Christopher

The definition of a EC in 5E (if I rememerber correctly) was: - Powers useable at same time - drain one, drain all Note that in 6E the Elemental Control was removed. Instead there is now a limitation that does "drain one, drain all". Often it was only used to "get stuff cheaper for the sake of getting it cheaper". The validity in the end depends on how commonly a drain to any one of the powers is encountered. A drain Blast is somewhat common/likely. A drain INT or drain for Sensory powers not so.

Played it. My first instict was actually comparing it with Shadowrun setttings. It is a covershooter in a area where law has broken down/a lot of factions vie for control. 1. I would tend them to be of the higher end of the spectrum. If nothing else it gives you more wiggle room regarding the opposition. Remember that in the game you play as 2nd Wave Agent. And as far as I can tell, the 2nd Wave is better trained (but not equipped) then the 1st wave. 2. This is the 2nd time in recent fiction (inlcuding "The Dark Knight Rises") where New York/Gotham has been cut off. It has the unique advantage that it is surrounded by water, so only a few Bridges need to be blocked in order to make a quarantine. The rest can be done by the coastal guard/harbor patrol. Or just the fact that with bridges few people have boats. The best way to block travel is a mountain/rockface. It simple takes to long to get through mountain Water comes second Flat land is third. While you can still move across, it is hard to hide on the open terrain. And potential guards have good firing/sight fields on anyone trying to make a escape. 3. In the game the characters must be fighters, because this is a cover shooter game. They use ISAC as a crutch for clear friend/foe identification, even against random looters. The also have no moral choices whatsoever. But for "Preserving/Restoring civilsiation" a lot of other skillsets might be nessesary and usefull. I would again look at the Shadowrun setting. Even with Magic cut out, there is still two Fighters (short and longrange), the Face and the Hacker/Mechanic as viable roles. Not to mention minor stuff like Medics. One of the creepier things behind the Division is that all agents are sleeper Agent in the own population. At least many find it is creepy. I think it was a genius decision: 1. It gives them personal knowledge of the area they are opeartiong in 2. It gives them additional/diverse skillsets based on ther cover identity. 3. As one recording pointed out, they will not "take over". "They got lifes and families to go back too, after this is over."

I am Grey Stalker, the Smiter. My brother would be Grey Stalker, the Reviled. My mother was Tri Stalker * of Asia My father was Star One * of Time *Sorry, I am very bad at rememerbering my parents birthdays. Never was any good with dates.

I think the basic maneuvers are just things you should normally not pay points for. I don't need a power to flip a switch - it is just a everyman use of a fraction of my Strenght. At the same time if I have the OCV and STR to pul lit off, I should not need to pay points for something like disarm or trip. It annoyed me to no end that D&D required you to buy talents for just about every normal combat maneuver (or at least to make it feasible). If you can not do a disarm without having to pay for it, nobody is going to pay for it (aside from a really specialiced figther). Wich means nobody is going to use it. And the combat just turns into a slog of "Strike Atrittion" like it does in D&D. Combat is supposed to be exiting. A natural candidate for "meaningfull decisions" that make RPG's interesting. Reducing the number of meaningfull choices freely doable is not going to help with that. Basic Maneuvers are one of those asumptions you just have to accept. Without it CV's, SPD, STR, Blast/HTH/Killing Attack, Defenses and the rest of COmbat atributes just totally loose thier purpose. Basic Maneuvers are the lynchpin that keep half the stats relevant.

