Hugh Neilson

Looking at each in turn, Summon is an Instant power.  Fire and forget.  The summoned creature can stick around or leave at its discretion (subject to the EGO roll contest).  The use of Summon only brings the creature to the character's location, so there is no ongoing maintenance required, the same as an Entangle or a Barrier.
 
Power durations are discussed at 6e Vol 1 p 127.  The discussion of Instant notes that these powers often have lingering effects after the power is used.  The damage inflicted by a blast, the entangle and, by extension, the Summoned entities don't vanish if the power itself vanishes.
 
Duplication is Persistent.  If you don't keep the points available, it stops working and the duplicates logically vanish.  That's an issue, though, as recombination normally requires a full phase and is done at no range. 
 
However, Duplication is a Special Power, which means that, by RAW, it cannot be placed in any power framework ("requires GM permission" to me is no different from "the GM can waive the rules").  The decision to allow a deviation from that rule comes with the need to assess how the power will work when included in a framework.  Maybe the points are "locked in" until the duplicates are recombined under the normal rules. 
 
Of course, the character has to spend a half phase to Duplicate (more, or have an advantage, to get more than one duplicate).  The duplicate needs the rest of that segment to orient itself.  Next phase, it could move away, but avoiding being at half DCV and using a full phase to recombine is a big benefit if they can just switch the MP points out, over and above recombining at range.  Perhaps one condition on GM permission to have this Special Power  in a framework is spending 10 points on the Easy Recombination added, and paying for the +1/2 Ranged Recombination advantage.  So a 60 point MP could have a 150 point Duplicate (30 base points) +10 Adder (Easy Recombination) = 40 x 1.5 (Ranged Recombination) = 60 points.  Remember that the duplicates also have to have the full Duplication power of the original "unless the GM permits otherwise".
 
Duplicating a 400 point character on this basis would cost 80 + 10 = 90 x 1.5 = 135, which would need a pretty big Multipower!
 
 

It was exactly because I felt the OP's description of the effect functionally precluded interactions with the full-size world that I thought of XD-Move (which, yes, is nothing more than a plot device with a point cost).
 
If there were still potential interaction some sort of adjustment power might make more sense, reducing movement and damage potential, perhaps, while as a side effect, making them harder to hit or even find.  But, I think the lower limit to that might be closer to action-figure sized, like the classics Dr. Cyclops and Land of the Giants.

I think its more presentation than content.  Nothing about 6th edition made Hero more complicated or difficult, it just made it more carefully detailed.  Losing figured characteristics made the math easier, and going from hexes to 2m areas is a push, because they're just hexes by another name.

Thank you everyone for the input.

After reading through all your posts, I decided I liked what I was hearing and decided to go ahead and purchase the 6th edition - if only to do my part to support the company.  Unfortunately, they are sold out of Book 1.  <sad trombone>  Guess it will have to wait...

Rogue presents an opportunity to cross the Avengers, through Ms. Marvel, over into the X-Men.
 
Which was basically Rogue's initial story arc in the comics.

I agree with you. It is IMO the most abusable modifier in HERO. But if used correctly, it does a excellent job with things like poisons or curses and also let's you write up many things that would be ludicrously expensive or pure plot device without it. 
 
The small increments are half the problem, the other is that it adds too many steps to the Time Chart so that effects that take place outside of typical combat times get too inexpensive. A one minute combat in HERO is an epic battle but outside combat it's barely time enough to compose your thoughts, much less figure a way to stop a deadly poison or a spell of demonic possession. GM vigilance and GM restraint are at a premium here. You can usually tell at a glance(Any power with +2 or more in Modifiers should be closely examined) but if the increments get into the 20 minute or more range on the ticks it can even become a Limitation.

I will suggest one problem is that many checks and balances rely on the people.  If a significant portion of the population would support Party X even if they ran on a platform that they will require all citizens to report to the capitol every Tuesday to have large rock dropped on their heads, then "the people" have abdicated their role in the process, and the process fails.  If the population is engaged and informed, the process becomes functional.
 
I wonder why so few governments support an educational process which develops critical thinking skills over parroting back a canned curriculum.

What's the purpose?  "The Heroes will battle the Evil Scientist; some may be shrunken and others not at the end of the battle"?  I suspect not.
 
