Hugh Neilson

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!

If so, it renders the rulebooks moot in their entirety as anything can be overridden by the GM.
 
 
DINGDINGDINGDING
 
A Naked AoE Radius, Selective lets you make a full OCV attack against many targets.  It also does not let you make half a dozen full DC attacks against a major opponent.
 
 
 
 

If so, it renders the rulebooks moot in their entirety as anything can be overridden by the GM.
 
 
DINGDINGDINGDING
 
A Naked AoE Radius, Selective lets you make a full OCV attack against many targets.  It also does not let you make half a dozen full DC attacks against a major opponent.
 
 
 
 

Buy a higher base OCV and apply a Limited Power Limitation Only to Offset Multiple Attack Penalties.  I know this sounds like it's bypassing the spirit of the rules (and maybe it is), but note that to get +6, as in the example above, it would be a base cost of 30, not 12. As a GM, I would probably only give the Limitation a value of -½. Being able to frequently use Multiple Attack without sacrificing accuracy is very useful (especially when combined with Rapid Attack). That makes the Real Cost of +6 to offset Multiple Attack penalties come out to 20 points instead of 12, and I think that seems about right.

So quote the RAW.  6e v1 p320 says
 
[quote]Accurate: For an additional +¼ Advantage, Accurate, a character can define an Area Of Effect (Radius) as automatically targeting only a single person, regardless of how many there are in the Radius. (Typically Accurate is only taken for 1m Radius powers.) This makes the attack work against DCV 3 without having the potential to affect multiple targets. The Range Modifier applies to Accurate attacks normally. Characters cannot Dodge or Block Accurate attacks, but can Dive For Cover to avoid them.[/quote]
 
This pretty clearly says Accurate can cover more than one meter radius to strike one target.  Nothing in the discussion of Megascale indicates that this is not an option.  A homing missile with a 100 km range could easily be an attack with Megascale AoE 100 km Radius, Accurate, No Range (the 100 km is always centered on point of firing), Focus, perhaps Charges, maybe Physical Manifestation (if you're quick, you can shoot the missile down).
 
Anything in the rules suggests it is legal, and I see nothing in the construct that is inherently abusive. Only hitting one target within a 100 km radius seems, if anything, a lot less potent than hitting every target in that same area.

Or we could try reading 6e v2 p 77
 
[quote]Unless the GM rules otherwise, characters cannot buy Combat Skill Levels specifically with Multiple Attack. They have to buy CSLs with the attacks they use to make a Multiple Attack, which they may apply when making the Multiple Attack with those attacks. However, if a Multiple Attack involves two or more different attacks (whether against a single target or multiple targets), a character may only use CSLs that could apply to any of the individual attacks involved.[/quote]
 
and 6e v1 p84
 
[quote]Nor can he buy OPSLs to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver (such as the -3 OCV for a Grab By), or to counteract the Unfamiliar Weapon penalty (6E2 51).[/quote]

Or we could try reading 6e v2 p 77
 
[quote]Unless the GM rules otherwise, characters cannot buy Combat Skill Levels specifically with Multiple Attack. They have to buy CSLs with the attacks they use to make a Multiple Attack, which they may apply when making the Multiple Attack with those attacks. However, if a Multiple Attack involves two or more different attacks (whether against a single target or multiple targets), a character may only use CSLs that could apply to any of the individual attacks involved.[/quote]
 
and 6e v1 p84
 
[quote]Nor can he buy OPSLs to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver (such as the -3 OCV for a Grab By), or to counteract the Unfamiliar Weapon penalty (6E2 51).[/quote]

