially, and was never added.  It first appeared in Fantasy Hero, which I credit to a desire to add enhancement spells like D&D’s Strength – short term, one target. 


 
Next, it folded into the system rules commencing in 4e, where it caused significant issues, in part because it was blended with Healing.  Imagine 1d6 Aid, All Stats below starting maximum, Self Only, Only to Starting Levels, Constant (taken for a high metabolism speedster).  Sounds pretty innocuous until applied to recover an average of 3.5 STUN and 7 END every phase by a 6 SPD character.  Even if he is at -45 STUN.


 
5e curtailed that. Steve looked at it pretty close for 6e, with part of the analysis being the theory that self only, 0 END Aid should cost less than just buying the stat up since it required actions.  


 
So now, we ended up with 2d6 Aid, 0 END, Self Only that cost 9 points, required 2 phases and added 12 CP  Tack on Constant and it’s the same 12 points that buying the stat would cost, although it’s halved for defensive abilities, so still not dead on.


 
But that's really just a baseline, as it  is not, in my view, the intended use of Aid (or, put another way, its purpose in the toolkit).  Let’s look at that another way.  I want a magic Belt of Giant Strength that adds +15 to my STR.  Will you suggest:


 
(a)   +15 STR (15 AP), OIF Belt (-1/2), 10 points; or

 

(b)   2.5d6 Aid STR, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2) (30 AP), OIF belt (-1/2), Self Only (-1), 12 points?


 
Points aside, I am thinking that, if you want to always have +15 STR, you buy +15 STR, not an Aid Power.

 
I am going to speculate, as he does not write designer notes, that Steve removed the Increased Maximum from Aid, at least in part, because it was an orphan mechanic within the system.  Logically, it should also have been available for Drain, and Transfer, and anything else that caps in similar fashion.
 
So where are we now?


 
Well, if I want to add 30 STR to my entire team, I could buy +30 STR, Usable by up to eight Others (+1), must be within Reach to grant the powers (+0) for 60 points.  This simply takes my "I want more STR at all times so I buy extra STR"

concept to "I want my teammates and I to have +30 STR all the time".
 
To Aid 30 points, I need 5d6 Aid, probably AoE (+1/4) to get all in reach, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), for 67 points.


 
Pretty comparable.  The Aid is unlimited in the scope of how many I could add STR to.  I could get super-cheesy with either one and slap on a ton of limitations since I expect to apply the effect out of combat.  This seems to be working.

 
So what does your +1 “increased maximum” add to the game?


 
Well, the Aid becomes 2.5d6 Aid, probably AoE (+1/4) to get all in reach, 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), Double Maximum (+1) for 49 points.  If you give me “takes a turn to reach full addition” for that UBO at -1/4, it costs 54 points, so still pretty comparable.  At -1/2, it’s 45 points.  No way is it more limiting than that.


 
So I can already build your “long term multi-target powerup” without Aid at all, much less increased maximum.  Why do I need increased maximum in the game?



But we kept Increased Maximum for Absorption.  Why?  Probably because Absorption is a very different power.  No dice, just 1 CP per 1 BOD in the attack.  So what is that?  Well, I guess it’s a limited form of Aid.  It’s 0 END (+1/2), Constant* (+1/2),  Self Only (-1), increase limited to BOD of physical or energy attack that strikes him.  It costs 3 CP per die (thanks to Standard Effect), so that “limited by physical or energy attacks” must be a -2 limitation.  It's a lot tougher to take advantage of that Increased Maximum, which is another reason maintaining it is less of a big deal.


 
* Arguably it’s Triggered by being hit by an appropriate attack, and Limited to the BOD of that attack, so even more complex to build.


If we really want to take a radical approach, maybe with UbO, we did not need Aid at all.  It's just a limited form of UbO.  But that's like trying to make Regeneration a limited form of Healing, and we know how well that worked out!

It's there today - wonder what happened the other day.  Anyway, resolved - thanks.

Or simple application of common and dramatic sense.  How often will being able to lift a football, rather than an aspirin, be highly game-relevant?

Let’s start with the reality that this is an odd concept to begin with.  It doesn’t do very  much, so either we’re building a kludgy Shrinking or TK concept, or we’re using a kludgy power like CE or Transform.
 
The main benefit of 1 level of Shrinking is +2 DCV (10 points), and it tacks on a PER roll penalty.  As this Shrinking does not enhance DCV, it seems extremely limited.  It’s not reducing PER rolls either.  But, of course, I may not want a UAA power to benefit the target.  It’s not changing Reach either.  Mechanically, all it really does is boost Knockback.
 
TK is similar – all it does is make it easier for others to move the object, so very limited.
 
