esampson

So set up the game as a 515/125 game (assuming membership costs 15 points and has 25 points in complications. I couldn't quite figure out what your point totals were suppose to be). As for limiting builds/concepts just decide whether parts are optional or mandatory. As an example KS: Avenger Foes 11- might not be something everyone has, especially the new recruits or people like the Hult, although it is highly encouraged. On the other hand anyone who is a member of Alpha Flight has Federal/National Police Powers (Canada). Anything that would prevent a person from gaining such powers would also invalidate them from joining Alpha Flight. Just make it a house rule that if you don't take something in the package it reduces the maximum points and complications the character can take.

It is possible that it was re-affirming a rule about minimum distance, except that if that was the case why was no attempt made to reaffirm the rule for any other form of movement? It would seem just as important to reiterate the rule for superleap. And why does it seem to single out fixed and floating locations rather than addressing teleportation as a whole? Yes, there is an inconsistency in limiting the effect to fixed and floating locations but it doesn't seem to me to be wholly illogical. Characters could still teleport to the location using the rules for non-fixed/floating locations which would include the possibility of misjumping and the use of the MegaScale multiplier when they misjump. The inconsistency might be an artifact added for reasons of balance, making it so that there is a purpose to purchasing multiple meters of teleportation and then more reasonable multiples of MegaScale. Again, this isn't to say that it couldn't be a copy/paste error. It seems highly likely that it is. However, without some kind of ruling from on high I don't think you can say that it is 'definitely' or 'clearly' a copy/paste error. I think that at best all that could be said is that it is 'probably' a copy/paste error.

Right. I'm not arguing that you weren't able to do that in 5th edition or that the text was copied and pasted (I can see both facts by examining the 5th edition book). What I am saying is that it is possible that it wasn't erroneously copied and pasted and that it is an intentional limitation of MegaScale teleport. For one thing, even in 5th edition revised it seems to be a special case. Either the rule is stating something that doesn't need stating because it is redundant (characters can't teleport distances shorter than their minimum distance if they are teleporting to a fixed or floating location) or else the rule is stating that there is some special restriction to teleporting to fixed or floating locations with MegaScale teleportation. A simple interpretation would be that even if a character has the additional +1/4 advantage to MegaScale they can't teleport to a fixed or floating location (as a fixed or floating location) if they are closer than the normal MegaScale multiplier. The reason for such a ruling might be to deal with the specific work around of purchasing the absolute minimum distance in teleportation with a large multiplier. Assuming that such a special rule was created for 5th edition there is no reason to assume that it might not be placed into 6th edition as well. So while it is easy to look at the rule and assume that it is an error caused by copying and pasting from a previous edition that might not be a correct assumption. Of course I could just as easily be wrong in my assumptions which is why I was asking if there was anything available where Steve Long said that it was a mistake or an errata that said to remove that section.

Why would such a rule exist in 5th edition? For one thing it is redundant since you already wouldn't be able to teleport a distance less than your multiple since MegaScale worked differently in 5th. For another thing why would it even mention fixed and floating locations since the rule actually applies to all teleporting? This isn't to say it's not possible that it is an error caused by cut and paste but can you point me to an errata or statement by Steve or something similar?