Okay, I am confused about this thread. You said you only wanted to think about not using Martial Arts Maneuvers/rebuilding them with powers. Yet you opearte as if the Standart Maneuvers do not exist either? Principally I agree that Martial Arts (the rules construct) is pretty damn wierd. Possibly broken. Martial Arts (the rules cosntruct) is more cost effective then buying extra STR, OCV and DCV, wich makes it interesting for heroic games (where weapons work differently and point are rarer). Nearly all Martial Maneuvers are jsut slightly souped up versions of the Basic or Optional Combat Maneuvers. There are a few Martial Maneuvers with no obvious "Basic Maneuver Counterpart". HSMA 243 has rules to translate those to "Basic Maneuvers". We should at least "Basicallise" all the stuff that only Martial Arts can do. That would eliminate one need for it to be there (possibly the main need it is still carried along). There is no need to rebuild stuff with powers if there is a Standart Combat Maneuver that can do it. You can use Standart Maneuvers with any form of Strenght, even Telekinesis. Maybe also have a basic rule to translate Damage to STR for unusual Purposes (shooting a weapon out of the hand). Afterwards maybe we should also restrict MA to "Heroic Campaigns only". Same was as DC doubling rule, Real Weapon and a lot of similar stuff is Limited to Heroic level games. It may still serve a purpose there due to the lower points. Don't know the guy. But if he was half as dedicated as the average poster he would propably kick our asses if we did not replace his work with a better version as soon as we find one. Martial Arts just feels to much like a Hack or Workaround. Something that was invented to serve a specific need of it's time, but has since been made useless by the development of the rules. A patch that has outlived it's usefullness but is carried along for nostalgia reasons. Same way Automaton Powers were made proper powers. Figured Characteristics were Abolished. The DC doubling limit was removed for all but heroic campaigns. It is never the basic rules that make a language or Ruleset difficulty to learn or master. It is always the exceptions. The Hero system as I learned it strives to remove all exceptions, one itteration after the other.

If you think about extra galactical, it might not be. There is only so close you can get to it without getting ripped appart. And even then the combination of time/space dilation and the general distance traveled might make hitting another galaxy suprisingly hard. Of course it could be used to travel to any place inside the same galaxy relatively savely and quickly, as a sort of "rapid response". It would mean that supermassive stars/normal black holes be very valuable real estate for travel purposes. Despite being absolutely terrible to live nearby, they might become the hubs. And what about carrying massive gravity generators inside the ship (if artificial gravity is a thing) or on a space sation? Would that not too allow better traveling?

"War. War never changes." Actually it does change: The weapons, armors and tactics have changed drastically over the course of centuries or even decades. Anything has been used as a weapon by someone at some point because it made sense, no mater how ridiculous and useless it would have been in any other situation. What was "the total hit" in one battle, could be a liability that defeated you the next one. However this change is a persistent process. And in this point, War never changes. Why am I saying this? Because this discussion somewhat elvolved into "wich is better". Wich is a non-starter. Everything was better then something else at one point, only to be rendered obsolete the next decade by a 3rd thing. The history of warfare and weaponry is a story of "Cyclical Imbalance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w Two weapon fighting is one of those cases: It makes sense if the enemy is not too heavily armored, while at the same time shields are not common/usefull enough. Wich basically transaltes too: Firearms age, High Sea, Duels, Gladiatoral Fight, Fighting animals or Peasant Uprisings

I think Legolas played into that class too, later on. He too wielded 2 weapons. And was a primary archer. And how many Archer Rangers were elf? It might be better to say "the classes adopted to what people wanted to (or were likely to want to) play, based on what as popular at the time. Back to "what was real": In The Black Eye there is a in joke about poorly made Pictures of weapons/fights. Mentioning the morning star "with a ball as big as the users head, and a chain shorter then the hilt so the user would crush thier fingers the moment it came back." So yeah, there is a history of missrepresenting weapons of War. Or not properly differentiating between Weapons of War and Weapons of Duel/Ceremony. And then often not taking into account when the weapon was "the thing". The Helbard was the weapon for armies for some time. As in 50 Years. In all the middle ages. Before it was never nessesary. Afterwards it turned into a ceremonial thing. We always picture knights with Swords and Shield. But fact was that with Armor developments axe and hammer became the more effective weapons. To the point where even Kings are recorded to have used a twohanded Axe as primary weapon. Humanity has always been nothing but adaptable regarding Warfare. With the rise of Firearms, armored infantery became useless. Riders became more important fighters. Wich in turn lead to the Spear/Helbard making a comeback to protect the ranged combatants. Wich resulted in the Helbard becomming prominent again (it could beat the spear in Melee while having most of the advantages). The Roman Empire went through at least 3 Major reforms of the army, depending on the needs of thier time. And that is before you consider that they used local auxiliaries wherever it made sense in tactical context. Unless you are striving for extreme realism (at wich point you have to mention the exact timeframe and not include magic), you should never discourage a certain fighting Style. Each fighting style should has distinct advantages/drawbacks, that the player can choose from. Unarmed fighting might not be strong, but it has the advantage that it is damn easy to smuggle your fists anywhere. The same applied to short swords and combat knifes - wich were in part developed to get around weapon laws. Axe and Hammer are better against armored foes then the sword, but the sword might have been better in duels. Throwing spears or axes are better against Shield wearing foes then Bows. (Get's through or at least stuck in it, making it unuseable). Crossbows are better mass army weapons then the bow. Firearms are even better mass army and anti-armor weapons then crossbows and throwing axes. Firearms made shields and in part armor obsolete, wich in turn paved the way for using 2 melee weapons - for a time and in very specific contexts.