Feels like a minor effect like this is a Change Environment with a single target that reduces mass, and with it reduces Knockback Resistance.  Reducing knockback resistance sounds no more powerful than reducing movement, so 1 m per 1 point seems pretty reasonable.  That's actually the same price as shrinking, and the main negative effect, so if I'm imposing it on someone else, it seems a reasonable starting point.
 
[EDITED TO CORRECT KB TO MASS RATIOS] Every 6 points changes mass by a factor of eight, consistent with Growth and Shrinking, basically a special effect.  That means 2 meters change to KB = doubling or halving of weight/mass
 
10 AP is -10 meters KB resistance and 1/32 mass.  16 AP is 1/256 mass.  20 AP is 1/2,048 mass.  Bump it up to 60, and we have reduced mass to about 1/1 billion of the starting point.
 
Frankly, that’s still pretty expensive for an ability unlikely to have much impact in-game, but 60 AP to make a jumbo jet blow away in the breeze at least seems impressive!  We drop a typical character from 100 kg to less than 1/10 of a milligram.
 
Transform adds 10 CP worth of complications at the Minor level, or 20 at Major.  10 points is light, so Major seems like the approach for Transform.  The drawback is that 4d6 Transform may require multiple hits on larger (high BOD) targets, but the target will stay low-mass without further END costs.  We could make a Partial Effect Transform to reduce mass a bit with each hit.
 
The bottom line is, whatever approach one takes, it is a pretty expensive power to only make inanimate objects weigh less.
 
Riffing from the OP suggestion:
 
Shunt Gravity:  Major Transform 4 1/2d6 (Transform Object/Person Into Lighter Weight Version Of Object/Person, 0.00390625/1/256 Weight, +10m KB Modifier Only Increases The Distance A Character/Object Travels From Knockback, Not The Damage Taken Character/Object Takes. , Default Of REC 4 For Objects) (45 Active Points); Rapid Healing REC per Hour (-1)
Real Cost 22
 
Feels like that should be +16 m KB (based on 2 m per halving, extrapolated from Growth and Shrinking).  As for Hero Designer, just make a custom limitation if you want faster recovery.  6e v1 p 308 says +and so on” after “per 1 hour”.
 
This seems perfectly workable.  I’d say make the mass 1/512 (or one halving per 5 AP in the Transform).  Or make it Partial Effect and set the reduction at 1/2 for each BOD (Growth adds 3 BOD for every 8x mass).

As my intro economics prof many years back was fond of pointing out, in economics the real world is often a special case.  Economic theory assumes no power imbalance.  For example, so many employers, all small, that each individual has full bargaining power, and no barriers to entry like huge capital investment requirements.
 
No regulations?  So, no protection for unions, then.  Management can send in the strikebreakers, right?  You want to work, you work for the wages offered, not some government-mandated minimum wage.  You don't like that all employers in the region got together to set the wage they'll pay?  Tough.  Market forces will prevail - someone else will start a business that pays more and wipe out the current employers, right?  And we can employ 8-year olds in the textiles plant, of course. 
 
"St. Peter, don't you call me 'cause I can't go.  I owe my soul to the company store."
 
No government funding for those who can't, won't or don't work.  Market forces dictate we let the excess labour force starve.  That's what puts economic power back in check.  When the Black Plague killed off a huge portion of the European labour force, employers had to offer better deals to attract the remaining workers.  Supply and demand above all!
 
The big grocery store chain can keep its eye on any competitors opening, and drop their prices at locations in that area.  Their price-gouging locations outside that shopping area can fund them long enough to squeeze out that upstart competitor, and then they can raise prices back up to where they were. 
 
Oh, and you can't regulate product either.  Stop squelching those young entrepreneurs marketing their cannabis, cocaine and heroin!  The market will dictate what does, and does not, sell.

buy the last point of END in the reserve with Side Effects!

To the last, first.  If ViperNinja wants to keep up the deception, he has to be hit as easily as any other VIPER agent.  He can always choose to lower his 10 DCV to 5, and match the VIPER agent.  He has to lower it to negative five to be as easy a target as the VIPER agent in that Multiple Attack.  How does he do that?  What causes Captain Mookbasher to have so much more difficulty hitting ViperNinja as part of a multiple attack, only as part of a multiple attack, and does not make it any harder for anyone else to target ViperNinja?
 
Back to the first, the question to me is the accuracy of the emulation.  Those HYDRA agents have a low DCV, so Cap can use his high OCV to confidently launch an MPA.  They have poor OCVs compared to Cap's high base DCV, so he can plow all of his skill levels into OCV to target a larger number with an MPA and still be confident he can avoid most of their attacks.  They have low DCs, so if a lucky shot or two gets through, Cap's superior defenses and STUN/BOD can protect him.  Their defenses are poor, and their STUN (BOD for the robots) is pretty low, so base damage, not augmented by skill levels (or the lower damage of an AoE attack) can, if not KO them, STUN them.  Combine that with Cap's Speed advantage, and he mows through those mooks.
 
