Sean Waters

This is long. Sorry. It’s written from the perspective of a Champions type game, but I think the issues have broad applicability, whatever the genre. I think it would be useful to have more discussion of the thinking behind game mechanics so we’re aware of the issues they can present and how we can use them to heighten playability. I’ve never really been a fan of the Killing Attack mechanic in Hero, even after the 6e changes, but maybe I need to re-evaluate my position. I decided to run identical characters against each other, but one using a normal attack and one using an equivalent DC KA. The results were interesting. I’ll get to them later. I used Hardpoint (high Resistant Defence) and Maelstrom (High Normal Defence) from 6E2 (and 5E) who had three battles each against themselves and I used a generic character with 12/24 Defences and 12/40 Body/Stun who had four battles. In total that was 25 rounds of combat ranging from a 4 phase battles to a 1 phase KO. I ignored rolling to hit as the characters were identical and I ignored Stunning (although, as it happened, that would not have affected any of the results) and Knockback. I assumed combat started on segment 1 so no one got a PS12 recovery, and both participants just used the one attack. The problem, in theory, with KAs mechanically is that they use far fewer dice than Normal Attacks which means much greater variability, in theory. I say ‘in theory’ because I was overly concerned that you’d get some really big Stun results for KAs, but over 25 phases of combat I got one each of 51, 48, 45 and 42 and the rest of the results were under 30 which does not seem unreasonable. By comparison the highest 12d6 normal Stun result was 56. The problem, in theory, with the ‘realism’ of KAs is that I’d imagine that having a life-threatening injury would hurt more, but then I suppose it is Heroic to ignore such injuries and soldier on. The problem with KAs in the game is that Body damage takes a long time to recover from and you don’t want characters sitting round in a hospital for most of the game session. You can give characters higher Resistant Defence (although that is a direct nerf to KAs and makes them pointless – so to speak) or, probably far better, access to Regeneration or Healing. Anyway, those results. 10 battles is not an enormous sample and different builds could have yielded very different results, but I think it is enough to draw some conclusions from. Of the 10 battles, there was one draw (where they knocked each other out simultaneously) and the rest were all wins for the Normal Attack. In one instance the Normal Attack Character was reduced to negative Body on the last attack and in another the Normal Attack Character was in negative Body on the penultimate attack, but negative Body doesn’t prevent you acting (you just bleed). That was not the combat with the draw. In every combat the Normal Attack Character lost Body (final totals were 10, 9, 7, 6, 6, 5, 3, 1, -6, -7) which meant between 2 and 21 Body were lost and in only 3 of the battles the Stun of the Normal Attack character was less than double figures. That means about 9 Body lost on average (8.8 actually) which would take most characters between 2 and 4 weeks to heal (assuming a REC in the 10-20 range) or 1-2 weeks of hospital care. That’s a long time, and that’s just a one-on-one fight. Very few of the characters would have survived a second fight without healing first. So, in summary, the biggest problem with Killing Attacks seems to be managing the consequences, which seems like an issue of scenario and character design: the team could have a character with high resistant Defences and/or Regeneration to tackle incoming KAs or access to Healing either through a team member or some other method. There are some rule tweaks you could make to change things though. 1. Track wounds individually. When you take Body damage, keep a note of how much each lot of Body damage was as well as reducing current Body. When you heal, each wound heals simultaneously which will (usually) substantially reduce overall healing time. 2. Body as a buffer. Body damage is considered to be scrapes and bruises – painful and doesn’t recover as quickly as Stun but not incredibly long lasting. When you finish a combat and are able to rest for a couple of hours (or whatever period is appropriate in your game) you immediately recover all your Body except any negative Body, which you keep a track of separately. This negative Body has to heal at the normal rate. For example, in a combat a 12 Body character is reduced to -3 Body. After a rest they are back to 9 Body (12-3) and they have to heal that at REC/month. If they are in another combat and are reduced to -5 body they can recover back to 4 Body (12-3-5) and have to recover 8 Body (or 3 Body and 5 Body if you also use individual wounds) at the normal rate. Once you get to -Body, you die. 3. Body as Bruising. As well as or instead of the above, you can consider each point of Body taken as Bruising. Until you recover you start every combat with your current Stun reduced by an amount equal to the 2x Body damage you have taken. You can recover from this Bruising at REC/day (even if you have not fully healed the Body damage, but additional Body damage does add to the Bruising total). There’s obviously lots of ways you can deal with these issues if, indeed, you consider them issues. What do you do?