While the word Haymaker implies using extra Strenght/Windup, it can totally include extra carefull aiming. Nobody would argue that a Headshot is deadlier then a Torso shoot. Or in case of a attack vs the Head Hit Location, hitting the eye socket being much more viable then hitting the skull at the side. The skull is the original sloped armor after all. There is even the optional "Offensive Haymaker", wich adds to OCV rather then damage. Yes, it is totally possible to haymaker with a Bow. Or a Firearm for that mater. The only real requirement is that the player must be able to suffer from the DCV penalty and extra phase. You can't just Haymaker everything out of combat*. Wich ironically means you might be able to heal more during combat then outside of it (because during you can Haymaker the heal). Haymakering Ranged attacks from a Ambush position would be a tricky thematic: You could just rule it is allowed. Allowing to Haymaker without retaliation is part of the Weapon Range and Situation (having ambush), more then the Maneuver being used. I might not allow it if it is the first phase of the ambush. Simply because there is no way a surprised foe can retaliate. Alternatively I would rule the target is not surprised against the Haymaker and can even take active dodge maneuvers. Or they at least get a 2nd Roll to detect the sniper (because he needs two phases). Stuff like someone noticing the Laserpointer or seeing a reflection from the aiming sight. *Allowing this might make some feats easier, however. Like breaking through walls/Pulling vaults out of thier buildings as a Superheroic Bricks.

Let's see what we found so far: 1. If Dispel is the way to close the portal, bolstering the Portals AP would be the way to counter Dispel. Pushing per 6E2 133 could be used to archieve that. After all boosting the Character points would also boost the AP of the power and thus it's Dispel ressitance. The big question is how long this use of Pushing has to be maintaiend/proves viable. If I pushed during the first attempt to dispel it and the Dispel would have been successfull without the pushing, what happens if I stop pushing? Does it collapse? Or only make future dispelling easier? 2. Just turn the powers into D6 at a 1D6/5 AP ratio. Roll and Compare normal Body of both rolls This allows some odd powers to be used to bolster the portal, inlcuding holding it open with sheer strenght or energy blasts. Also mind the rules about complimentary and contradicting Mental Powers, wich can do a sort of "Mental Duel" the same way this would be a "Dimensional Duel". 3. Simulate a proper "Tug of War" by giving the portal a Endurance and SPD at wich the Endurance is used up. There have been various ideas to implement the Power Skill Roll into this. You could just use it as repalcement for the EGO roll required for normal Pushing.

Bulky or Immoveable OAF perhaps even. This is a old style phone. You can not just move around with it inside the building. While it is not as heavy as a Piano, the wire around your feet will be about as hindering in combat. For all intents it is bound to the Desk it is sitting on.