The basic concept is sound but there are some issues with the specific execution related to Megascale and teleportation. This is a really awkward statement because in general the shortest range increment of someone's MegaTeleportation is 1m=1m according to the rules. However when that literal definition is used the statement becomes one of blinding obviousness (characters cannot teleport a shorter range than any limitations they may have taken will allow) so I think some interpreting of the statement has to be done. I think what is meant is that characters cannot teleport to fixed or floating locations as fixed or floating location if they happen to be closer than 1m x the Megascale multiplier. They can teleport to fixed or floating locations as if they are regular locations since there isn't any implied limitation that regular locations have to be further away than that and it doesn't make sense that by spending extra points you gain a restriction. 1m x the Megascale multiplier makes sense because pretty much anything else can be either reduced to 0m or at the very least some given distance (such as 1 km if the restriction is 1m x the lowest Megascale multiplier). Using that interpretation you probably want a multiplier that is lower than your nearest tube. In the case of a Justice League teleporter you would want a multiplier of 10,000 km since your closest tube would be about 35,000 km away (the height of an object in geosynchronous orbit and incidentally a problem with the current build of 1m with 10,000 km of Megascale). Quite likely you would want a multiplier of only 1000 km (or possibly even 100 km) so you could have tubes nearer to each other, though you could always get by with a trip up to the station and then back down to another tube which is only 100m away from the first tube. There's a couple of other minor things that you probably also need to buy. As people have said you probably want no relative velocity since people landing will have a fairly significant velocity change over the station's. Position change is also probably necessary or else people teleporting to the opposite side of the planet are literally going to end up on their heads (unless they start the trip standing on their head). Then you also probably need to purchase Usable on others (since it isn't the base itself that's teleporting), quite likely as an attack, and probably with no range modifiers.

Whoops. My bad. In previous editions it was legitimate to take both. Even as it sits I'm not 100% sold that it is never appropriate (though certainly as it now sits the RAW forbid it), just that in the vast majority of cases it is probably inappropriate. Of course in many, many ways the OIAID limitation itself is now superseded by Multiform. In the past I was not a very big fan of Multiform because I thought it was an overly cumbersome way of handling OIAID, but nowadays I have become much more sold on its usefulness.

Actually, what you could do is simply take both the OIF limitation as well as the OIAID limitation. There's nothing that directly says that the two limitations are mutually exclusive. Examples of Obvious foci that could still be used without changing into alternate identity would include things such as guns or knives the character may have hidden on their person, wrist blasters that they keep covered up with long sleeves, or amulets that they have to pull out in order to use. In all those cases the focus needs to be visible when it is being used (an amulet that can be used while it is being worn underneath a shirt is Inobvious, at least in most cases) but using them doesn't necessitate a complete costume change. On the other hand something like a suit of armor like Iron Man's current suits might be too big to hide underneath normal clothing. You might get into some funny grey areas with things like the ability to throw an oversized overcoat over the armor but by and large that character can't just walk down the street in their armored suit without causing a lot of attention. Of course that might not work for all campaigns because of interpretations. The exact definition of 'Obvious' isn't completely nailed down. Some GMs might rule that anything obvious focus that provides defense cannot be hidden underneath normal clothing. This would include things like a 'bullet proof' costume. Others might be a bit more flexible and allow an OIF costume to be concealed beneath street clothing (the costumes properties being obvious when people can examine the character).

I like the core concept that you have, mainly that Superman's powers fluctuated a bit depending on how much attention he was spending, but I would still stay away from OIAID. As has been stated it isn't a matter of 'doesn't use' or 'won't use' the power in normal ID. It's a matter of 'cannot use'. Even if it were a psychological limitation that couldn't be overcome with an ego roll the character could use their power if the were being mind controlled with a high enough roll. That said, it is mostly a matter of semantics. You could easily assign a -1/4 Limited Power limitation to say 'will never voluntarily use power while not in costume' or something to the effect which gives you the same point total as OIAID. However, semantics do on rare occasions wind up being important.

But those are highly unusual cases that are so rare that they are basically "-0" limitations. The number of occasions where someone else has been able to grab or prevent Thor from using his hammer are so limited that you couldn't really justify an OAF or OIF limitation (though when it is a walking stick that's a different case). In 6E inaccesible foci can be taken away from an unconscious or restrained character in a turn. This is one of the reasons why Tony Stark's armor doesn't work well as OIF (though it is often done that way). Even excluding the 'time dilation' effects that normally occur in Champions (I can completely change my clothes in 3 seconds?) in the comic books there have historically been safeguards that have prevented people from simply removing his armor and while ultimately a determined villain could probably come up with a way to do it it would take way more time than a turn for most. So I would personally say that those rare occasions where someone else manages to use Thor's hammer or are able to prevent it from returning to him are uncommon enough that they probably fall more under the rules of 'special effects' than full limitations (as in, this is the special effect of why my hammer isn't a normal focus and why I don't have a recoverable charge when I throw it).