I don't see the problem. If there's two house bricks on a table, can you pick them both up as a single telekinetic grab? You could as a non telekinetic grab. You could grab two opponents with a normal grab, so why not with a TK grab? There's penalties. If probably require them to be adjacent to each other, or say least close. Then there's the two opponents, one grab. Say both opponents are 30 STR and you've got a 40 STR TK, if they're both in a single grab, why not allow them to combine STR and effectively be STR 35? I mean, you can do what you want, but I don't see how these suggestions are game breaking and they allow for more flexibility in gameplay which has to be a good thing.

Flight does not allow you to stop instantly. There's the acceleration (5m/m) thing. Which is really unhelpful. It isn't as simple as that though? Most 'brick' characters don't have gravity control. Damage avoidance shouldn't be metagamed, should it?

Page 295, Book 1 A character with Telekinesis can use it to Grab multiple people in successive Phases — one person in his first Phase, a second in his next Phase, a third in his next Phase, and so on. He’s not restricted to only using the Telekinesis on one person at a time, or to the number of persons he could Grab using his own limbs. Of course, he has to pay END for each separate use of Telekinesis. That answers that one then. Given that you can definitely grab multiple opponents I'd probably allow a multi-attack. Given that is one use of TK I would only charge you END for one use but I would allow the grabbed targets to combine STR to break free. Seems balanced. Like one big hand rather than lots of little ones. You may decide not though. Matter for you.

I would not build an invisible attack with an obvious focus as that would be foolish but if someone else did I'd just treat it as any other invisible attack with the advantages that implies and, more to the point, they have paid points for.

You can't be too carful. CAreful. Careful. Hello Doc

Well, no, the way the OP defines it either immunity will stop it. It is OR, as stated by the OP. It couldn't really be AND: I certainly wouldn't say that 'many, characters have both and I would say there's not enough characters that are likely to have immunity to both heat and cold to make it a valid NND condition. If the damage is caused by the shock of the rapid transition and you are ignoring one half of the transition there's going to be no shock, so the whole attack fails.

As you've defined it, if she had LS: Cold, she takes no damage, despite the vulnerability to heat. Maybe the lack of hot/cold contrast negates much of the attack and the cold part nullifies the heat, at least in her case.