Regarding Undead: Yeah, undead personhood is a can of worms indeed. To quote the 2007 Schlocktoberfest. "Narrator: The leaders of Nations did chortle and scoff at this legal loop-portal for beneath all their laws lay an unwritten clause. . . "No citizen may be immortal." Narrator: But Petey, a gleam in his eye laid deep plans that bore fruit by and by with relative ease his gene-tweaked a disease* that would make it so people can't die." (note that this is mostly a bad dream/horror imagiantion. But they DO end up releasing Immortality into the public much later). "Nobody is immortal" is kinda a basic asumption all our laws are based on. Superhuman settings can break that. Our current laws might actually be able to cope with people comming back to live. There is no clear definition of "being dead".However you can be "declared legally dead" by the court. Usually people are declared dead by court if there is a valid proof of death by a medic that they were medically dead. But almot as simply as you can be declared dead, you can be declared "actually still alive". In the long history of humanity somewhere, somewhen a Judge must have said "Nobody could have survived that, so I declare him dead even without a body." Only to be proove wrong years later. There here are precedents for this: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2253/what-happens-when-someone-legally-dead-shows-up-alive The article also mentions a relatively recent case with John Burney. The big problem would be to provide a "proof of identity". It is relatively easy to proof you are a living human being. But not that you are a specific human being if your body changed. Actually with undead/immortals/reincarnation claims the mater is simple and might be covered mostly by our existing laws: Somebody claims to be the reincarnation of Thomas Edison and want all the income from his patents back. Problems: 1, prooving he is it indeed, without genetic evidence 2. those patents were distributed among the heirs so long ago, they can no longer be reclaimed. Somebody claims to be Edison that was Immortal and in hiding/Trapped in an alternate reality, timeloop or timejump/whatever and he has DNA proof. Problems: 1. If he is edisson, then who the hell is that corpse? 2. Prooving that he is not a clone. 3. Again the Inheritance was Distributed so long ago, they can no longer be reclaimed. If he was really immortal and in hiding he had ample opportunities to say "Hey, I am still alive". If he let it pass, that is his problem.

I see some problems with that: - Duplicaties are identical to the core by default. Even minor changes need a expensive Advantage. - while unlikely, it would still be possible for both to interact - it might not fit thematically at all. Duplicates exist independantly of one another. So killing/imprisioning one would not affect the other, while it should What is the game effect of this? You provided us with a special effect for the build. As well as some indications of the possible game effects of it. But nothing concrete at all. It could just be the special effect to change the value of a Secret Identity or Hunted Complication: - It could be easier to guard it. If nobody knows both teams are the same, it is harder to establish a modus opearandus or likely target. If one goes for the Jakuza and the other for the Mafia in town, there is less chance of both working together against the common foe. - it could also be harder. "Bruce Wayne Taken Hostage" is a thing and you just expanded it to "Bruce Wayne, Batman or Clownman being taken hostage". Being closely hunted by one foe might prevent switching of identities when the other is needed somewhere - when sharing information between both identities, care must be taken to provide a narrative for this. See this Ertworld Entry, 3rd segment.

There are a thousand different ways you could Model "Two Weapon fighting". As Christopher Taylor pointed out, historically the offhand was used for defense or feinting and other support roles. HSMA has rules for "Bind" maneuver, wich allows you to block your enemies weapons with one of your own - at wich point Dual Wielders would be at an advantage. The offhand weapon is one of those diffuse bonuses, that can be used many different ways: Simplest way might be "10 point CSL, only when using offhand weapons". You might also use 6 or 8 point CSL, covering "all HTH combat with a 2 weapons." If you want to solve it mostly via maneuvers or in high detail: As I said, HSMA has the Bind Maneuver as well as other optional maneuvers that would work well. Also weapons with odd Bonsues likes "+ OCV, only Block, Disarm, Takeaway, trip, etc.", wich makes them very good as offhand weapons, but not so good as main. Keep in mind that Shields can be used to either increases defenses or OCV for Block, wichever helps you more. Combined Attack allows you to do more damage. +1 DC would do the same, while being better against armored foes. And it could easily have the Special Effect "attack with both weapons at same time". Having spend a bit of time translating Knight age weapons to Modern weapons for a Shadowrun campaign, I would differentiate between 3 weapons/useages of weapons: Weapons of War are the kind you equip your professional army of hundreds of Soldiers with Duelling weapons are the kind you use during a Duel. Maybe the Gladitorial Arena. And then there are the weapons you give to a Militia/Townguard. Wich should mostly be cheap and it helps if they are not too effective in a Melee. While being a potentially abysmal Duel weapon, the spear and halberd can be quite deadly in masses against an enemy charge, even when wielded by untrained men.

