megaplayboy

Steve, will there be a section discussing divine "perks", such as (optional) Divine Ranks? I did see such a thing in one or two Hero books, as I recall(being a Greater God was worth 50 points, IIRC). I suppose there might be a few other divine skills, talents and powers which might merit some discussion as well.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/netanyahu-vows-to-start-annexing-west-bank-in-bid-to-rally-the-right/ar-BBVGAV1?ocid=spartanntp Technically, politics, but of the non-American variety. Annexation is a very worrisome prospect for regional stability and any hope of a peaceful resolution.

High school valedictorian. Graduated Harvard Magna cum Laude, dual major in history and literature. Rhodes Scholar, graduated Oxford with first class honors degree in philosophy, politics and economics. Naval Intelligence officer in the Navy Reserve. Deployed to Afghanistan 2014. Speaks Norwegian, Spanish, Italian, Maltese, Arabic, Dari and French. Plays guitar and piano, and played in 2013 with the South Bend Symphony Orchestra as a guest piano soloist. His husband seems like a really nice guy, too.

I and my old gaming group in Northern California had a "shared universe" with up to 5 different GMs(rotating duties) contributing NPCs and storylines. This universe persisted through several different superhero campaigns, with lots of the previous backstory being maintained into the newer campaigns. There were some conflicts over overall direction at times, but in general it was a blast to run/play in. Very similar to actual comic book universes, which have multiple titles, writers and editors.

You can have Hunted by Evil Boss/Wicked Stepmother/Vindictive Ex-Wife/School Bully--the hunted doesn't have to be a criminal or evil organization, it can be someone in the everyday life of the PC who makes their life miserable on occasion. You can also, of course, have the Hunted be the PC's arch-nemesis or whathaveyou.

I'd make liberal use of extra time requirements, difficult skill rolls required, extra endurance, maybe even some stun/body damage, limited conscious control, etc. Generally the "this isn't something you can do in combat" is a good GM ruling for over the top feats.

To build a universe, first build a neighborhood, then a city, then a country, a world, and so forth. Start small, as you describe, then flesh things out and expand the stakes over time. A campaign setting that lasts long enough will become an entire campaign universe.

Well, there used to be a fair number of such villains in 1st-3rd edition Champions--the Geodesics, for example, were built on only 200 points apiece, and there were multiple villains who weren't particularly overwhelming, such as Bulldozer. It's not difficult to write up such villains, just skimp on noncombat stuff, give them just enough power to hurt heroes, just enough defense and stun to not be one-shotted or one-stunned, and modest mobility. They should be tougher than a Viper agent but weaker than the heroes they're fighting. Or alternatively, you write up a team that outnumbers the heroes but the individual villains are weaker. One other option is villain teams that are a mix of weak and more capable characters. If you take out the weak ones quickly, you can team up on the stronger ones. But if you ignore either for too long...

I think, if you have mega villains and master villains in a setting, it's reasonable to sprinkle in a few mega heroes, legends and icons as well, just to counterbalance them. Players do occasionally complain about being overshadowed by "ringers", but that's more a matter of GM misuse of such NPCs rather than their mere existence being some terrible injustice. Who, after all, are those 250 point newbie heroes aspiring to emulate? Captain Average?

If the ACA is abruptly ended without a replacement, then millions would lose coverage no later than the end of whatever year the ACA was ended in. Without protections for pre-existing condition exclusions, millions would be unable to buy new coverage. And they would remember who was responsible when they went to the ballot box. I would lose coverage if the ACA is repealed, because I don't have a steady permanent employer.

Just saw it yesterday. Generally liked it. A few thoughts: --love that the Kree are (accurately) portrayed as elitist, imperialist pr**ks --didn't think CM too overpowered, I put her on par with Thor, so she's the WW to his Superman --these films are getting a tad formulaic and I would like to see more risks taken going forward --Now I really want to see Super Skrull in a movie, or maybe even the Skrullian Skymaster(sadly, Marvel could film a Squadron Supreme trilogy that outperforms Justice League by every metric) --I expect to see a grown up Monica Rambeau in CM 2/3

I believe that Streetwise and Deduction are still everyman 8- skills, yes? Treat the major clues as "easy" level tasks(+5 to roll) and have them roll their deduction to get the inference you believe they should get. Then if legwork is a factor, again give them an easy bonus to get the most basic information. If they're still stuck, then have something happen to advance the plot and move them further along. At this point it should be a matter of either a player finally clueing in, or handing them another deduction roll. Short of handing them a stack of Sherlock Holmes books, a handbook for criminal investigators, a few seasons of CSI, and Critical Thinking for Dummies, you can't turn a team of combat monsters into sleuths. But you can probably ask them to go through the motions a bit.

Technically it's a pistol. The .223 loses a little oomph due to the shorter barrel. Kel-Tec is known for making some funky fresh firearms.