The problem here is that falling damage is silly. 30d6? Falling off a tall building is really going to do more damage than Grond pushing his strength with a haymaker? I think not. Hero lacks a consistent approach to damage, meaning that we have to come up with either cheap but tricksy solutions or really expensive ones to what is (or generally should be) a niche problem. Superheroes (and non-superheroes, for that matter) often survive long falls in the subject matter, even if real people don't - but then a normal taking 15d6 damage or 30d6 damage is going to be just as dead. The reason falling is very dangerous is not because of the impact of you on the ground but because of the impact of your internal organs on the inside of you when you hit the ground. A light creature should take far less damage. so a character with shrinking should be able to reduce their effective falling velocity for damage purposes by the amount their KB is increased by (also the increased KB thing is silly because that isn't how momentum works, at least in atmosphere. If you hit a fly it doesn't shoot 20m across the room. Another time. Creatures with no hit locations (i.e. no differentiated internal organs) should probably take less damage from falling. There's an argument that Stretching should also protect you. Then there's the question of HOW you are surviving a long fall. If it is because you are really tough, then you shouldn't be taking a 'falling damage only' limitation: if someone throws a building at you you're going to be just as resistant. Trouble is that if you can survive even one 30d6 punch we have a terrible case of power inflation. If you are a teleporter, the 'no relative velocity' trick works well. I'm not sure about using flight because it is not instantaneous: turning flight on or off does not instantaneously stop your current movement and buying enough increased acceleration/deceleration to get you to instantly stop is going to get expensive and silly. Technically 'no turn mode' will allow you to change vertical movement to horizontal movement instantly, thus preventing contact with the ground, but it is not going to stop you moving. Anyway, if you can fly, why fall at all? Probably the most appropriate superpower is Leaping, but again the rules are silly. You wouldn't actually accelerate after you have left the ground, but you would decelerate to your apex point and why do you need DOUBLE the vertical leaping to arrest your fall (you're already halving your Leap for going up): being able to leap 60m straight up should arrest a terminal velocity fall. If you have 'no gravity effects', does that mean you only (only ! ha!) need 60m of leaping? You don't need to be completely immune to falling damage to look good (it's unlikely you'll be taking falling damage every phase), you just need enough protection that you aren't going to pass out or be stunned or at least not go SPLAT! So, let's not worry about total immunity, let's look at what we already have in the toolkit. 75% damage reduction changes 105 Stun and 30 Body into 26 Stun and 7 Body. Probably a bit less as you will have other defences, presumably, so, for a superhero, maybe 20 Stun and 2 Body after all defences. I'm not a fan of Damage Reduction though. I don't think it is a power we would have in Hero as it is not really a defence but rather a situational stat multiplier. We can talk about that elsewhere. Personally I think falling damage should be more like velocity/3 DCs, possibly Armour Piercing (which would mean that hardened defences are particularly effective against falling damage - something a super is more likely to have). A terminal velocity fall would be velocity fall will do 20DCs damage: more than enough to kill all but the most outrageously lucky normal instantly, and enough to seriously shake most supers but not put them out of the fight. Using Breakfall, the roll shouldn't be distance dependent but should be (something like) reduce the damage by 1d6 if you make the roll and another 1d6 for each point you make it by.

There is no right answer, it depends on your game and your group. You can play Steampunk as 'slightly above average normals' with special equipment or as fully fledged superheroes, depending on what you want. What I'd do is reverse engineer it. Think up a character concept, build the character work out how much it costs, round to the nearest 50 or 25 and give everyone the same points. It also depends on what threats you want them to face. If they are going to be facing a cunning criminal gang robbing a bank using a clockwork mole, I'd probably go for 50 or 100 points plus free equipment, whereas if I wanted them to face the menace of the city-smashing Steam Titan I'd probably make them steampunk themed superheroes and give them 400 points.

I'm not sure it does. 6E1 358 USABLE AS ATTACK modifiers:can grant power to one recipient, recipient need not be willing, grantor controls power, grantor pays END for power, recipient must be within reach to receive power, recipient must remain within LOS of grantor Value: +1¼ If you also needed to also buy some UOO it would be at least +1 1/2. I appreciate that the cost is the same as base UOO plus 1, but then the cost of AoE (Radius) is the same as cumulative plus armour piercing and autofire. I'm not sure that establishes a principle. Also, see below, but if UAA was a part of UOO then you definitely could grant the power to yourself as a +0 because that is one of the modifiers you can 'buy' for UOO. You are right, but, like much in the overlong and rambling 6th edition that makes no sense. If I have a Blast power, can I not use it on myself? I might not want to, but it is an attack and it would work just fine. Not being able to use the 'base power' is an unnecessary and inconsistent injunction doubtless inserted to counter some perceived but unlikely abuse. Sure you'd need to use the advantages and such and pay full END for the real cost, but where its the possible harm in being able to use a UAA power on yourself? It just means you have to stick it in a MP with a power without the advantage which is a completely unnecessary build complication.. I'm pretty sure this sort of thing is why I don't play Hero much any more. Fine if you are standing on the edge of the hole but the example power is ranged, so as soon as the target is 2m deep you lose LOS and the power stops, shallower if they are crouching. Again, what is the point of this? I'm sure I could think of some convoluted situation where it would be a problem, but that is what GMs are for. Anyway it stops, or at least confuses, some perfectly legitimate builds. What if I wanted to UAA flight someone and include Uncontrolled so I can just switch off their gravity and they float away? Does Uncontrolled (does not need LOS) trump UAA (does need LOS)? They are both specific rules. It is just that one of them is completely unnecessary because Constant powers (Flight, for example) DO need LOS to keep working anyway. I appreciate you could make a ruling on that, and I can guess what it would be, but you shouldn't have to, and wouldn't have to if the LOS thing was not there in UAA. The point is that Hero is increasingly impenetrable and that makes it less fun. I could almost put up with that if all these arbitrary rules and comments made the game clearer and quicker to play, but that is not what is happening.

