bigdamnhero

"Healed by another application of the same device" or words to that effect.

Agreed. Even in a superhero setting, I've never made players pay points for mundane items that everyone has access to, like flashlights & wristwatches. (We used to call it the Radio Shack Exception, but I may need a new name for it now that the Shack has gone the way of the dodo...) Same applies here as far as I'm concerned. Most smartphone apps/capabilities don't need to be built out: they're noncombat features that are low-level enough to ignore mechanically, and they just work the way they work in real life. As for Internet access: if there's a piece of information that would be helpful to the character, and the player could look it up, then the character can get it in game. If that information would normally give the Character a bonus on a Skill Roll, then it does that. Or if it's just narrative information, it does that. No points needed. That said, realistically there's also a significant downside to having characters with Secret Identities carrying their personal cellphones around with them while in costume. Even assuming you keep Location turned off, someone's eventually going to think to search and cross-reference cell records near Hero X sightings to identify that one phone that frequently makes calls from wherever Hero X is active. So while I might not make the PCs pay for a smartphone, if they wanted something anonymous & untraceable, that might be worth a Small Perk. Just like I wouldn't charge the PCs for a regular phone line in their base, but I would charge them for a scrambled/encrypted/untraceable line.

Apparently that Harley Quinn movie is actually a Birds Of Prey movie? Huh. Not that I wouldn't love to see the Birds on the big screen, but that's a pretty backstory-dependent team...

Yeah, the Circle of the Scarlet Moon is a good example of what I called "vending machine magic" above: anyone with access to the right grimoires, etc can with enough study and practice learn basic ritual magic. While membership does seem to run in the family, that seems more about inheritance and only trusting family, rather than a specific talent that's passed down through certain bloodlines, which seems more the case with the Sylvestris and Vandaleurs.

Yeah, inert gasses aren't great for providing energy, etc.

Um...yeah, and it's been possible in every edition since then. I'll concede the term "Maxima" is perhaps misleading, and the 4ed text you quoted confuses things by inserting the "superheroes can ignore this completely" in the middle of it. But it's literally always been true that heroic character can exceed the "normal max" by paying double. I've never heard anyone argue otherwise. And either way, the question is about differences between 4th & later editions, not 3rd & 4th.

So does 5th (5ER p39) and 6th (6e1 p50). It basically the exact same rule as in 4ed. (Except with more words.) And of course it wasn't included in the pre-4ed Champions books, because it's a rule that's not typically used in superhero games. I'm not sure what your point is?

Welcome back! I don't think the Nolan movies had anything to do with anything; for one thing, 5ed came out well before Batman Begins. I do think Steve Long's "style" (for lack of a better word) is perhaps a bit less over-the-top* than the folks who did 4ed, so it's possible that's reflected in the character write-ups. But as HM said, I'm not entirely sure which "published characters" you're referring to? DEX: there were no changes from 4ed to 5ed. But with 6ed CV is now "sold separately" rather than being derived from DEX, so DEX is no longer the God Stat it used to be. So yeah, I've definitely noticed less DEX inflation in my 6ed games because it's now possible to build a combat-effective character without buying their DEX way up. Personally I don't see that as a bad thing, but YMMV. SPD works exactly the same in 5th & 6th as it did in 4th, with the exception that the pricing is no longer linked to DEX in 6ed. Without going back to do a side-by-side comparison, I haven't noticed lower SPDs overall? As for the general question: 5ed didn't actually make too many significant rules changes IMO, certainly less than your average D&D new edition. But it cleaned up a few things, fixed some balance issues, and added a LOT more descriptions, examples, etc. So a much thicker book, but the core rules didn't really get more complicated IMO. When my group changed form 4ed to 5ed, it was completely seamless; heck, a couple players kept using the 4ed books for years. 6ed did make a few substantive changes. There's a pdf in the Downloads section that highlights the main ones. Opinion seems to be around 50-50 here whether those changes were improvements or blasphemous blasphemies. But regardless, 90% of those changes are in character creation, so once you start playing the game should look very familiar to you. I run a lot of convention games, and have had a lot of players sit down who who hadn't played Champions since 4ed or earlier. None of them missed a beat adapting to the changes. * Not saying over-the-top is necessarily a good or bad thing; just a stylistic choice.