Yeah. Like I said, he works really well for that. The multiform even has the advantage that each form can have different followers (thus when he is Tony Stark he can have robo-Iron Man and robo-Hulkbuster as followers, when he is Iron Man he can have robo-Hulkbuster as a follower, and when he is Hulkbuster he can have robo-Iron Man as a follower).

Not sure why you would give him Multiform 'for his own Genius' (I'm not even sure what that means. He can somehow change his mind so that in one mind he's good with mathematics and in another he's good with other sciences?). As for his armor, I would go with OIAID primarily for the reason that the armor cannot be 'simply' removed from him. Especially in the comic books it is a fairly arduous process for some bad guy to remove his armor due to all sorts of safeguards put into it. If I wanted to be 'accurate' I would go ahead and add a -0 limitation that his armor can take damage as if it were a focus. One part of me says that it should be worth more than that but if you make it a -1/4 then the limitation and the OIAID add up to the same thing as an OIF, but without as many limitations. Doing his various armor suits as 'partial MultiForms' works very well, however. You just add some limitations to the MultiForm cost that restricts his ability to change to the different forms. You can even make things like an outer suit that encompasses an inner suit and which has to be jettisoned to allow him to use the abilities of the inner suit.

As stated above, there isn't really any 'granularity' problem with most megascale movement. A character with megascale flying can stop literally anywhere along their line of travel. They are not limited to travelling within full megascale multiples, not are they required to travel in 1m 'base' hexes. This means a character with 30m of megascale flight can travel 57m is they want to by both lowering their megascale multiplier to 2m per meter and only using 28.5 'base' meters of flight. So no, granularity is generally not a constraint (I think a couple of the powers might be somewhat affected since they can 'scatter', such as leaping, and that scatter could be affected by the megascale, but over all, no, it isn't a problem). As for it being a MacGuffin for moving the players about, that's more of an issue for the GM. If they want their game to be such that players have to travel widely then they should give the players some method of doing that. Preferably some method that has limitations that prevent it from being overly abuseable. Star Trek style teleporters that don't work well in combat (someone has to remain in the same hex for several seconds for it to work), ballistic transports that allow characters to literally be 'fired' from their base to the scene of the disturbance, or like Spider-Man perhaps the heroes only respond to events that are relatively close to them and it is up to the GM to manufacture those events. As GM controlled MacGuffins those don't require megascale at all. They could just be bought with absurd amounts of points. All that said, I'm not quite sure MegaScale movement is bad, per say. Yeah, it is a bit inconsistent that when Batman starts to get his Batbutt handed to him that he doesn't just whip out his Batcommunicator and within seconds Superman, Martian Manhunter, Green Lantern, and the Flash aren't there backing him up and laying the smackdown on whoever he is fighting. Comics have had those inconsistencies for years. They've been noted, parodied, 'worked around', and generally addressed in multiple manners. It's just something that happens in superhero comics. Kind of like lifting buses by their bumpers and disguising one's identity by putting on a pair of glasses. It doesn't really make sense, but it's just handwaved away. Which means that, like any other power, MegaScale may not be appropriate for every campaign. If you want to run a style of campaign where someone trying to lift a bus is probably just going to tear off wherever it is that they are gripping the bus and the glasses disguise doesn't work (and I'll confess to having played in more than a few of those campaigns and enjoying them a great deal) then yeah, MegaScale probably isn't appropriate. If you want a campaign where people can race down nuclear missiles, on the other hand, there's really nothing wrong with MegaScale. As long as everyone is having fun then you're never 'doing it wrong'.

As others have said, OIAID is a 'can't' situation and not a 'won't'. This can be viewed similar to the occasional argument that arises over a particularly odd physical/psychological complication. If a hero could be forced to use the power through Mind Control without changing into their AID then obviously the power isn't OI, just MI. U C? If the problem with using the power without changing into costume is psychological then I would advise doing that either through a Limited Power limitation (the catchall for any limitation that fails to fall in another category) or else to take it is a PsyComp. However, given that as a limitation it is not as limiting as the full OIAID the limitation logically wouldn't be worth as much, making it a -0.

