ghost-angel

If I were to implement a Sanity Mechanic it'd work more like a renewable resource like Stun or Endurance. As you're introduced to new, horrifying, facts about reality it depletes - too many new things at once and something horrible happens, but if you're given enough time to recover, internalize, and normalize the information your Sanity restores itself and you can move on. It would work much better for campaign longevity.

Nope. In any given campaign something can be used to abuse the campaign's expectations.

Aiding Aid + Power 2 isn't illegal, but it will get hit by the law of diminishing returns very quickly, since Aid can only add a maximum of the die roll (i.e. 1D6 Aid can add only up to 6 Active Points to the original Aid) and since Aiding two powers at once is an Advantage, eventually, you won't be able to add enough Aid to get more dice out of it. Also, sometimes an abuse in one game won't be an abuse in another... I mean x32 Duplicates all with Mind Link and a x2 Penetrating KA broke a game I was in (and Unkindness of Ravens was truly unkind...), wouldn't have done much in a different campaign though. But then you get shenanigans like the following: Does Body, Alternate Defense (Hardened Smell Flash Defense) which is perfectly book legal, and utterly ridiculous for 99.99% of all games out there. You can do some seriously weird stuff with the system, on purpose. Just gotta reign it in to play with the Campaign at hand.

Precog doesn't need to be addressed, it already is. Players who have poor reading comprehension and skewed expectations is not really something the rules can address... that's the GMs job. RE the Money Perk, it's addressed well enough. What isn't addressed is in any given Setting Book there's little or no space dedicated to translating that Perk into a meaningful number for the game at hand.

stupid utopia's putting everyone out of work.

That's like saying we should have a "Movie" supplement for Hero because all the movies have a bunch of thematic ideas that are the same almost everywhere... Anime is a medium, a book needed to cover the differences of all the various genres would be insanely large... almost like you'd have to split it up into different Genres.. like Fantasy, Sci-Fi, Superheroic, Wuxia, ... It's also worth a note that a lot of 'common themes' Westerners see in Anime are cultural in nature, and not inherent to Anime or Manga itself, but Japanese Culture.

I find this much more likely than "programming" as the rule predates the software development.

Don't forget Conversation and/or Persuasion to cover Layer 0 Networking issues.... ?

Ah, yeah, it changed completely from 5th to 6th.

what skill levels?

Nope. 10-point Skill that can be Limited, but otherwise just covers Attacks.

It's been around since 5E, I think there's some intent behind costs and things like Armor/Resistant Defense; or possibly that a single source of a Defense (SFX) needs to be either Hardened or Not. Every once in a while I think of a reason for it to be that way, but most of the time it feels like a rule because someone, somewhere, went Full Munchkin.

Not sure how you'd weight it, but PRE via PRE Attacks are very effective sometimes, especially in the opening phases of combat - losing 1/2 or even a Full Phase from a good Attack can alter a battle significantly. And of course, this entire thing revolves around combat effectiveness and effectively ignores non-combat builds/encounters entirely.

One thing that is normally common is for the build to actually take a "Hand To Hand Only" or "Ranged Only" limitation of -1; making it effectively a 5pt Skill, which is a good deal. But yes, if you're using 2-Weapon Fighting for the default All Attacks, generally speaking +2 OCV is the better deal, barring OCV caps.

For games that have some focus on Tech, but not total focus (i.e. probably not playing Hackers Hero, but a more rounded Cyberpunk game) I broke down into the following broad skills for flavor: Programming - actually writing software Phreaking - phone systems Networking - all layers (physical and software) Hacking - part programming, but mostly the actual act of digital B&E (basically a computer only version of Security Systems) (this on top of Security Systems for physical security, and Electronics gets hardware done.) It's not super detailed, but it gets the job done for gaming. I find it has just enough detail to emulate a small group of tech-saavy characters that each have a field of expertise.

Whose running a Marathon in Combat?

IMO - Utter Nonsense. Yes, the Character Creation Tables, 5ER p28, also in 5E and 6E.

D&D was based on Tolkein and Jack Vance (the magic system is Vance, while the races are Tolkein). The Monk goes all the way back to the Blackmoor release, it's based on Remo Williams, and probably also no small part on the popularity of Kung Fu movies in that era as well. The class totally fits into the utter mish-mish of fantasy and medieval Europe that is D&D.

I don't want to just come with negativity on things like this, but honestly - Rule Of X has always felt like an extremely bad concept; and not just for the reasons Hugh has pointed out. Even if 5th it could be massively unreliable, to the point of (IMO) actual detriment to play. What if I build a character with 0 Offensive/Attack Powers, but is still a valuable, and contributing member during combat. And not just with buffs. Rule Of X can never fully take into account Controller Types who alter the playing field indirectly in a constantly dynamic situation. (I am currently playing such a character, literally 0 Damage capability. Still effective.) Even the official rules assume a character will have all the basic elements in, more or less, equal value. Reducing a character to a single number will almost always negatively impact the game. There's a reason why there are Limit and Range tables of a full suite of stats at the start of the book.

The vehicle itself is probably built with Continuous or Fuel Charges. The driver could possibly just 'coast' the vehicle for a turn (no turning, no maneuvers, just straight ahead), or deal with issues of slowly wearing themselves down as they drive through combat... Even at 1END/Phase they could probably last through your average Combat length easily. Marathon runners would use Long Term Endurance, which is END Loss based on END Used vs REC Stat, and has no Post-12 factors, they would be uneffected.

Removing this element slows the game down a bit, as you'll find players will (at least attempt) to get a Recovery Action in during the Turn to make up for it. It's not a horrible game changer to do so, but it can frustrate players. Will need to either keep the "Post-12 Only" for negative stun level, or find a replacement, however.

I never claimed expertise, just knowledge. People can have knowledge without claiming expertise... I also (apparently wrongly) assumed that ST ships had a relatively similar sized crew ratio compared to modern warships, and I know crew have cleaning stations to keep the ship clean; I was suggesting extending that to the civilian portion - but apparently if I don't say something with an overly intense level of near hyperbolic precision comprehension just gets lost.. (the implication was that since they never actually showed anyone doing the cleaning, it could be civilian, crew, or both, with stations). After looking up on various ST wikis the complement of the Enterprise D (just chose the most known one) and the size vs literally any modern warship, the crew is of comparable or significantly smaller size for a ship that is at least an order of magnitude larger - so either it is automated, or the tiny number of crew clean an inordinately large amount of space, or have civilian help (as per the question asked). I suppose we can get back to the argument of wether the Federation is civilian, military, or run by clowns who can't do either.

Given the size differences - all the information on modern US Warship crew complements adds to this discussion is that either 1) the ST writers have woefully underestimated the amount of crew needed to work that ship or 2) The future is pretty hyper-automated, and maintenance free.

An extra point in CON never hurts.

If I were to get into semantics about swords in a game, the long straight blade would add a bit against opponents susceptible to Piercing (stabs), and the curved blades against opponents that slashing attacks worked better against. Otherwise the difference always seems to come down to a bunch of dudes yelling "Katana!" "Longsword!" ala Daffy & Bugs deciding who gets hunted....