No. I don't agree with that. There can be a meaningful distinction between "natural/innate" OCV and combat skill. Just as one can have a superhuman stat and one can have a stat based skill level/roll regarded as "superhuman". The OCV level listed in the guidelines is for the OCV "stat", it doesn't indicate an absolute cap on OCV level. The question is, what number of skill levels would be "average", what number would be "exceptional", what number would be "legendary" and what would be "superhuman"? It matters, because there are definitely "human" characters in various campaign settings running around with a LOT of CSLs.

I am gratified that the "anti-SJW backlash" largely failed to materialize in any manner that actually significantly affected box office revenues. If anything, at this point the "anti-SJW" rants have gotten more obnoxious than any excesses of "political correctness" from the left side of the aisle, imo.

That's my point. I think there should be. If an OCV stat of 10 is the "max" stat for a Legendary human, then it follows that a number of combat skill levels which exceed 10(or thereabouts) should reasonably be considered superhuman as well.

I would like to see a set of "benchmarks" for combat skill levels, similar to the stat range benchmarks for "normal", "exceptional", "legendary" and "superhuman". What is a "superhuman" number of combat skill levels? I'd humbly suggest that, for example, having 10 skill levels with all combat would be "superhuman". That is, no human, even a legendary one, should be so skilled as to have that many all-combat skill levels.

I have a few thoughts on ultrapowerful PCs built upon skads of points: 1) Throw out the concept of cost-efficiency and/or combat efficiency. Dr. Destroyer, in his high end writeup, spends around a third of his points on perks. He's incredibly formidable, but he's not designed to squeeze the maximum efficiency and lethality out of the points available. Generally veteran players design their PCs for cost/combat efficiency precisely because their budgets are limited and they're trying to stretch points to fill out their character's capabilities. Really isn't necessary when you have a 1000+ point character. 2) Think, as a GM and/or player, about taking a Rock-Paper-Scissors approach to PCs--powerful but limited in scope. Not 6 guys running around with the same 100 STR, 35 DEX and 150 point VPP. NovaBlast has awesome energy powers but falters in close-quarters combat with powerful bricks and martial artists. PrimeMover can lift buildings but is vulnerable to magic and/or mental attacks. And so forth. 3) Make sure every PC has a physical weakness or limitation, and some kind of major limitation out of combat as well. Silver Age Superman could lose his powers under a red sun, was affected by a rainbow of kryptonite rocks, and had no special protection against magic, either. Green Lantern's ring was powerless against anything yellow. The Flash has no special senses other than the ability to see the world in slow motion, and his defenses are not ludicrously high either. Even Dr. Manhattan has some serious limitations on his freedom of action. Thor used to turn back to Donald Blake after being separated from his hammer for 60 seconds. If you do these three things, you will have a group of awesomely powerful superheroes who can still lose a fight, and who still need to depend upon each other.

You could set caps at the beginning and then raise the caps at a steady rate, say +1 to max CV per 50-100 xp, +1 Dc to max damage per 50-100 xp, and so forth. This keeps people from just plowing all their xp into more damage and more CV. You can also make sure that noncombat skills and interactions are very important in the campaign, and scale those challenges up as well. So maybe the heroes have to put 10-15xp out of every 50 into noncombat stuff.

Tears in Heaven would be particularly inappropriate.

52, stroke. Most famous for playing Dylan McKay in Beverly Hills 90210, he also played Buffy's boyfriend in the movie Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It's jarring when famous people around my age suddenly die.

Characters whose conception puts them in a certain "range" could still be extremely effective out of combat, and moderately effective in combat via a variety of means(having an attack that will at least do some damage to most opponents, having a variety of non-damage attacks that help other PCs(throws and grabs, flashes, entangles,distracting via images or somesuch, etc.).

On knowledge skills, going from the most general to most specific, according to The Ultimate Skill, would incur a penalty up to -60. That suggests a peak number for KS, around maybe 100-105 or less(figure the -60, plus an "impossible" modifier of -10, then enough left to make a half roll/critical on a roll of 17 or less on 3d6). One such skill apiece for People, Places, Things and Groups would cover everything. Similar treatment of sciences, languages, professional skills etc, combined with purchase of all the standard stat-based skills, would probably wind up with a character who has every skill at maximum remotely feasible/practical levels for a cost of maybe 1000-1500 points. Honestly, the most pricey stuff for a character to buy is probably perks like followers, vehicles and bases. For powers, obviously duplication, multiform and a number of other abilities which are very expensive(clairsentience with a bunch of extras added, e.g.). Ultrapowerful mental powers and transforms probably yield the best return on investment, just because even strong-willed foes with mental defense only go up to a certain level, while nigh-invulnerable opponents will be more commonplace at the epic/cosmic level.

Which is fine, I guess, though as has been stated, you will find similar or comparable flaws among most of the major candidates. Harris has issues related to her conduct as a prosecutor and AG. Klobuchar has issues with how she treats her subordinates. Biden...dear lord, where to start? Sanders has an oppo file a foot thick. Booker is tainted by association with Wall Street and charter schools. Tulsi Gabbard has so many issues she arguably is already disqualified.