OK. It lets you decide who goes first. Whoop-de-do. You don't get more goes, not anymore. I'm not saying that's not useful, I am saying it's not that useful, plus you are ignoring my bit about economies of scale, which was a good bit. If you but 30 DEX and I don't buy any extra, that's 40 point's I've got to whup your ass and if you buy 30 points and I buy 29, that's only 2 point's I've got on you. High DEX is only really useful if it's highest DEX. Sure everyone gets to whale on the slow brick, but that extra 20Pd/20ED is going to help, right? Then Brick takes out one of the opponents because they don't have an extra 20PD and we rinse and repeat. Maybe he takes out the fastest opponent out of spite. Or, right, and this would be a real laugh: you have 30 DEX and 4 SPD and I have 10 DEX and 6 SPD. How we doing now? You hit first, I hit 50% more. Or +2OCV and +2DCV. You get the picture. I accept that Combat Driving and Breakfall are useful, to an extent, in combat, but they are really not so useful out of combat, pretty much by definition. Analyze, Concealment, Deduction, Disguise, Lipreading, Mimicry, Paramedics, Security Systems and Tactics, Acting, Bribery, Charm, Oratory and Persuasion all have serious combat applications (as do Perception and PRE attacks) AND they (and all the other skills derived from INT and PRE) have serious non-combat skills related to Role Playing. Great, you picked the lock but set the alarm off. Now they know we're here. As for taking down a suicide bomber in a shopping mall, the reason snipers go first isn't because they are are so quick and champing at the bit, it is because someone else is keeping the suicide bomber talking while they line up the shot. 'Decoding a computer countdown' would almost certainly be an INT based task. There's no prizes for doing it quickly, if you don't do it right. As my wife keeps telling me. Sure you can build a way to do the Quicksilver thing, but you'd probably also need indirect and some sort of improved perception. AoE's Running won't get people out of closed rooms unless you want to get mush back and AoE Teleport requires you to be able to shift enough mass. Oh and you'd have to snag everyone because selective, and there's always going to be some bad rolls. Build it and see what it costs: unless it's a slot in a multipower the raw cost will be prohibitive and, even if it is, good luck scraping it in under the real point cap. Anyway, the point about Quicksilver wasn't that fast is not good but that strong can also be just as good: it is situational. Fast is not always better, strong is not always better. More to the point fast is not better twice as much as strong. Also, I suppose, DEX wouldn't really help: the GM is unlikely to say the house blows up on DEX 29 and you are DEX 30 unless they are going it for dramatic effect and to make you feel that ridiculous point investment was worth it. Throwing does not require skill levels. If I can hit you with a punch I can hit you with a rock for probably only -1 or -2. Of it there is a handy telegraph pole (which there often is) at no penalty at all. Or, like I say, a bus. Big penalty, aiming for DCV 3, and it probably does not matter if I miss by a little. Or I don't throw it and just flip it on you. I mean you CAN dive for cover, but that's your next go gone, right, so your fancy DEX isn't going to help with your next attack and anyone can abort to a defensive action whatever their DEX (so DEX is irrelevant to timing) and sure it allows you to dive further, but sometimes you are going to roll a 16 and then you are under a bus, literally. I appreciate that is only 5% of the time, but the dice can be vindictive. Even if you make it, you are prone, and at half DCV and can't use Acrobatics or Breakfall to avoid the half DCV or get up until your next go, so let's hope I'm alone. Maybe I was using Acting to make you think I was going to splat you with a bus but I was just trying to get you to Dive For Cover so you'd be easier to hit. I can throw a bus that far, and the points I put in PRE come in real handy. In combat. If StrongCharacter is under a bus, just shrug it off and carry on. Not that you could lift a bus. To be absolutely clear, I am not saying that a point of DEX is not useful, but I am saying there is absolutely no way it is twice as useful as a point of STR, if anything the opposite, and almost certainly no more useful than a point of INT or PRE. Certainly not in the context of the wider game and not really even in 'just' combat.