Because using any MegaScale at all for movement takes a full phase action and drop you to 1/2 DCV. Even if you are only moving 10m with your MegaScale bonus it's a full move and you are unable to perfom a move by, move through, strafe, etc. This is explicitly stated. That said, I'm not a huge fan of MegaScale, either, but it's more of a campaign flavor thing. I like games where a character flying at Mach-1 is really impressive, which you don't get if all it takes is a +1 advantage to your regular flight. On the other hand if you like campaigns where people can fly at ridiculously high speeds it works out pretty well.

No, because Megascale is already scalable. Unless you have a limitation that states that you have to use it in the full amount (or some minimum) you can vary the use of the power.

All I can say is that the situation has an awful lot of variables. I've played in games where player vs. player battles have been highly successful. Usually they took the form of sparring matches rather than 'mix ups' but there were the occasional storylines where one player would get maneuvered into taking on another player through some plot mechanism. The thing was, however, it worked for that group. It worked for those players and it worked for those characters. I recently found myself in a somewhat similar situation with a completely new group and a completely different character in which it would not have worked out well for a whole list of reasons. The first was that I simply disliked the other player who was trying to engineer the 'PvP' combat. I felt that the player was one of those ones who was much more focused on being the toughest guy around and not as focused on telling the story (in his defense, however, it wasn't as if all he was was a combat monster with no interests in telling a story. Just that he was one of those people who seemed like he would only be happy if his character was the toughest). His character was a super strong high defense regenerating person barely out of his teens who had only fairly recently (as in the past few years) obtained his powers. My character, on the other hand, was an 80's Wolverine expy who had never been given an adamantium skeleton or claws (I created the concept back in the 80's before it was established that he naturally had claws). Rather that going the violent psychopath route he had gone down the 'old soldier' route. The idea was he still had the berserker core that Wolverine had, but over the decades had completely suppressed it to the point where the character had no berserks or enrages, no ability to 'berserk on command' and gain any kind of stat shifts or anything, but physiologically speaking that capability was all down there. He just never, ever, let it out. He was physically a bit stronger and faster than a human, he had enhanced senses, he healed a lot faster than a normal person, and that was about it. He also had a mess of skills and used gear such as a bullet proof costume (hey, he can heal if he's shot, but it still hurts like Hell). So as a result of this any kind of PvP between the two characters would have just been a horrible hot mess. First off my character had no interest at all in fighting his, as long as his character didn't start hurting people, which he wasn't going to do. Fighting wasn't something my character ever did for fun. He did it because it was necessary. Sure, he would practice relentlessly, but when he did it was always with a focus, some kind of scenario. If he ever felt the need to work on a scenario so he could take down the other guys character he wouldn't practice with that guy, because he wouldn't want that guy to be getting practice against him. Secondly, as I said, I didn't really hold out a lot of trust in the other player. I figured that if we did spar one of two things were going to happen. Either he would win (entirely likely given the build of his character) or he would get huffy because he wasn't winning and would get upset. Was I sure that would happen? No, but I thought it was really likely. Even if that didn't happen I would probably have ended up fairly resentful that my character was forced into that situation since it was not one he would ICly be interested in. So in all likelihood a PvP brawl between those two would have been a mess on both the IC and OOC level. Again, that doesn't mean such a thing couldn't work. As I said at the start I've had great success in games doing the PvP thing between two heroes. I'm just saying that it has the capability of being a complete disaster as well. It can work well, but be sure you really know your players before you do it.

