Netzilla

There is a special hell for coders who don't comment (let alone document) their changes.

Thanks for the well-wishes folks. I do feel better (gastricly speaking). Now, back to your regularly scheduled crankiness. . .

We are talking comic books (or comic book logic, anyway). In both comics and Hollywood, the training montage is more than enough to turn almost anyone into a world-class warrior (let alone ageless demi-goddesses with physical prowess beyond normal mortals). Not realistic, but a long-accepted trope of the genre.

If the only game effect is +1 to various skill rolls, I would just build it as the appropriate Skill Level with the Focus advantage. Larceny Backpack: +1 with 'thieving skills' (4 AP), OIF (variety of tools, -1/2) (3 RP)

Actually, now that I think about this, I guess it's not really any different that CE with a DEX Roll penalty automatically requiring a DEX Roll to avoid falling over.

Not sure how you'd cost that. On the other hand, if you already require a casting roll, using CE to create a penalty to the roll is pretty straight-forward.

Well, a loud enough sound will overcome a waterfall's roar, which is not the case for Darkness (one of Hero's few 'absolutes'). So, it can be argued that they aren't mechanically equivalent. Basically, Darkness prevents sound, while the waterfall overpowers it. In most cases, it's a distinction without a difference. In this case, it could matter (again, depending on campaign metaphysics/sfx reasoning).

Frankly, these questions are as old as D&D's Silence spell. I remember an editorial column back in the day talking about why a Silence spell blocked spellcasting but being near a loud waterfall didn't. So, really, this goes beyond mechanics and into the metaphysics/sfx of what the Incantations are actually doing.

Whether or not the rules are official (and I agree that they are official) is a separate issue from whether or not they are balanced. For the purposes of this thread, I think that balance is the more important issue. The APG, itself, admits that its rules may not be well balanced. As a result, they don't make compelling examples for how to construct well-balanced house rules or custom advantages & limitations.

Pardon me for a moment of self-pitty. Stupic colitis is acting up so I've got an upset stomach, aching joints and generally feel like crap all around. Just in time for the weekend. Yay. Ah well, only 30 more minutes before I'm off work. Then I can go home, eat something bland and then maybe lay down for a while.

I pointed above (post 7) that they're similar to a VPP with certain built-in limitations.

Yes they do. They can be allotted a base pool size at GM discretion. They can then buy them up at a rate of X CPs per Y pool points. The ratio is also set by the GM. It's the armory that you don't pay for.

It's no more going to die than if your supercar would self-destruct if it got stolen out of your vehicle pool. What you're giving up in the case of the Resource Pool is access to the power itself. Once you place the curse on something that curse is not available for anything else. You would either need to take the curse off the original target or acquire a new curse if you wanted to curse something else. How easy either of those are will depend on the nature of the curse and the specific rules regarding magic for the campaign. Note that I'm not saying a Resource Pool would work for every type of magic system. That's why I stated in my original post that what you would do would depend on how magic works for that campaign. One in which magic is based on a Resource Pool, however, would need SFX that were compatible with the rules for Resource Pools. For example, magic that requires spells be imbued into objects (wands, potions, scrolls or some other physical vessel) would easily fit the rules for resource pools. On the other hand, magic which is entirely inherent to the caster (such as most magic in Middle Earth) would be less so.

Okay, let's approach it from this direction: what aspects of Independent are you looking to emulate?

He did so in post #10 of this thread.

The fact that the points are disconnected from the character and once the power is lost its gone for good with no recompense for the character. That's a big part of what Independent did.

Resource Pools originally came up (I believe) in Dark Champions for 5e. For 6e, you can find rules for them in AGP1, page 191. It's somewhat similar to a VPP in that you have a pool of points that you can use to swap powers in and out. It has the limitations that you have to have access to your "armory" to make the swap, you can only use items that currently exists in your "armory" and if anything in it is lost or destroyed, it's gone forever. Adding new things to your armory could be as simple as buying a new piece of equipment or as complex as researching long lost lore to unlock the secrets of ancient magic; it depends on how the pool works as defined in the campaign guidelines. Any spell cast in an "Independent" fashion would end up gone (basically you're permanently giving up the magic required to run that spell indefinitely and independent of your control and upkeep).