Yes, but the question is how does someone who starts out not addicted become addicted, ie how does someone without that Complication develop it? That's an attack, whether it's statted out as one or not. I know we always prefer to Reason From Effect, but it's difficult to define Defense Against ____ without understanding how _____ affects the character in the first place? I agree that in most games it's unlikely to come up enough to be worth more than a point or two. But in this case, it sounds like the GM is deliberately setting it as a way to stop characters from over-using performance enhancers without consequences? That sounds like some kind of Cumulative Transform: either Power Def or a limited EGO Boost would work. (Assuming it works against EGO, not BODY.) Resistance might be appropriate too. If you want an absolute defense, then yeah Life Support is probably a better approach. But I'm wondering if "Only prevents addiction" is actually a Limitation or an Advantage in this case? If normal Immunity means drugs have no effect on you, modifying that so you get the benefits without the downside is arguably more of an Advantage. Depends on how you and the GM see this coming up in game. Not to accuse anyone of munchkinism, but I've gamed with a few people who would argue vehemently for the Limitation, but then take it as a license to use performance enhancers on a regular basis while ignoring the side effects...

That coincides well with one of my favorite quotes from way back in Doctor Strange #5 (1974) when Silver Dagger steals the Eye of Agamotto tries to use it against Strange: "The Eye is not a gun, answerable only to him who holds it! It is a conduit for any who understands it. And I am a Sorcerer Supreme, a man of knowledge, while you are only a man of learning! You think magic is no more than obscure phrases and arcane gestures - a recipe to be read and applied. Such a belief may take you far, Dagger. But not as far as I have gone!" [mystic mike drop] It seems to me in most superhero comics (and therefore in the CU) there are two types of magic. The first is ritual magic consisting of "obscure phrases and arcane gestures" that just about anyone can learn with practice. In one of the Dresden Files* books, IIRC Harry describes them as the spiritual equivalent of vending machines: you put your quarter in and you get your Coke out, no understanding required. Hence in every horror movie ever where a bunch of kids read from a Spooky Old Tome and wind up summoning something unpleasant. The power comes from the ritual/object/trapped demon/whatever, so no innate talent for magic is needed. The second type requires drawing on the magic within you, and/or tapping into the magic of the world around you. That requires not only training, but usually some sort of innate talent, and is frequently portrayed as something that not everyone is capable of learning. Whether or not there's any practical, mechanical difference between those two types of magic depends on your campaign. Clearly there are superheroic-level characters who fall into both camps. As for belief (or whatever other word you want to substitute for it) that does generally seem to be one of the fundamental differences between science and magic. To quote the TV shirt: Science works whether you believe in it or not. If you give a vaccine to a creationist, it still works exactly the same whether or not they think evolution is a lie. Gravity affects a Flat Earther exactly the same as everyone else. But Magic generally seems to require you have some belief that it will work or else it doesn't. Tho in Real Life, that usually seems to be used as a dodge to explain why mystic powers always seem to stop working when a skeptic tries to measure or test them in a controlled environment. How relevant that would be a world where people like Witchcraft and Talisman are common knowledge and so everyone has cause to believe that magic exists is another question. * Technically neither superheros, nor a comic, I know.

Villainy Amok has stats for a number of civilians, cops, bystanders, mundane crooks, etc. Also one of the best books on How To Run Superhero Games out there, so definitely worth picking up either way. Oddly enough, I don't seem to have the HD pack for that one so someone else will have to confirm if all the characters made it in. (Can't imagine why they wouldn't have.) Cops, Crews & Cabals also has a lot of normals, to include doctors, business execs, high-end security, etc. Tho I don't see an HD pack for CCC in the store, so maybe they never did one? EDIT: I just downloaded the Villainy Amok HD pack, and it does look like it include the NPC stats.

Right, the question isn't how can Wolverine's claws be Restrained, but how can this character's claws be Restrained. Maybe Wolvie started out with Restrainable, but after a few centuries' worth of XP he bought off that Limitation (ie - got more experienced at using his claws even when restrained). Similarly for the psi-sword, what circumstances would prevent the character from wielding it, and how common are those circumstances likely to be in your game. You can also ask the question from the other direction: how often do you want it to come up? If you're getting a discount for Focus/Restrainable, the assumption is that it will come up sometimes, frequency varying with the value of the Lim. If the player doesn't want that to happen, then they probably shouldn't take it as a Limitation.

Fair enough, and I'm all for busting shopworn tropes. But I do think that to some extent follows naturally from the space opera desire for 1) other spacefaring races for humanity to interact with, and 2) stories set in the relatively-near future (ie - a few centuries) to keep humans relatable. If you start with those two assumptions, it's hard to logic your way around the idea that some of those races that have been in space for hundreds or thousands of years more than us are going to be significantly more advanced than us.