Or we could try reading 6e v2 p 77
 
[quote]Unless the GM rules otherwise, characters cannot buy Combat Skill Levels specifically with Multiple Attack. They have to buy CSLs with the attacks they use to make a Multiple Attack, which they may apply when making the Multiple Attack with those attacks. However, if a Multiple Attack involves two or more different attacks (whether against a single target or multiple targets), a character may only use CSLs that could apply to any of the individual attacks involved.[/quote]
 
and 6e v1 p84
 
[quote]Nor can he buy OPSLs to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver (such as the -3 OCV for a Grab By), or to counteract the Unfamiliar Weapon penalty (6E2 51).[/quote]

Or we could try reading 6e v2 p 77
 
[quote]Unless the GM rules otherwise, characters cannot buy Combat Skill Levels specifically with Multiple Attack. They have to buy CSLs with the attacks they use to make a Multiple Attack, which they may apply when making the Multiple Attack with those attacks. However, if a Multiple Attack involves two or more different attacks (whether against a single target or multiple targets), a character may only use CSLs that could apply to any of the individual attacks involved.[/quote]
 
and 6e v1 p84
 
[quote]Nor can he buy OPSLs to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver (such as the -3 OCV for a Grab By), or to counteract the Unfamiliar Weapon penalty (6E2 51).[/quote]

Some years back, I built a Dr. Mid-nite homage (martial arts, blackout grenades with Darkness, Personal Immunity, continuing charges that covered all sight and maybe a few other senses (IIRC, perhaps radar and maybe sonar as a sound baffle).
 
Another player had built a Cat Person with targeting smell.  The blackout grenades did not confuse the sense of smell...  The characters were designed independently, and it took a few scenarios before we realized the accidental synergy.

No argument. We Canadians often criticize the flaws in our health system, and rightly so. But I can assure you that not one Canadian citizen hesitates to see a doctor for an illness or injury out of concern over paying for it. And practically no Canadians would trade our system for yours.

I draw a distinction between wearing the helmet and smoking for a few reasons.  One, you can't isolate the risk increase from smoking;  there are other factors.  Two, on this argument, should someone who eats poorly, doesn't exercise, etc. be denied coverage when the diabetes diagnosis is made?  That's a very tricky slope.  But not wearing a helmet while off-roading, or at any time on a motorcycle, or not wearing a seat belt in the car, have clear cause and effect.  Sure, I'd pay for the other injuries (one guy I used to work with, had one of his hands utterly mangled and largely useless from an off-road motorcycling accident) but as you say, damage to the head is excluded if wearing the helmet would have mitigated or prevented it.  Another example would be driving drunk.  
 
Now, ok, the point about the slippery slope with regard to lifestyle-related conditions might apply to vaccinations here.  And what do you do when the objection is based on religious belief rather than a "no one can tell ME what to do" attitude?  Another point is that some exclusions for these types of situations have been in policies...but in legalese.  And they've potentially been abused by the insurance companies to avoid paying out clains.
 
So a lot of this would be perfectly fine in an Ayn Rand universe.....

I was talking to a coworker years ago, who was upset because she was required to wear a helmet while four-wheeling.  Her argument was, "If I want to do something dangerous, that's my choice.  It's my life."  I said, "That's fine.  As long as you're okay with your insurance choosing not to pay for your closed-head injury and years of rehab if you're injured but not killed."
 
She countered with, "But I'm paying for that insurance.  So really, I'm paying for my own treatment."
 
I argued, "No, you're not, unless you've paid in a half million dollars or more.  I'm paying for your treatment.  And he is."  (point at one coworker)  "And she is."  (point at another)  "We'd all be paying for your choice."
 
Then she asked if I felt the same way about the possibility of her getting cancer because she smokes.  We won't even go into that pile of stupid.

What I wish our system allowed...if you refuse the vaccine, then develop Covid...your insurance is voided.  You pay for everything.
 
But that'll never happen.

I liked his working with a shrunken character who, if he was KOd, would fly away with him.
 
"Hey, how can I buy flight that only activates if I'm KOd to get me out of harm's way?"
 
"Ask the Dash !"