Shadowrun advise for four "Powerlevels" compared to the PC that NPC should have: Inferior (80% of points), Equal (100%), Superior (125%), Superhuman (200%) They might be superior or even superhuman but they have several issues: They are known. Spynetworks watch thier every move. They have Governing to do. They are only one person. There is lots of places where they/thier attention should be. Thier tactics and weapons are known. People know that Jaina Proudmoore uses Ice Attacks and Water Elements so they might plain stack up those resistances beforehand. Or even recruit someone with a grude+resistance to that element. They are like the Head Captain of Bleach in the Aizen or Bakotou Arcs: So powerfull nobody would even dare to make themself a target for his wrath without a plan how to defeat/neutralise him. The bigger question is actually on what powerlevel the PC will be. And specifically if you will be using Heroic or Superheroic game logic, points and caps. Personaly I would tend towards the superheroic approach. Jaina is in no way inferior to any ice mage in a Champions World. Except maybe a lot more powerfull.

There might be a simpler way: The plain Rule of Pushing on 6E2 133. It already requires an Ego roll. It is very tyring by nature. And if any mystic can just "take over" anothers portal it would only mater who currently holds it open. Only thing would be that you apply the "pushing" only to certain phases of use, rather then the entire use of the power.

Q1: "Mechanically, the portal is EDM with the Gate modifiers." And what other modifiers, especially limitations? Is it perhaps a bulky focus? Immobile Focus? The ideal case is that you can open a gate whereever you want, to wherever you want, using your own power. The 2nd best is to have a Focus (highly mobile) that you can use to open it. Having to use a hard to move gate, located inside a Fortress is pretty incovenient. There must be a pretty good reason for that. That means either the EDM power is part of the Focus (just so BB can save some points on it, buying it through his base). Or something about the gate allows to make a Portal to a normlly denied location (BB's Gods Dimension). If it is part of the Focus, it depends on the Focus use rules you applied. Q2: Again this depends on the Full Build of the Portal. Ideally that gate powers itself, so all he has to do is keep people "from the Controls". That needs no special Skills. But Maybe it also needs Concentration and Endurance to keep it open while in use? As far as movement Powers go, EDM is by far the least granular and well defined. Because it ties deeply into the Campaign settings. A short answer would be something like a "Power Skill Roll". But I asume you want something else. Maybe making EDM more like Flight, Running, Jumping or Teleport would be an option? I am a fan of applying Megascale to Teleport to simulate Star Trek Longrange Beaming. As a result "Change Environment, -X meter of Teleport" could be used to simulate teleport Inhibitors (it affects megascaled Movement at megascaled intervalls). Wich in turn could be countered by Aiding the Teleport, dispelling or Draining the inhibitors, destroying the Foci that produce it/generators that power it or just getting closer. Translating that to EDM: What if Dimensons were a set of "Dimensional Distance Units" appart from one another, same way two hexes are meters appart from one another? What if EDM was bought with DDU Ranges like Teleport/Jumping is with meter ranges? What if you needed to make the "jump" into a Dimension in one go (the reason I keep mentioning Teleport and Jumping)? What if the dimension was so distant/protected against dimensional intrusion in that area that you need a certain minimum DDU range to get there? Now the portal could be something like a "Aid EDM power". Or Maybe "Change Environment, +X DDU for EDM". The biggest problem with that question: This might be something that just does not translate as well between Source Material and a RPG. It might not be something that was ever intended as role for a Player Character anyway. "Needing to hold the portal open" is usually a Special Effect for splitting the party. Whoever holds the portal open/tries to close it is not doing anything else that maters. I do not see how you could make this role exiting for a PC and his player. You should propably leave that to a NPC. (S)he might even be the Dr. Strange, Dr. Fate or Witchcraft of the local setting. But since that character is bound "keeping the portal open/closing the portal", it serves as a reason why they are not comming along/helping with the fight. The mystical NPC serves the role of Questgiver/Relayer and Travel enabler. And because he is doing that, he can not come along. You could maybe apply this role to a PC if the player is not around that session. But always keep a "I stabilised the portal so now I can join you" exit strategy handy, in case he is there next session. The JLU Episode S2, 18 "The Balance" was a dedicated epsiode where only Wonder Woman and Hawkgirl were in Focus. Those two were the PC's of that session. So about the first thing they did was write all the seriously mystical heroes out of the story. Even the amazons were tied op "keeping the doors closed" (in this case, litteral doors).