Gangler Rebound Elastilad (for that Legion of Super Heroes feel)

What else do we know about him besides his power set? Any personality quirks or interesting oragin tidbits? On his power set, what else does his stretching allow him to do? Does he bounce? Can he change shape?

Is this a PC or NPC ability? If it's NPC, I just list out the mechanical effects and don't worry about an "official" power write-up. If it's for a PC, then it depends on the mechanics of the magic system I'm using. Personally, I'm a fan of using the Resource Pool rules for magic. In that case, the pool works very similar to Independant as the items in the pool can be permanently lost without any recompense to the character.

Christopher's view is also pretty close to the view expressed in the last paragraph of the intro to APG1.

First, you're replying to a single sentence out of a 3 paragraph post. Second, you seem to be under the impression that I'm somehow talking in absolutes rather than giving general advice. Third, a 2 or 3 Advantage and Limitation combo is hardly a "litany". If you're trying to use Limited Power as short-hand for something longer than that, your explanation of the LP is likely going to end up being just as long or less clear. Sure, you can use Limited Power: Gun (-2 1/4) in place of OAF (-1), Charges (8 shots, -1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4) and STR Min (10, -1/2), but you're going to have to explain how "Gun" is limiting somewhere on your character sheet and that's likely just as long as the list of official limitations would be. You act like this is new with 5/6e. I started Hero with 3e and there have always been arguments about the "best" or "correct" way to build something. I'd seen tons of over-engineered builds back in the 4e days. I've also seen plenty of vague power write-ups as well; where the only way you can tell how the character was meant to work was to read the full character bio (and maybe not even then). Personally, I prefer something somewhere in between.

I'm not saying "never change the rules". Like I stated, I've got nothing against using a custom solution to things that the rules don't really cover. Limited Power is an example of a codified rule for 'if you don't see an existing Limitation that covers your situation, make one up'. The key factor in deciding to use Limited Power, IMO, is that there is not already an existing Limitation to do what you want. Also, I'm willing to entertain house rules for things one wishes Hero did differently (I have my own for stabilizing bleeding characters because I feel the existing rules actually penalize high Body characters in some situations and I've proposed several of my own alternatives to the use of the Speed Chart). However, I advise doing so with caution and, especially for new players & GMs not familiar with the system, using the RAW first to better understand what it is you're changing. So, again, if an existing Advantage/Limitation combo exists that does what you need (which, in this case, would be Side Effect with the possibility of Reduced END), you're probably better off using that combo than making up a new Advantage/Limitation. You'll confuse fewer people, it will look less like you're trying to munchkin the system, and you will have an easier time finding official rulings and advice on how that power/ability/rule works.

It's basically just an instance of the 'Rule of Unintended Consequences of House Rules'. Like any other house rule, a custom Advantage/Limitation may end up interacting with official rules in unintended ways. As a result, if an existing Adv/Lim (i.e. rule) combination exits, you're probably better off using that. If you can't or don't want to use the existing, then be prepared to have to make spot-rulings or revisions when oddball (unexpected) rules interactions happen (up to and including tossing the house rule out entirely). That's why, when I'm running a campaign, I try to limit house rules (including custom Adv/Lim) to only things not already covered in the official rules.

A friend or family member of the wife might (unfairly) blame him for failing to recue her. Also, since he used payroll deductions to build the suit, someone else in the company may have found out. If he did any design or concept work while on the clock, the company may consider the suit their property. This could be a simple complication (ongoing legal battle in the backstory), or the company may go the more expedient route of hiring a merc to steal the suit in order to avoid negative publicity.