Selective removes a primary (IMO) advantage of AoE, that it ignores the target's DCV.  This is an area where more granularuty could be useful.  AoE combines multiple targets with ignoring DCV.  Non-selective requires you hit each target's DCV.  Is the value of targeting DCV 3 really only +1/4?  Yet Accurate is +1/2.
 
A better answer may be making Accurate a +1/2 advantage separate and apart from AoE. 
 
AoE without Accurate or Selective would grant the ability to attack all targets in the area, against their DCV.  A huge boulder rolls through the line area; it may miss some targets based on their DCV. 
 
AoE with Accurate, but not Selective is a wall of fire or ball of fire.
 
AoE with Selective allows the user to choose which targets are attacked.  Speedy runs around a radius taking a swing at each target, not swinging at allies or noncombatants (or the guy with a Damage Shield).
 
An Acurate Selective attack is very precise.  The floor is filled with electrical panels, allowing the fellow in the control room to AoE Surface anyone standing on the ground, selecting which ones he wishes be jolted.

The super speed villain known as "The Dash" was in the 'Great Supervillain Contest' along with few other villains, including the megavillain. I still use "The Dash". You can get a PDF of it in the Hero Game store, in 3rd edition Champions.

Of course, you can also go crazy with odd powers, and may be doing one on the fly anyway (maybe not if the character can't easily change powers on the fly).
 
"OK, x inches Teleport, Megascale, Usable as an Attack, AoE Radius, Selective, 1 Hex Accurate (so anyone I target is still DCV 3) - grab the team and Teleport x kilometers north."
 
followed by
 
"Actually, a random direction that he just thinks is north, since we just got here and he has no way of knowing which way is north"
 
was a wonderful in-game moment for a character with the psych lim "impatient, impetuous and impulsive". 
 
One splashdown in an alternative earth body of water later, as the team floated and discussed what to do next, "I can try it again" was not well received...but it DID end the standoff while everyone stood around not knowing what to do next

First off, I use Excel for most character builds, so I won't be a very helpful HD advisor.
 
With a 240 point VPP, 120 point control cost, the character has a lot of options.
 
In addition to a list of sample powers, I'd include scaling options - e.g. this attack power uses x points per DC, so the option of shaving a few damage dice off to make room for a utility power is easier to implement.
 
I'd also include some standard configurations of the full 240 points.  This is a typical build for a day with no expectations; this configuration is "stealth mode"; this is expected all-out combat mode; travel mode.  Which ones you'd have depends a lot on the character.
 
My wife had a character for a high-power game years back who had a cosmic "attacks only" VPP with an SFX limitation.  To facilitate switching on the fly, she had a chart of "This many points per d6 [5/10/15] with this total advantages [in +1/4 increments] equals this many dice.  A list of likely attack powers and advantages was also on that page.
 
At that time, there were no multiple attacks, so no expectation of two or more attacks used together, so the pool was intended for one attack at a time.  That made the chart a very effective tool, especially as she was pretty new to Hero at the time.

6Ev1 p127
 
AREA-AFFECTING CONSTANT POWERS
If a Constant Power affects an Area (either inherently or because the character purchases the Area Of Effect Advantage for it), the Power remains in effect in the Segments between the attacker’s Phases. Any target who enters the area takes damage or is affected in the Segment he enters and every time the attacker’s Phase occurs while the target remains within the area.

As far as I can tell, it works the same. An area-affecting constant power affects anyone who enters it when the enter it, and every one of the power owner's phases thereafter while they remain in it. A Damage shield using area of affect-surface affects anyone who touches it when they touch it, and every one of the power owner's phases thereafter while they remain in contact with it.

I mentioned this before...the "girl power" scene was set up like a comic book splash page. If that isn't in genre....I don't know what is. A similar scene occurs in the first Avengers movie and nobody complains about how "forced" that is.

I also saw it as "what do you mean, we don't have a diverse roster of strong female characters?", to which the answer is "how many lead a movie, compared to male characters?"

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

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