It is not that easy to get the proper correlation between the powers you can switch too instantly and the price for this... Naked Advantage? 2nd part of a Compound Power? What kind of Rules construct would that even be? My Content only goes back one year and that one was older. Could not find a way to override this even when editing HTTP parameters either. So right now I just can not search that far back. Variable advantage and SFX only work if the powers are based on the same base power. The moment we got a Stun or Paralsiation (Blast or Entangle) setting in there, it fails unfortunately. Other problems are that a +1/2 version on a 60 Base Power Attack is a lot more expensive then what I build. That one is not it, unfortunately. In any case I now have it written down again and propably better too. So I guess I do not need that old one anymore.

I am pretty sure I wrote this down before, but I just can not find it no mater how deeply I searched. Would really help if I could just find every topic ever started by me (rather then only every topic that has a post form me), but I live with what I got. How this idea came to be: Combining Frameworks (putting VPP into Multipower or vice versa) has been explicitly forbidden by the rules. It is the first of the "General Rules" about Frameworks as found on 6E1 398. Yet there are cases when it would be plain the simplest Construct to put a Multipower into a VPP. For example a Assault Rifle with Underbarrel Grenade Launcher would best be solved with a Multipower. If your are a Gadgeteer Hero with a VPP, you can never build such a Assault Rifle with that VPP however. The VPP is to slow/expensive at switching powers to simulate switching the mode on the Rifle. Other issues might be adapting heroes, that can copy abilities using a VPP - but not if the enemy bought them in a Multipower. I had some thought to make it at least possible and balanced as far as Multipower in a Variable Power Pool are concerned. What would make that whole idea moot: If there was some way to buy a specific slot for a VPP with Character points. These "Fixed VPP Slot" you could always switch to as 0-Phase action without rolls, regardless of what the normal rules for Changing the VPP are (you still have to drop powers to make room, but otherwise Effortless Change). Just waving a Lamppost towards the writers of the 7th Edition. Why (I think) the rule exists: I would think the biggest issue for the "MP in VPP" combo are "Limitations that affect changing of slots" and "Limitations shared by all slots", because they affect the biggest Number: The Multipower Reserve. Asuming the Assault Rifle has 4 Firing Modes (Single, Burst, Automatic, Grenades) each at 60 AP: The Multipower + Slots without Limitation would cost 60+4x6 (for the fixed slots) = 84 Character Points (wich would propably be fair) The Multipower + Slots with a Focus Limitation (-1) would cost 30+4x3 = 51 Character Points. Wich is obviously a problem as now you can fit a bunch of 60 AP Attacks into a VPP that should only fit 51 AP Powers. And it get's worse with Limitations Solution: 1. We add the Concept of an Abstract Multipower. 2. No Limitations that would affect the Reserve cost or all Slots can be applied to the Abstract Multipower. No Charges, Focus, Extra Endurance, Only usable by Kevin's, etc. 3. Where needed some limitations must be abstracted. As you do not know if the Final Construct will be fuelled by Endurance or Charges, you can put neither "Extra Endurance" nor "Extra Charges" on the Burst and Full Auto Slots. The solution would be to create something like "Increased Cost" Limitation, wich just increase the amount of resource drained - if that means extra Charges, Extra Endurance or Endurance from a Power Reserve in addition to normal Endurance is up to the Implementation. 4. Implementation. When putting that Abstract Multipower into the VPP, take the cost of Reserve+Slots as the AP. You can limit it with any Limitations you could not use at step 2 here, and as usualy for powers that will not affect the Active Points value. Example: Asuming the above example the 4 Attack Assault Rifle, this is what we would get: 1. A abstract Multipower called "Assault Rifle", 60 Points reserve, 4 Fixed Slots each 60 Points with different Attack Powers). 84 Character points total. 2. We can not apply Focus or the like here. 3. I skip this step for simplicity. 4. When implmeneting it as "Assault Rifle, Focus(-1)" it would be worth 84 AP, 42 Character Points as part of a VPP. Lacking any overriding Limitations like Charges, it would drain Endurance at the usual rates for the seperate "Attack Modes"/Multipower slots. It would take the usual time, rolls, Control Cost and Poolsize for the VPP owner to switch to "Assault Rifle, Focus(-1), 84 AP, 42 Real Cost". But once there switching between Firing modes is instantly. Caveeats: - This will not be cheap. But it is still cheaper then having to buy Effortless Change (No Roll, 0-Phase Action) for the VPP. And I think that is just about the right price for this utility. The Point Build system requires us to find the Pricetag for anything, and this seems about right for me. - It hinges on the asumption that a Multipower without any "Reserve" or "all slots" affecting Limitations can be treated like a distinct hero power. That it's Character points cost without Limitations is a good equivalent to AP. And that it will still end up around the same Character Point cost if you apply those Limitations during Step 4. - The bigest weakness/approach to break it might come from Rule 3, so I am not against just throwing it out entirely without replacement. However I feel confident that as long as the Reserve Cost can not be modified anything comming alongs this vector would have next to no impact. Questions: Anybody ever had the same/a very similar idea? Or maybe even tried this? Anybody can think of a way to break it that does not violate above 4 rules (just so I can refine them)? Does the final result seem to Cheap? To Expensive? To abuseable? To Blue?