Is. No, Krondite is the typical brick. The strength can be used for all the stuff that strength can currently be used for. Lifting, throwing, punching. Breaking stuff right away. You see what happened there? Indescructecon and Shalamar are a strong slow character who can lift stuff and do a lot of damage but only when they can apply leverage and a weak character with lots of MA or HtH Attack. We have a way to do Shalamar, that's easy: low STR, plus extra damage from various sources. We don't really have a way to do Indestructecon other than a custom limitation, which no one is ever going to bother with because Strength is so cheap and because the game does not encourage you to think that way. Admittedly that is because most big muscly characters in comics and movies can hit hard. Still, take a look at a small skilled boxer and a big, strong unskilled thug seeing who is going to win at the fairground punch ball machine (it's the little guy). The point is that, and this tessellates nicely with the bit about DEX being comparatively too expensive, Strength in Hero (and to be fair, most games) is not actually a good representation of what strength is, it is a good representation of our channelled expectations. Plus it is too cheap, which is the real problem here.

Here's a fascinating exercise in mental gymnastics for you, if I have not wearied you enough already... What if a villain had 'Detect when I'm being watched' as a power? Or if that is too broad for you, 'Detect Clairsentience'. Whenever you look at them using your powers they know and don't do anything incriminating, so you never suspect them. This could be particularly confusing with Postcognition: there's been a murder, you go to the scene and view what happened. Two people approach each other then one stops, looks around and walks away and the murder does not happen. Either the victim never died or they are murdered at another time and place (unless you take a look to see what happened...). I mean, this is a perfect Schrodinger situation: the observer changes the thing observed. Make for a pretty interesting scenario if you slanted it just right. Excuse me. I may be some time...

When I am running games I ad lib, when I am posting here I nit pick. I really believe that, especially with something like Hero which does sell on the mathematical precision of its character creation, you need a consistent and repeatable approach and shouldn't just have a stab at something that is about right if there is a more, well, consistent and repeatable way of doing it. The thing is that, here, it probably doesn't that make too much difference. Hmm. Let's check that: Clairsentience to Sight Group plus normal hearing and smell is 30 points. I could have added the Single Sense (-1/4) in but you are not supposed to do that if you are including multiple senses. Plus 45 points from the increased range and the fast mobile perception point.. Case 1: Allow the full 'no range' modifier at -1/2. Cost is 50 Case 2: Allow the full 'limited range' modifier at -1/4. Cost is 60. Case 3: Apply no range to the base power then add in increased range and mobile perception point without limitation. Cost is 65 points. My 'logic' is that you are taking away the range (hence the -1/2 no range on the base power) then adding something like range back in (which does not get a limitation because that bit is not limited). The full no range (Case 1) is clearly a non-starter because then you'd have no range for any of it, so the extra range and mobile perception point would just have no effect. Adding in Limited Range to the whole thing (Case 2) means that the increased range and mobile perception point also get the advantage of the limitation (if you see what I mean) whereas they probably shouldn't because the lack of range is not actually limiting them it is limiting just the base power, so you have to create the perception point at no range but can then move it freely within a large area... ...which is how I get to Case 3. I don't see that as overthinking. it is not even complicated, it is just how the game is supposed to work, at least in my tiny, weird mind. I started by saying that 'here' it did not make much difference, but it might if you had spent a lot more on the base power, by adding in sense groups and more of them. Say you had sense groups for Sight Hearing, Hearing, Taste/Smell and Mental, and you can perceive into a limited group of other dimensions, the base cost increases to 105 points. Case 1 would then cost 70, Case 2 would cost 92 and Case 3 would cost 92 as well. If you add even more stuff in to the base power then case 2 becomes more expensive than case 3 and that would have happened at lower cost levels if there had not been so much extra range and a slower MPP i.e., if the base Clairsentience had been a more significant contributor to comparative cost. It's only a few points but if you are saving or spending a few more points on every power it makes a real difference.