I can't really speculate how mutants would react without some more data. Two really big questions are how common are mutants and how easy is it to detect them. If mutants are only 1 in 1,000,000 then the United States would have a population of around 300 mutants. While this might seem like a lot it is a vanishingly small minority. If it is difficult to detect them then most of them would probably hide as it would be very difficult for the government to find them and it would be nearly impossible for them to find one another. Also, how powerful are they? If the majority of them have abilities like the ability to turn their hair blue they probably aren't going to be trying to fight back. On the other hand if it is 'easy' for the government to detect mutants (e.g. mandatory blood tests to get driver's licenses that exposes mutants) you'll see a different type of hiding going on, with specifics determined by the tests (e.g. people taking underground tests before submitting a blood sample and those who test positive either not getting a license or else figuring out some way to beat the system). On the other hand if you have 1 in 100,000 people be a mutant with Superman level abilities you'll have a very different response. I could see some of them briefly expose themselves in the hopes of joining up with other mutants before the authorities can rally enough firepower to bring them down while others try to hide who they are. The more mutants there are and the more powerful they are the greater the odds are of large groups of powerful mutants building up and openly fighting against the authorities (though you will still have some who prefer hiding). As for preventing an 'us versus them' setting, the main way I can see this is to not have the authorities representing the will of the people at large. Perhaps they are a majority but there are a large number of people who still oppose the policies. Perhaps they represent the minority in this aspect but are still able to maintain power because either not enough time has elapsed for elections to remove the current authorities from office, because 'pro-mutant' politicians aren't able to be elected for various reasons (in the same way that it is very difficult for pro-environment politicians to be elected), or perhaps there is simply corruption and conspiracy keeping them in power (rigged polls and rigged votes that shows that people with 30% approval ratings have 50% approval ratings, then during the election they are able to squeak out a victory, control of the primaries so that the only choices in the general election are between different pro-humanity candidates, etc.) You would have lots of people who think the control program is wrong who would be willing to help the mutants, more who are willing to look the other way, and authority figures who disagree with the policies but feel compelled to obey them because they are the law all before you finally have people who are actively opposed to the mutants.

Of course I should add: Maria Hill: What does S.H.I.E.L.D. stand for, Agent Ward? Agent Ward: Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division. Maria Hill: And what does that mean to you? Agent Ward: It means somebody really wanted our initials to spell "Shield". Good acronyms are great, but if you have to force it they tend to sound rather silly in the end.

As others have suggested, buy the power as Always On and then buy what amounts to a naked advantage to allow you to turn the power off with a focus limitation. In addition I suspect that being able to store up and unleash their energy in more controlled blast will allow the character to do more damage than they will do with the always on power. Purchase some more dice for their attack with the same focus limitation. Since the base attack had to be purchased at 0 end the extra dice might have an increased END cost which balances out to a moderate END cost in the end. Similar to how you buy off a limitation with a focus you might also lose an advantage with a focus. As an example: 60 - Exploding Body: Blast 8d6, Personal Immunity (+1/4), Persistent (+1/4), Area Of Effect (18m Radius Explosion; +1/2), Constant (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (120 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Always On (-1/2) 40 - Suit: Naked Advantage: Removes Always On and No Range modifiers from Exploding Body (60 Active Points); OIF (Suit; -1/2) 8 - Focused Blast: Blast 4d6 (20 Active Points); Increased Endurance Cost (x3 END; -1), OIF (Suit; -1/2) -17 - Naked Advantage: Removes Area of Effect, Constant and Persistent from Exploding Body (-25 Active Points); OIF (Suit; -1/2) Of course at this point you're getting into some wicked point tricks, so it might be preferable to do something simpler such as buying off the entire power when the suit is worn (the way I've created this the character no longer has the option to voluntarily explode as long as their suit is on) and then purchasing a new blast or else just removing the always on (so they can voluntarily explode) and purchasing a 12d6 blast. There's some...bending of rules here. I like to think the way I'm doing it is well within RAI, but I wouldn't be surprised if you had a GM disagree and require you to build it a different way.

Force Elite Recon and Assault League (or Legion). If they are created lifeforms F.E.R.A.L. could be the name of the project that created them. Forced Evolutionary Response: Advanced Lifeforms or Forced Evolution for Recon, Assault, and Labor.