But when he comes up against a more worthy opponent:
 
 - he needs to put levels back into DCV, so he can't pump his OCV to the same levels he can against the mooks;
 - his opponent has a higher DCV, so he can't suck up a bunch of -2 penalties without seriously compromising his chances of hitting with even the first attack;
 - his opponent does much higher damage, so a hit is much mores significant, and Cap has to direct some of those skill levels to DCV (and cannot afford to take the 1/2 DCV penalty of a Multiple Attack either)
 - his opponent has much higher defenses and STUN/BOD, so he can't use lower-DC options as effectively as he could before; and
 - he no longer has the advantage of a significantly higher SPD.
 
The Supers can plow through mooks easily provided mooks are built to be mooks and Supers are constructed as Supers.  There are lots of ways to hit multiple weaker targets.  Multiple Attack is one.  Spreading the attack (lower DCs in exchange for hitting multiple targets) is another.  Area Effect builds are a good construct if you want a MookBuster attack (fits great in a Multipower).
 
Abilities that "only work against mooks" (however we define "mooks") aren't needed.  And, once we have them, what limitation will you give me for abilities that are "not vs mooks"?  OverconfidenceMan slacks off against mooks.  He only brings his full power to bear against truly worthy foes.  So when his MultiBlast hits four mooks and the disguised ViperNinja, it does 8d6 damage against the mooks and 15d6 to ViperNinja. 
 
That's equally acceptable, right?  Heroes like Spider-Man go toe to toe with the Hulk in one issue, then struggle against the Kingpin in the next.

So, by leveraging the players' presumed homophobia?
 
....
 
OK, keeping my nerd hat on, and not trying to peel that onion, I'll move on to amature RPG design theory, and ask, why would seduction - or any other PRE skill - go to live-action resolution?  If you don't want the player fighting a certain DNPC, do you pull out the rattan & duct tape?  
 
It seems dreadfully common, even in comparatively complete systems, like Hero, to just toss the resolution mechanics when it comes to social scenes.  It's always bothered me.
 

I'm not sure what the SFX are for "only works when it doesn't matter much".  We are battling 50 VIPER agents (or so we think) when Captain Mookbasher tosses his mighty shield, applying his +10 PSLs to reduce multiple attack penalties so he can hit 6 agents without penalty.  Unknown to Cap, however, there are five VIPER supervilains in this group, working undercover to trick the heroes, and his third target is one of them.
 
Do his first two attacks take penalties?  They are against minions (at least I assume VIPER agents are minions, and a VIPER Super is not, as we have not defined that term - do villains become minions when they work for a master villain, and lose minion status when they go back to working on their own?).  But the third attack clearly does not get the PSLs.  Cap rolls a 4, but misses.  So much for ViperNinja's 27- Disguise skill and his roll of 5, since it's now pretty clear he's not an ordinary VIPER agent.
 
What SFX make Cap less accurate when the target is not a mook?  The Super has a better DCV, but he already gets his DCV - Cap is 10 OCV less accurate for no reason I can see.
 
From the M&M description, "If you render a minion incapacitated with an attack," - this construct allows attacking minions at no penalty without any need to incapacitate each one in the series, so the ability isn't really duplicated anyway.

Many prostitutes are essentially enslaved (they cannot leave their pimp or madame, they receive little pay for what they do -- some slaves did get a stipend -- they are compelled to undertake labor, they are treated as property, etc).  It is actually legal in the US Constitution to enslave people while in prison, forcing labor out of them for no pay (breaking rocks down at the penitentiary).  Slavery is more common and present today than most people realize.
 
It was almost ubiquitous in the past, in nearly every culture through human history.  Back when you had to draw water from the river, chop wood to build a fire, start a fire with two rocks, so you could smelt ore to make a pot to boil the water and cook some food, labor saving devices = slaves.
 
I wrote about the way slavery works in my Field Guide, because most modern players (especially younger ones) don't really understand slavery or its history, so a clear statement on it was needed, I felt.  Enslaving people who have done terrible things to force them to work off their debt to society is one thing, indenturing people to do free work in exchange for learning a trade is another, taking prisoners from a conquered nation to work as slaves yet another, and just raiding another people to make them slaves yet another kind.  Each has its own moral character and significance which just condemning slavery entirely whole cloth does not adequately address.
 
This is probably a bit deeper than most players want to get into the concept, but GMs who are doing worldbuilding need to consider this kind of thing.
 
And let's face it, freeing slaves from bad guys is a really great adventure concept.

Oh, I thought this was a reference to the GM shackled to game preparations, completely unappreciated by players who consider it appropriate to enslave the GM in this manner.
 
Carry on!