That is my mind having a break. Probably a psychotic break...

OK, why is DEX so expensive? DEX skill levels cost more than INT or PRE skill levels, at least they do now, but that's mainly because we falsely value DEX skills more. They have some combat applicability, but not that much, especially in a superhero game and being able to go first in combat is actually of relatively limited use unless you are One Punch Man. Anyway, it is not a scaling thing. If 1.2 points come from the boost to DEX skills and 0.8 points come from the increased 'initiative' and you bought 30 points, you spend 24 points on getting the first hit in, which is a complete waste of 8 points if the next highest DEX is 20. DEX used to control Speed and Combat Value and only cost 3 points. Now it doesn't and still costs 2? And you're good with that? Do me a favour... Lifting and carrying. Hmm. Well maybe not carrying so much, but lifting: any well written run will have innumerable opportunities to apply strength in or out of combat: holding up that wall while the civilians run to safety should make you feel good and garner a round of applause and probably a medal, at least. I know Quicksilver saves lots of people in Age of Apocalypse using speed, but if he's turned up 10 seconds later and people needed digging out, it would have been a very different movie. Also try actually building that in Hero for a reasonable number of points without using a clearly broken interpretation of EDM. Anyway, what about throwing (which is still linked to Strength): the ability to cause damage at range is pretty useful and normally costs at least +1/4. Then there is AoE. If I drop a bus on Dodgy McDodgeFace they'd better have bought Flying Dodge or I've hit them for all their vaunted DCV and Martial Arts. Methinks the Gentleman doth protest too little.

I do have a passing familiarity with the concept, but the point I was flailing to make is that Strength is a measure of force not momentum. Indestructecon is a powerful robot that can lift over 50 tons and can tear tanks apart but it does not do so quickly. It does not punch through the armour, it grabs it and applies force. Slowly. The armour tears, such is the power of Indestructecon. Shalamar, on the other hand is not strong. If Shalamar were to grasp both ends of a thin steel bar, Shalamar would struggle to bend it. Shalamar can lift a full beer keg, but probably not two of them, at least not for long. Shalamar is quick though and can punch so fast the blow lands like a 76.2mm tank shell and can burst through tank armour. Hopefully Shalamar is wearing something that prevents Shalamar's hands turning to jelly when Shalamar does that. Krondite is both strong and fast and can tear armour apart or tear through it. In combat, Shalamar is more effective that Indestructecon because Shalamar does not need to grab a target or wedge it into a corner where it cant move. In a situation where a building has collapsed, Indescructecon can hold the roof up and bend steel I-Beams to rescue people. Shalamar, if Shalamar was not immobile under a pile of rubble, could punch through those I-Beams but that would probably bring the whole unstable structure crashing down and kill everyone. Krondite is great in combat and great in dangerous rescue situations, but paid more points to be more versatile. You see where I'm going with this?

Absolutely: Perception is a complicated thing, but it can be simplified. In reality it is two things: 1. the ability to actually perceive something. No matter how smart I am I can not actually see if there's no light. 2. the ability to attach significance to something you have perceived. I might be able to hear the slowly rising background hum, but I have no idea that means the reactor is going critical. Perhaps red lights and a klaxon next time? The first is dealt with by way of the normal and enhanced senses you get or can buy in game, the second is where intelligence seems to matter, but it probably doesn't. Intelligence is not the same as knowledge. If you study something then your native Intelligence helps you study better, retain more and apply that knowledge to situations but if you don't have the requisite knowledge then being generally smart probably won't help: that disturbing slithering sound is actually the harmless wide snake, not the terrifyingly aggressive and deadly narrow snake, but you don't know that because your degrees are in astrophysics and set theory. Perception is the ability to, well, should be the ability to realise that something is amiss. You can be smart and not pick up on the obvious (a common trope) or have animal level intelligence but still know when it is time to get out of Dodge. Perception should therefore be a General Skill IMO, starting at 11- for which you can substitute appropriate knowledge or professional skills that apply. That makes KS and PS more useful in a game to game setting. Danger Sense could also usefully sub in if the situation called for it. If you are specifically looking for the thing that is amiss, you are not distracted and can (actually) perceive it then you probably won't need a roll at all. A simple 'no Intelligence' computer programme can tell if there's something on the camera that shouldn't be, so is always going to succeed in a 'perception check' unless you can find somewhat to misdirect or distract it. The ability to do the Sherlock thing, draw valid conclusions from apparently limited data is something else again. I am not sure how to handle that because it is a bit of an 'editor power': it is there mainly as a plot device and would be tiresome to have to GM if a PC had it. You could, I suppose, have an INT based Observation skill, or a limited form of Pre/Postcognition that allows you to make connections that other's can not see. Don't like that though because when I write a deep and involved plot I want the players to gather clues and put them together, not just roll low.