"The Heroes will be shrunk to the scale of insects, forced to interact with a world suddenly far too large to even notice them while contending with challenges like hungry beetles, mice and birds, as they desperately seek a means to return to their normal size and stop the Mad Doctor carrying out his Evil Plans on a far grander scale against the unsuspecting world."  Seems more likely
 
For the latter, it's a plot device.  Re-scaling the PCs to battle at -20 STR, with 12 mm of running, 0-1 defenses and attacks that do 1-3 STUN seems a lot less satisfying (and a lot more work) than leaving their stats unchanged, analogizing objects at this scale to objects at their own scale (that sewing needle is now a Greatsword, that Ant is now a Giant Ant) etc.

If you use Damage over Time and Partial Transform this becomes a feature instead of a bug.

I once wrote up the holds-people-motionless option for an occultist villain who used various trinkets and talismans, with the Gestures Limitation indicating lighting the fingers:
 
Hand Of Glory: Entangle 2d6, 2MD, Alternate Combat Value (OMCV vs. DMCV; +1/4), Area Of Effect (8m Radius, Selective; +3/4), Takes No Damage From Attacks (+3/4), Works Against EGO, Not STR (+1/4); OAF (-1), Gestures (-1/4), Mental Defense Adds To EGO (-1/2), 1 Continuing Fuel Charge (1 Hour; -0)
 

As an up front note, I find rigid limits tend to create a "sameness" of build as they incent some approaches over others. Assessing synergies is pretty tough.
 
More tone than content, but "They WILL be used against you and will haunt you." sounds pretty adversarial.  To me, a -1/4 limitation will crop up on occasion but not often. The more challenging it is when it does crop up (Unified Power is very challenging), the less often it needs to crop up.
 
I like phrasing like "When you spend points, you are directing me to include challenges that those points will make it easier for you to overcome.  When you save points, you are directing me to include challenges that those points will make it tougher for you to overcome.  The more points, the greater the frequency and/or impact."  That means that you need to write scenarios that make those 20 points of skills just as useful as 20 points spent on, say, exotic defenses.  One reason many players don't like spending points on skills is that they see their combat abilities benefiting them in play, but the GM adjudicates non-combat challenges based on "role playing" (e.g. resolving social interaction based on the GM's arbitrary assessment of the player's social skills, rather than the points spent on the character's social skills; "where do you look for traps", etc.)  Should prudent play be awarded bonuses?  Sure.  If a description that great would merit +2 OCV or +1 DC in context of combat, it should merit a +2 bonus to the skill.
 
Overall, I'd also build a "max in all basic categories" character.  How many points do they have left over?  If I can spend half my points and be "campaign maximum" across the board, then expect everyone to be at "campaign maximum" across the board.  Hmmm...spend Campagn Max across the board, buy an exotic Targeting Sense and a No Range, broad coverage Darkness Field, or just be Invisible...
 
 
 So I can have a 12d6 Blast, or a Multipower of a dozen different 12 DC attacks.  Why would I not choose flexibility? You recognize this for the isolated case of the Brick, but not for anyone else.
 
 
How do things like Hardened, Damage Negation, Damage Reduction factor in?  What about limited defenses (my character is more resistant to fire)?  Ignoring point costs, may as well make 24 defenses resistant, and Harden them, so KAs cannot harm me.
 
And I can be invulnerable to exotic attacks, since there is no limit there.  With a 12DC standard, 25 Mental Defense and Power Defense seems like it should generally do the trick.  Maybe 30 just to be safe.  Probably some Flash Defense in there as well - do I just want to avoid blindness or should I avoid damage from AVADs as well?  Decisions, decisions.  I'd probably cap these at about half the PD/ED caps.
 
With 12 DCs and 25 defenses, I can expect an average attack to pass 17 STUN past my defenses.  If I choose a 30 ED and a 20 PD, I'll need a pretty high CON, or some way to avoid physical attacks.
 
 
So 5 AP is +1 OCV, +1 DCV or +1 Skill Level, and I can have 20 x 5 = 100?  Did I get that right?  This is the only one with a "per" definition instead of a flat amount (60, 50, etc.)
 
Define "within reason".  +6 PSLs against Range is a pretty effective DCV enhancer for a fast flyer, and I see no restrictions on movement.
 