One of hte first rules of working with hero system is: Model the game effect, not the special effect. The special effect should at tops define the most important limitations (usually the ones mentioned at the power themself are the ones there to mimick a certain special effect). The game effect of "looking through a CCTV's camera system" is Clairsentience. Where he can do that is part of the game effect (only where there are cameras; must have link to CCTV hub). How he does that is special effect. A very similar special effect would be: "See the light that passses through the lenses of every active artificial beholder". You could just as well see what passes through the lense of a camera (if it is on), your are limited slightly less (no link need), but otherwise it just works the same.

Concept does not mater. It is like special effect, something intangible and not relevant to the game discussion. We are talking about the game effect. Specifically: Wich Limitations (a game effect) could make this Construct (a game effect) less problematic from a Game Balance point of view? The "rule of game balance" is more fundamental then "Special Powers do not belong into Power Frameworks" or even "this is what Frameworks are there and how they work". Anything you construct - no mater how legal by RAW - can be denied by the GM based on that ultimative argument of Game Balance Reason. In 6E you can switch directly between Alternate Forms. "Revert to baseform on KO" was also renamed to accomodate that you might not end up in your base form (the weakest one) on Knockout. But in turn it might be a advantage too (if you automatically revert to your most powerfull alternate Form). To get back on Topic, let me ask a question: Why are you even trying to combine VPP and Multiform? Why do you not just take both? You can easily stack a lot of alternate forms onto Answer 1: You either have to reduce the power or exceed the campaign limits to do so. Answer 2: It would result in the proper cost for the effect. More so then towards our GM's, we might try to obfuscate how broken something is from ourselfs. It sounds easier to just allow special powers in framework (like Nightvision based on cat's eyes). For wich there is explicitly mention in the Special Powers rules: "Can't be put into Frameworks, unless the GM allows it based on SFX and other limitations". I once had some thoughts on the mater of Combining Frameworks - specifically putting a Multipower into a VPP as a single slot. I have to dig for it a bit, but it should be a viable alternative.