More strength would cause more damage but you would have to be able to apply the force some other way than a punch. A punch is about momentum not simply about raw strength unless the target is immobile and you can apply all of that strength. What this is actually all leading to, I suppose, is that Strength is extremely under-priced for the utility. It should cost 1.5 to 2 points per point, even decoupled as it is in 6E. What it says is that the way you do it is roll damage and count Body but in some cases it might be quicker to roll 9+STR/5 with the better margin of success winning. I find having more than one way of doing things to be slower, generally.

To build apportation using teleportation as a guide you'd probably need to (in essence) buy UAA TP with Only to self. That wouldn't mean obviously you could not use it on yourself (or you could but it would just teleport you to where you are). I am not sure what the value of that limitation would be, but if you did say -1 1/4 then it would work out basically the same as TP, so that's something to think about. It might even be more than that. If you could ONLY teleport to a fixed location what would that be worth? -2 at least... ...or not. There's an example on page 302 where it is set at -1 (which is nowhere near enough for the limitation). That would make it 15 points for 20m of TP. Would you like MegaScale with that?

Nit pick: you don't need UBO if you have UAA. UBO is used to give a willing target a power temporarily, UAA is used to force the effects of a power on a target whether they are willing or not. UAA allows you to force the power's effects on a single Recipient for +1 1/4. It is the same cost as a single target UBO +UAA at +1 but that is not how it is built because otherwise you could build it to target 2x the Recipients for +1/4. Also a character can teleport themselves because there's nothing I can see in the rules that says that the Grantor and Recipient have to be different. The first paragraph talks about giving or forcing a power on another character, but the actual body of the text (and there is a lot of it) does not seem to require this. In fact, correction, the text specifically allows the character to grant he power to others of himself for +0 (so why wouldn't you) 6E1 345. Also, peskily for a TP power the recipient must be in LOS at all times so no TPing someone else behind a wall (or from behind a wall) unless you have a X-Ray vision or some such. Arguably a TP location (fixed or otherwise) should work but it does not technically grant LOS to the target, it just means you don't need LOS, so does not work with the rule as written. Having said that, one of the examples on page 360 is 'Entombment' which allows you to bury someone underground using fill-in Tunnelling where you definitely would not have LOS so who knows, eh?

What it actually says at 6E2117 is that: A character can use his STR or Flight (if he has it) to resist Knockback. This implies by a strict reading that you have to choose which one you are using and the entry does not contain an injunction against using Strength to brace when, for instance, falling. I certainly would not allow that. As to whether you could use both Flight and Strength to brace at the same time, on the one hand you can use both Strength and Flight to lift more (which does not really make any sense at all) but on the other it would not make any sense at all. I'd probably only allow the use of Flight to brace when in the air. I can only assume this was slipped in because someone saw Superman do something like that once and thought it was a good idea. I'm not sure the bracing rules make much sense anyway: it is one thing if you can grab on to a building to stop yourself being knocked back, but if you are standing on a beach or in a field, for example, surrounded by sand or soil there's nothing to brace against, especially as KB can be directed slightly up, for example. It is a pretty pointless thing to do anyway unless an opponent is a long way away and attacking with some sort of Blast power because you have to can only brace against damage from one direction (or other similar Boy Bands) which again does not make sense if you are 'digging in' or grabbing something solid. Most opponents can easily shift to another position before attacking, or two could attack from different angles. Probably one to be dissected in another thread...the rules are really quite unnecessarily nuanced.