Shinkansen - Japanese speedster. If you want to try and break stereotypes a bit more you could have them be fairly well armored. Another variation would be a brick with a high running speed (probably specializing in move through) Tsunami - Water manipulator. Alternately someone able to turn themselves into a large wave and smash into people (tricky to do that, however). Oni - Monstrous brick style similar to the Hulk. Yuki - Possibly short for Yuki-onna, yuki-musume, yukinba or another from a list of names. Woman with ice powers. Possibly the spirit of someone who died. Tsukumo - Able to animate small inanimate objects (not statues but things such as umbrellas, shoes, clothing, rope, knives, etc.)

Rather than armor I would probably give them 3/4 damage reduction that only applies to piercing attacks (including bullets) but with limited coverage (their head is not protected). You can eventually bust their body apart by doing enough damage but it's going to take a long time, especially if you are dealing with normal attacks. Edged weapons will let you take apart their bodies faster but shooting them anywhere but the head isn't going to be very productive (unless you are shooting them with something explosive like a rocket).

Like other people have said, I typically tend to scale my thugs based on a lot of variables (what the group is, how powerful the heroes are, etc.) To help me with this I created a concept years ago called 'Cartel'. Cartel actually fills several different roles in my campaigns including providing thugs, explaining where some people get gear that makes them more powerful, explaining why a villains powers suddenly change, and busting villains out of jail now and again. They're basically a mercenary/arms dealer group with weapons that tend to be more grounded in 'realism', though this varies with the campaign setting. Historically this has given me an awful lot of flexibility. Villains might just use random street thugs to back them up for things where the villain doesn't have much money or the goal is a minor goal. VIllains a bit better off can have their thugs go through a Cartel 'boot camp' that raises stats slightly and gives them a level or two. For things even more serious the villains can start arming their thugs with equipment purchased from Cartel (usually advanced combat rifles and body armor) and for things that are really important the villains might contract out actually Cartel fire teams (Cartel also has super powered agents but their use tends to be more specialized). Fire teams tend to be tough. They have the same general stats as Viper agents but their equipment tends to be a bit better (their advanced combat rifles come with grenade launchers and they have a variety of grenades to chose from including concussion, flash, shaped charges, very powerful 'shotgun' like blasts, smoke, etc.). More important than their point totals, however, is that Cabal agents tend to 'fight smart'. They will usually be spread out to avoid bunching everyone up for area effects. They use cover to their advantage to improve their DCVs, they will set and brace given half the chance (and their rifles often have scopes), and they have a smattering of Martial Arts which they are happy to make use of (Martial Block, Martial Strike, etc.) along with a point allowing them to use the maneuvers with 'clubs' (really their rifles). A Cartel agent who is attacked won't hesitate to dodge or use a Martial Block if they are able to, which tends to tie down the hero while all of the agent's buddies take shots at them.

While I don't recall where I read it I'm fairly certain that in one of the books I recall seeing something written that discussed using robot followers as missiles. Pros: It would not require an advantage to guarantee the loyalty of the missile and solves the fact that summoned creatures can't move on their first phase. Neutral: This would have the same base cost as summons. There would be a limit to the number of missiles you can fire before you have to get more (I listed this as neutral because some people will like the increased realism while others won't) Cons: Seems like there's no mechanism for having a moderate supply of missiles (8-16) with the ability to only fire a limited number per round. Seems like firing a missile doesn't take a character's action. Both could possibly be resolved by purchasing the follower perk as a power and applying Limited Power.

Re: HKA's and STR in Champions Complete In the context of Champions all 'Real Weapon' means is that there's some additional limitations to it. It isn't as effective at carving through walls and you can't add more that the base DCs to the total DCs. There's some other minor things, like you're suppose to have to maintain it, but I would think that could be handwaved. Real Weapon doesn't actually mean the weapon has to exist in the real world. It just means it behaves in a manner more consistent with reality. You could certainly apply Real Weapon to a flaming sword. It would then be limited in its maximum damage and in its ability to cut through walls.