Hugh Neilson

VSE sounds fairly priced.
 
Regen also can't regenerate things other than BOD, so we're already past "without GM permission" and into "special GM customization".

In this case, tho, saving those points only applies to the base form...and what else is the base form spending points on?  He's said 450 point alternates...so the base is also 450 if you want it to go that high.  130 isn't a problem.   
 
I've goofed around with the occasional multiform, and if the base form isn't combat-capable?  MAN, you've got a lot of points to spend!  

Stronghold was the start of Hero's "every module should bring something of lasting use, outside the adventure" model.  It was definitely more setting than adventure, with any escape scenario being more plot seed than actual adventure.  Of course, we called them "modules" back in those days (and yes, using that phrase makes me feel old), and either the Island Adventure or the SuperPrison could be slotted into an ongoing campaign.

I found Quantumania, in particular, to be very comic-booky. The ensemble cast (Hank, Janet, Hope, Cassie and Scott) all had relevant parts to play, they interacted with the setting (motivating the natives to join the fight) and the villain (a major character on his own). In prior Ant-Man movies, Hank and Hope were significant players, as was at least one of Scott's prison buddies. The characters don't live in a vacuum.
 
America was clearly a major player in MoM.  I wonder if an equally important role for Clea would have drawn as much ire, or been overlooked since she is already a big part of the lore.  No one griped about Wong, Mordo or the Ancient One having big roles in the first movie.  No one complained that the third Avengers movie was more about Thanos than the Avengers either - villains are allowed to be a major focus, but not other heroes (or supporting cast?).
 
I wonder if the issues of "other characters got focused attention" would have been as big a deal if Marvel had just removed "Ant-Man" and "Dr. Strange" from the movie titles.
 
I think what we are really seeing is that the growth of the MCU is making for a lot of different projects with different themes and different feels, as well as struggling with 21st century inclusivity issues - both very much like their source material.  One difference is that few of us would consume the entire Marvel publishing line every month, but 3 movies and half a dozen TV miniseries a year is a much smaller commitment.  Another is that, with fewer offerings, a lack of diversity/inclusivity in a single offering (or leaving a couple of characters out of this movie) feels like a much bigger gap.

Stronghold was the start of Hero's "every module should bring something of lasting use, outside the adventure" model.  It was definitely more setting than adventure, with any escape scenario being more plot seed than actual adventure.  Of course, we called them "modules" back in those days (and yes, using that phrase makes me feel old), and either the Island Adventure or the SuperPrison could be slotted into an ongoing campaign.

In other words, edging into those maximum SPD and running values values reflects someone with rare genetic gifts related to sprinting engaging in intensive training to make the most of them - sounds a lot like an Olympic-level sprinter to me.
 
 
My first thought as well, but he's running less than a turn, so it could prevent multiple world-class times in rapid succession, but not a single sprint.

6e V2 P 37
 

So first subtract 2, then halve the remainder.
 

I think his staying power is that nostalgia that he was the villain in the very first Hero Module.  [Wasn't Stronghold 1e? Pretty sure Deathstroke was 2e.  The editions weren't overly different.]  Adventures in the mid-1980's were not as developed as they evolved into. The personality and backstory was typically the GM's job, not the module's job.

As CRT notes, that was a 5e experiment that was reversed in 6e.
 
 
BOD is likely reduced more often. STUN and END get reduced even more often than that, so gut feel, setting the same price feels excessive for other stats.
 
That could be fixed with the later edition Adjustment Power halving for defensive powers. Regen for DEX, STR, etc. would get 2 CP per time increment, unlike BOD (which costs 1 CP in 6e).  This would still be very pricy to regenerate all reduced characteristics.  It could be a bit cheaper if constructed as a Multipower - only one stat recovers at a time (multiple drains requiring the body to multitask).
 
 
All characteristics don't cost the same in 6e, but variable costs are no harder to work around than it is in any edition.

When the rules get in the way of the fun, change the rules.  The easiest approach feels like either allowing Continuous on Healing (the reduced re-use time cost will still keep the recovery rate down).
 