Why would I take 10 OCV/10 DCV when I can instead choose 3 OCV/3 DCV and 14 CSLs for massively improved versatility?  Can my Mentalist have a 3 OCV, 17 DCV and 10 mOCV and mDCV?  One hex accurate AoE is also looking pretty good if I want a high DCV character (or want to trade points into other categories - a 12 OCV, 3 DCV and 25 more points into defenses, say).  And I may as well max out both DCV and Defenses, and OCV and Attacks, as there are no tradeoffs in there.
 
 
Again leaving point costs aside, why would I choose a 5 SPD?  I can have a 6 SPD and lose nothing else.  Why bother including this when it is static?  Everyone has 4 - 6 SPD, so there's no way to add to or subtract from that 50 points.
 
 
I've never liked paying to exceed the campaign limits.  Tradeoffs are a lot more palatable.
 
As I look at this, I finally realize the nomenclature issue.  Rename the "points".  Call them Campaign Limit Points (CLP) or Character Maxima Points (CMP).  Pick ANYTHING that does not have the same acronym as Active Points, Character points, Experience Points or Real Points.
 
Speaking of Experience Points, do my maximum CLP increase?  I count 260 for these characters (60 + 50 + 100 + 50)
 
 
60 STR and a huge multipower of 3 DC No Range Attacks is looking really good right about now.  That depends, of course, on where you are drawing the line.  A 75 STR and some Stretching, or very high movement, is looking pretty good as well.
 
 
Sounds like a good buy.  Defensive Strike is +1 OCV and +3 DCV.  That would cost me 20 for the CV bumps.  Do I read this correctly that the +x DC attacks are over and above the 12 DCs (15 DC if I am slow with no range) that I could start with?  No point buying the "extra DC" maneuvers otherwise, but moving my skill levels around to effectively suffer -3 DCV for a +4 DC Offensive Strike to hit 16 (19?) DCs seems like a pretty good tradeoff, especially if the typical enemy is sitting at 25 defenses and 20 - 30 CON.  That Slow Brick just cries out for Martial Grab!  Martial Block (especially with Deflection) would be great if I can move most of my skill level CVs into OCV - one phase lasts a lot longer at 4 SPD.
 
Toss in the UMA maneuvers, and this is a must-have for any HTH character.  And I really need to review Ranged Martial Arts as well!
 
ADDENDUM:  The challenge of balance in Hero is the dizzying array of options.  More variables increase the complexity of any "balance" geometrically.

any people say they can never be a lawyer because they simply cannot pass a bar.  A lawyer know points out that you only have to do it once.

Not Hero,  but I recall a game some time back where the players could define multiple traits of their character, like "big,burly dude", "ace archer" or "detective".  If you were the "detective", you made a normal roll for anything falling under that skill set. 
 
Unless someone else had a more specific trait.  Say, Shadowing.  In that case, the Shadowing character got a normal roll, and your detective took a penalty, in Shadowing a target.

Why would half the intestinal bacteria of those that remain disappear when 100% of the intestinal bacteria of those that were snapped went with them?

I've considered a variation of this. The base skill would remain unchanged. As a toolkit option, the GM could decide that characters using the skill would need additional Familiarities or face a penalty. For example, in a Pulp game, the Survival skill might work in all environments. In a gritty post-apocalyptic game, a character might need a KS for each climate type or face a -3 penalty. A superhero campaign would not need additional detail for Forensic Medicine, but a police procedural would.

The only 10 point skill I recall was Acrobatics, which came bundled with DCV bonuses.
 
The challenge is that the system covers multiple genres, and then branches in to subgenres.  What does Doctor Blake need in Champions?  PS: Medical Doctor should cover it.  But is that going to cover Dr. McCoy, Crusher and Bashir in Star Trek Hero?  It certainly isn't enough for a Hero game focused around medical issues - Pandemic Hero?  St. Elsewhere Hero?
 
To have a generic system, we need to account for levels of granularity.  We can do that in Hero, but we have no real guidance on various levels of granularity, much less on how to alter the system to suit the specific genre and game.
 
Looking back to Champions (skills are not the focus; use broad, non-granular skills) and Justice Inc./Danger International (skills are much more a focal point - break them down more), the system always accommodated this.  But when we  moved to 4e, the skills system became "one size for all genres". 
 
It didn't have to.
 
It could have said "where languages are a minor game issue, a simple Linguistics skill will do.  In games where they are highly relevant, the very granular Language Tree can be used.  Supers can get by with one Detective Work skill, where a police procedural game will need a more granular breakdown.
 