Too many drive systems to choose from to pick a absolute favoirite. I am partial towads Sword of the Stars 1+2, because each race thier has thier own unqiue drive. Not that easy to do with 7 different species! I guess we can classify drives by the following characteristica: Speed of Movement: Instantanous, Absolute fixed time (Traveler), Pathspecific fixed time (Star Wars Hyperdrive), Fast, Normal, Slow. The last 3 are in relation to other sets of drives that a similarily measured. Selection of Target: Free Selection (inlcuding stuff in deep space), Gravitational Targetting (only towards Masses like planets or even solar systems), Other Stellar Targetting (lk only planets with abundance of life/psionic power/the force/magic), custom build Gate/Beacon only (so you have to get there another way, maybe the hard way) Selection of Origin: Free Selection (park in deep space), Stealler Source (only close from a Planet/system), prebould Gate/beacon only Freedom of Useability: Freely useable by everyone you let it use (stargates or hyperlane networks), Ship requirements (a drive section), Ship+Path requirements (you need a drive and the prebuild gates/hyperlanes) Effiency factors: Faster/slower with many ships nearby. Faster/Slower around gravity wells. STL/IP use: If the drive can or cannot be used as STL drive or interplanetary drive too. Communication use: If the drives technology can be used to transmit data, other then via courier ships/bouys Reachability/Reactiontime of ship in transit: If you can reach the ships and if they can change course mid flight Environmental Impact: If the drive causes damage to Spacetime, it's medium, source or target system when in use. Freedom of reuse: Is there a cooldown before you can jump out again? Limited fuel that only allows 2-4 Jumps without refuelling? Special Drive ships: Does every ship in the fleet need the drive, or only a few that can take the others along? (In addition to actuall carriers) Fleet interaction mid Transit: Can ships in a fleet physically interact/dock while zipping around? Safety of the Medium: Are there hostile inhabitants in the Medium? Can others using the same medium intercept you?

Indeed a big issue with this limitation. Casual STR is (by defnition) capped to [sTR Capaing Cap/2], hence it is not an issue that it is free. As long as you extra "STR; casual use only" does not exceed that implied Cap on casual STR a -1 might be spot on. Once it does exceeds it, it is a whole nother story. It might even turn into an (minor) advantage, because it allows you to break caps. It is like being able to buy beyond NCM without surcharge. It is easier for everyone to increase the value of a Limitation later, then to decrease it later. Especially with big Limitations like -1 to -1/4. On a related note: "Humans never developed a system they could not find a way to break." "Telekinesis, Only to Affect Water" is a totally different power/limitation depending on if your definition of "Water" includes the 70% water in a human body or not. If that is indeed true, that is the real issue with the game. The idea with higher SPD for Martial Artists and Speedsters appeared for me that they had phases to "waste" on Aborting to Dodge and Recovering from being stunned. While the Bricks defenses allowed him to last about as long, without the need to abort - maybe even ignore AoE's outright.

Masks of Potential (because they bring out your full potential or at least part of it). Masks of Power (because with them you have Power) Court of Masks (asuming there is a secret society made up mostly of them) Some other tricks: You can run the word through a Anagramm generator. Not many anagramms with only "Masks", due to the single Vocal: Ask Ms Kas Ms Ska Ms How about Skask Masks? Or just get the Latin Translation from google translate/someone that knows some latin. Totally there and totally Spidey. While the other Movies weren't half bad, it seems Marvel has a much better handle on him. Having him in a Teambattle certainly helps to keep his Quips from being grating. We will see how his own movie turns out.

Yes and no. Remember that you can't Throw an enemy on another enemy without a seperate attack action. i.e. If you grab and use your free attack to throw the enemy into a wall, that is allowed. If you try to use your free attack to throw the enemy onto another enemy, that is explicitly forbidden. You could use the free action to squeeze, then throw next phase. Or make a multiple attack with the "throw against enemy" being your next attack.