Alternatively, what about a "time delay" limitation on Power Defense? It doesn't take Extra Time to activate, just Extra Time to reduce the Adjustment taken. That relies on the attack applying against Power Defense, though.
 
If it were my game, I'd look for a way to keep the cost down, even if it's handwavy, as I don't think this would come up all that often.  If these effects could be avoided entirely with 25 points of power defense, recovering faster should cost less than the 25 point cost of full immunity.

If we dig into the history, 1e had only Regeneration - no Healing.  By 2e, Hero made a fantasy game - that needed a Healing power, and an Aid power (neither of which were in Supers yet). It stayed that way, I think, in 3e.
 
4e combined everything. Aid also healed, unless you limited it to only Healing. Anything in any of the old games made it into the new system [NOTE:  3e and prior, Hero published games; 4e, Hero published a system and games built using the system; 5e+, Hero published a game system and advice on how you could use it to design your own games.]
 
5e looked to do some streamlining.  Some of it worked.  Regen did not, in part because they had to tone down Healing, and that required Regen to have a handwave for the re-use period required to balance Healing better. 6e put Regen back, but its cost was higher, consistent with trying to build per-turn Healing.
 
I recall the 1e "Characteristic Drain/Transfer".  While you did not Drain CP directly, it worked that way indirectly as a STR Drain cost 10 points per 1d6, but a SPD drain cost 100 points per 1d6.  2e's broadening of Drain and Transfer required the direct use of CP to measure.
 
I had forgotten Regen was per recovery!
Maybe 5e should have built Regen as 1 REC, BOD only, moved up the time chart

If we dig into the history, 1e had only Regeneration - no Healing.  By 2e, Hero made a fantasy game - that needed a Healing power, and an Aid power (neither of which were in Supers yet). It stayed that way, I think, in 3e.
 
4e combined everything. Aid also healed, unless you limited it to only Healing. Anything in any of the old games made it into the new system [NOTE:  3e and prior, Hero published games; 4e, Hero published a system and games built using the system; 5e+, Hero published a game system and advice on how you could use it to design your own games.]
 
5e looked to do some streamlining.  Some of it worked.  Regen did not, in part because they had to tone down Healing, and that required Regen to have a handwave for the re-use period required to balance Healing better. 6e put Regen back, but its cost was higher, consistent with trying to build per-turn Healing.
 
I recall the 1e "Characteristic Drain/Transfer".  While you did not Drain CP directly, it worked that way indirectly as a STR Drain cost 10 points per 1d6, but a SPD drain cost 100 points per 1d6.  2e's broadening of Drain and Transfer required the direct use of CP to measure.
 
I had forgotten Regen was per recovery!
Maybe 5e should have built Regen as 1 REC, BOD only, moved up the time chart

I would also start with the basic rule that, if you can do it, the bad guys can do it with similar frequency. Are you OK with the typical villain team having one or two members who can reliably hit every PC with NNDs?

When the rules get in the way of the fun, change the rules.  The easiest approach feels like either allowing Continuous on Healing (the reduced re-use time cost will still keep the recovery rate down).
 
Alternatively, what about a "time delay" limitation on Power Defense? It doesn't take Extra Time to activate, just Extra Time to reduce the Adjustment taken. That relies on the attack applying against Power Defense, though.
 
If it were my game, I'd look for a way to keep the cost down, even if it's handwavy, as I don't think this would come up all that often.  If these effects could be avoided entirely with 25 points of power defense, recovering faster should cost less than the 25 point cost of full immunity.

I would also start with the basic rule that, if you can do it, the bad guys can do it with similar frequency. Are you OK with the typical villain team having one or two members who can reliably hit every PC with NNDs?

I would also start with the basic rule that, if you can do it, the bad guys can do it with similar frequency. Are you OK with the typical villain team having one or two members who can reliably hit every PC with NNDs?

True.  This comes down to how fast we are prepared to allow healing in our game.  Regen had no costing issues in early editions - back me up, @Duke Bushido - because you paid a flat cost per BOD healed per turn.  No moving up or down the time chart, Regen worked per turn.  And it healed BOD.
 