Maybe we need something even more granular and step-by-step for real "game focus" elements.  A Social Combat system for high court intrigue, a Medical Research and Treatment model for those tense dramas where the doctors work to identify, then treat, the ailment, or a Legal Combat system for courtroom dramas.  In some games, our very granular combat system could be reduced to "Brawling skill" - make an opposed check to determine who wins the fistfight.  Oh, you have a switchblade?  That's a +2 bonus.  Maybe our Medieval Royal Court Intrigue game features Brawling, Dueling, Swordplay and Archery.   Assassination or Poisoning could be in there as well.  If it's not a focal point, it does not need to be as granular.
 
But that works a lot better when the system is in the background, and we play games designed with the system, then when the main rules need to cover every possible permutation and combination for all possible genres, subgenres and specific games.

For the most part the game plays pretty much the same as it did in the older editions.  The biggest change is probably the stun multiplier for KA, which is a good thing.  It used to be that the single most powerful 60 point power was the 4d6 RKA.  With a good roll it could take down just about any character.  The second thing would be the new power damage negation which I also think is a good addition.  It allows you to basically pay to be able to ignore a certain amount of damage classes.  
 
The elimination of figured characteristics is also a good thing.   Sure it cost more but it leads to better characters.  Now there is less reason to buy up certain stats just to save points.  CON is the biggest example of this.  It used to be that everyone bought up CON as high as they could to save points on the figured stats.  STR was not quite as bad but it did lead to most characters being bricks or at least having brick like stats.  It does mean that stats cost more, but you get more points so it works out to be about the same.  The only exception is that purchasing the base stats just to get the figured stats no longer works.  So some characters who exploited the cost savings of the figured stats will be less powerful.
 
Advantages and limitations have changed a little.  In general there are more options to refine how you purchase things.  For example now the advantage for an area of effect is based on how large an area it covers.  This allows you to get more powerful attacks with a smaller area.  There are more options for having an attack that works against different defenses.  Now if the defense is the same level or rareness it does not cost anything.  
 
Disadvantages have been replaced by complications.  Complications don’t give you any points, but you are required to take a certain amount of complications.   The amount of complications you need is a lot less than the maximum disadvantages used to be.  For example a standard super hero is built on 400 points and has to have 75 points in complications.  I think this allows a GM to actually use the complications more than in the previous editions.  When you had half a page of disadvantages it was hard for the GM to really use them without seeming like he was picking on the character.  To me this is one of the best things about 6th edition.  
 
As I said if you have played Hero system before it will not be that different.  The game plays pretty much like it did in earlier editions.  The biggest difference will be in character creation.  Once the characters are created they actual play will be very similar to older editions.   In short I would highly recommend going to 6th edition.  
 

As is typically the case, I don't have much idea what you are meaning to do.  I can only read what you said.  You said your big issue was that allowing this kind of all-out attack with a bow is not realistic and you would not allow it.  That left open the questions of whether you acknowledged that:
 
 - this is a deliberate choice to depart from the rules as written, not an "interpretation of the rules" call;
 - your "realism" is cinematic; and
 - your "realism" even accords with reality (I didn't address that one as I am not an archery expert, although it seems reasonable that over-extending the bow to get more power would have negative consequences like reduced accuracy and/or limiting reaction speed so losing some DCV).  You also said "I only allow haymaker for melee weapons or fists", and I noted that I do not see how we assess real-world realism of projecting flame, sucking out a target's soul or overriding their neurons with a potent burst of pure mental energy.
 
TL;DR - you seem to have difficulty differentiating between objective realism (e.g. "violence causes long-lasting effects, a reality not consistent with repeatedly being knocked out by blunt force trauma causing no long-lasting in-game effects) and your own subjective interpretation of realism ("there is no possible valid in-game special effect for an all-out attack with a ranged weapon enhancing damage at the cost of evading counterattacks").
 
Oh, just to spare another poster on the thread some time, I know you told me so...in fact, I thought of that very exchange as I typed my initial comments further up.

The only 10 point skill I recall was Acrobatics, which came bundled with DCV bonuses.
 
The challenge is that the system covers multiple genres, and then branches in to subgenres.  What does Doctor Blake need in Champions?  PS: Medical Doctor should cover it.  But is that going to cover Dr. McCoy, Crusher and Bashir in Star Trek Hero?  It certainly isn't enough for a Hero game focused around medical issues - Pandemic Hero?  St. Elsewhere Hero?
 
To have a generic system, we need to account for levels of granularity.  We can do that in Hero, but we have no real guidance on various levels of granularity, much less on how to alter the system to suit the specific genre and game.
 
Looking back to Champions (skills are not the focus; use broad, non-granular skills) and Justice Inc./Danger International (skills are much more a focal point - break them down more), the system always accommodated this.  But when we  moved to 4e, the skills system became "one size for all genres". 
 
It didn't have to.
 
It could have said "where languages are a minor game issue, a simple Linguistics skill will do.  In games where they are highly relevant, the very granular Language Tree can be used.  Supers can get by with one Detective Work skill, where a police procedural game will need a more granular breakdown.
 
Maybe we need something even more granular and step-by-step for real "game focus" elements.  A Social Combat system for high court intrigue, a Medical Research and Treatment model for those tense dramas where the doctors work to identify, then treat, the ailment, or a Legal Combat system for courtroom dramas.  In some games, our very granular combat system could be reduced to "Brawling skill" - make an opposed check to determine who wins the fistfight.  Oh, you have a switchblade?  That's a +2 bonus.  Maybe our Medieval Royal Court Intrigue game features Brawling, Dueling, Swordplay and Archery.   Assassination or Poisoning could be in there as well.  If it's not a focal point, it does not need to be as granular.
 
But that works a lot better when the system is in the background, and we play games designed with the system, then when the main rules need to cover every possible permutation and combination for all possible genres, subgenres and specific games.

The only 10 point skill I recall was Acrobatics, which came bundled with DCV bonuses.
 
The challenge is that the system covers multiple genres, and then branches in to subgenres.  What does Doctor Blake need in Champions?  PS: Medical Doctor should cover it.  But is that going to cover Dr. McCoy, Crusher and Bashir in Star Trek Hero?  It certainly isn't enough for a Hero game focused around medical issues - Pandemic Hero?  St. Elsewhere Hero?
 
To have a generic system, we need to account for levels of granularity.  We can do that in Hero, but we have no real guidance on various levels of granularity, much less on how to alter the system to suit the specific genre and game.
 
Looking back to Champions (skills are not the focus; use broad, non-granular skills) and Justice Inc./Danger International (skills are much more a focal point - break them down more), the system always accommodated this.  But when we  moved to 4e, the skills system became "one size for all genres". 
 
It didn't have to.
 
It could have said "where languages are a minor game issue, a simple Linguistics skill will do.  In games where they are highly relevant, the very granular Language Tree can be used.  Supers can get by with one Detective Work skill, where a police procedural game will need a more granular breakdown.
 
Maybe we need something even more granular and step-by-step for real "game focus" elements.  A Social Combat system for high court intrigue, a Medical Research and Treatment model for those tense dramas where the doctors work to identify, then treat, the ailment, or a Legal Combat system for courtroom dramas.  In some games, our very granular combat system could be reduced to "Brawling skill" - make an opposed check to determine who wins the fistfight.  Oh, you have a switchblade?  That's a +2 bonus.  Maybe our Medieval Royal Court Intrigue game features Brawling, Dueling, Swordplay and Archery.   Assassination or Poisoning could be in there as well.  If it's not a focal point, it does not need to be as granular.
 
But that works a lot better when the system is in the background, and we play games designed with the system, then when the main rules need to cover every possible permutation and combination for all possible genres, subgenres and specific games.

I've always thought a millionaire HAD $1 million.  The problem is that we tend to conflate "income", which we tax, with "wealth".

If half of all humans cease to exist, don't they take half of the bacteria in human digestive systems with them?  And who in Far From Home had undertaken the detailed analysis of the Infinity Gauntlet to determine precisely how it worked?
 
 
Sadly, "I believe humans will learn from their mistakes" could make him the most insane villain in the history of both movies and comic books.

Whoops, sorry Hugh! 😁

1d6 Continuous AoE Stun Drain, 0 END, No Range, 1 Fuel Charge (how long can the candles burn continuously before they run out?), recovers immediately if candles snuffed.  Held by a 2 SPD individual, everyone within the radius who is asleep takes an average of 7 STUN per turn.  Light it up, wait a minute and they are not waking up while you rob the place.  The STUN comes back, and they are as asleep as they were before, when the candles are snuffed.

I've always thought a millionaire HAD $1 million.  The problem is that we tend to conflate "income", which we tax, with "wealth".