Slowing it down is not cost-efficient as it was not designed to be slowed down, nor redesigned to balance slowing it down.
 
 
To toss in another option, maybe it is 1 CP to restore 1 DEX or to restore 2 INT because we apply the adjustment power halving rule for defensive stats.  I lean toward treating Regen as an adjustment power in this regard.
 
 
Agreed. It's a character sheet, not a tax return (where have I heard that before?).  Anyone trying to assert binding precedent against the GM shall suffer the fate of all Rules Lawyers.
 
 
Not sold. Both make recovery of something way faster. Neither is "unbalanced" in isolation.  Do I expect the characters to take a lot of BOD damage, or am I playing a four-colour game and don't care if a character can recover 6 BOD a turn because they aren't likely to take enough BOD for it to matter.  Similarly, am I OK that this character has a massive advantage against a Drain-based opponent, especially one with delayed recovery rates?

Maybe "sure, no problem".  Maybe "sure to be a problem; no way".  Maybe "OK for this character but not for that one" due to other aspects of the two characters.
 
If I'm allowing per segment Regen, I have to do so knowing that this character will recover fast enough to trivialize these attacks.
 
But I also need to consider how this compares to 20 points invested in extra defenses, BOD only.  Investing that 30 points into Power Defense wouldn't leave much likelihood of being Drained in the first place.  These abilities massively mitigate certain damage types. Will it hurt my game to have them mitigated?  If not, who cares what mechanic they use to get there. 
 
If you want me to spend 24 CP to recover 1 more point per turn from a Drain, I think I'll just buy Power Defense instead.  That's also pretty effective against delayed recovery drains.

Yeah just use regeneration and keep a close watch on it.  Regeneration gives back one body per x time period; Body costs 1 CP per Body.  That means one character point of a stat per x time period; extrapolate from that.

When the rules get in the way of the fun, change the rules.  The easiest approach feels like either allowing Continuous on Healing (the reduced re-use time cost will still keep the recovery rate down).
 
Alternatively, what about a "time delay" limitation on Power Defense? It doesn't take Extra Time to activate, just Extra Time to reduce the Adjustment taken. That relies on the attack applying against Power Defense, though.
 
If it were my game, I'd look for a way to keep the cost down, even if it's handwavy, as I don't think this would come up all that often.  If these effects could be avoided entirely with 25 points of power defense, recovering faster should cost less than the 25 point cost of full immunity.

The issue is exactly as you say - an attack that is blocked entirely by any defense is less advantageous than one reduced by that defense.  How much less so is open to debate.  20 defense is pretty secure that 4d6 won't do any damage anyway.
 
This doesn't fix the ability to switch the NND to "LS - High Heat" or "LS - Need not Breathe".
 
The versatility of the VPP greatly facilitates targeting any opponent's weaknesses.  That needs to be a consideration in how they are managed, or even whether they are allowed, in-game.

I remember Blazing Away! The description noted that, while it was not effective at hitting targets, it counted as an extremely violent action for, IIRC, +4d6 to a PRE attack.

I didn't remember this thread, though

I remember Blazing Away! The description noted that, while it was not effective at hitting targets, it counted as an extremely violent action for, IIRC, +4d6 to a PRE attack.

I didn't remember this thread, though

Let's assume I want up to 60 AP, one spell at a time, all spells with -1/2 Requires a Skill Roll.  I need a 40 point pool (60 AP/1.5 = 40 real points) and a 30 x 3 /1.5 = 60 point control cost = 100 points total.  I can cast any spell I want as long as I make my skill roll.  If I want to cast another spell next phase (whether the same one or a different one), I need to make my skill roll again.
 
That sounds identical to what you are describing.
 
We had a new player some years back with an "attacks only" VPP.  She had a chart for dice and DCs at various advantage levels and a list of advantages, and had no problems picking attacks on the fly.

A fine descriptor - they are full groan.

Play a character with a heroic personality in a game of heroic fantasy?  That's just crazy talk!