Given that I just said the exact opposite of this... All I'm saying is there are a lot more inter-dependencies between different fields than you might think. Of course some will be less advanced. I got the impression you were positing that all other species could/should/would/ be less advanced than we are. If you just mean some, then we're in violent agreement.

Yes. But in that same amount of text you could explain how Dispel works as a Power once, and then all you need to list for individual spells is "Dispel ____ 10d6." Unless you plan to only have one single dispel in the entire game, you're not saving text or complexity - you're just spreading it around. Hero's biggest weakness from a marketing perspective has always been that its complexity is front-loaded, which can be intimidating to new players. I'm all for streamlining/simplifying that. But one of Hero's biggest advantages in game-play has always been that because the complexity is front-loaded, once you get through character creation the game plays quickly - it's all right there on the character sheet, no need to constantly flip through the book(s) looking up each individual spell to see how this interacts with that (like in every D&D game I've ever played). As someone who has played around a lot with simplifying Hero* to present to new players, con games, etc, I'm all for simplifying presentation and hiding more of the mechanics. (At least for an intro-level book like being discussed.) What I'm opposed to is creating new mechanics that give the illusion of simplicity by simply moving the complexity downstream a ways. You're fixing the parts that aren't broken. * And no, I don't expect anyone to read all those links...

And again, over and over again, I am all for that! But IMO inserting a new arbitrary "spell level" game element complicates things rather than simplifying them. Creating absolute effects isn't about simplification either - at best it is "complexity neutral" and at worst it actually adds complexity because it increases the level of explanation required for specific spells. So rather than having a couple paragraphs on How Dispel Works, you now need a sentence or two in every single effect built with Adjustment Powers explaining how that specific effect works. You're simply moving the complexity downstream, which (again IMO) is the exact wrong direction to go.

Never actually saw Smallville, so I don't have that comparison. Never saw Merlin either - I think it's in my Netflix queue.

I have no objection to simplified presentation. But eliminating AP, only to introduce an arbitrary "Level" system that you then have to explain to folks that are familiar with Hero - especially if they might want to tinker with the setting a bit, like some of us are known to do - is actually making things more complicated, not less. Leave out the stuff that isn't needed, fine. But if you're having to make up new stuff to replace the stuff you're leaving out, maybe you should consider just using the thing that already works?

Wow, they must've aired a completely different episode here than whatever you saw. Perfect? Not hardly. But I thought that was one of the most fun hours of superhero TV we're likely to see. Yeah, Kara needs to put some points into a Disarm maneuver, but Plus, I think I'm developing a crush on Lena Luthor. I know it'll end badly. But there it is. I read that as equal parts unwilling to put him in danger, since he's weaker than her and not yet used to his powers, and being worried he might kill someone because he's not yet used to his powers. (Yeah, time for some training.)

I fail to see how listing a spell level is any simpler than listing an AP cost. If your intent is simply to eliminate die rolling, you could accomplish the exact same thing by saying "automatically dispels any spell of less than 30 AP..." etc. (Unless you're just allergic to 2-digit numbers, in which case Hero may not be the game for you anyway. ) But hey as long as we're at it, let's eliminate attack rolls: a warrior with Combat Level of 5 automatically hits anyone with a Defense Rating of 3 or lower, and hits a 4 if they make a Weapon Skill Roll... [/sarcasm] Be careful how far you go with this. There's a reason why diceless RPGs never really caught on.

This is a new trailer, not the July one I believe.

Trying hard not to get my hopes up too high, based how awful the last few DC/WB movies have been. But the new trailer looks reeeealy good...

Somebody has to win the lottery, too; doesn't mean it's likely to be you. Especially not if others may have gotten a million year head start on buying tickets. Don't get me wrong: if you're proposing "What if humans are first" as an interesting idea for a story/game/whatever, then fine. Cool. But if we're talking about what's most likely, color me skeptical. Sure, tho to be fair we've just barely started looking and the universe is a big place; me I'm not ready to write off the possibility just yet. But you're absolutely right that we're just speculating. And sure, if it turns out life is staggeringly rare, and intelligent life is even rarer, and technologically-advanced life is rarer still, then yeah it may well be just us. But you started off by proposing that there are other intelligent alien races, they're just all technologically behind us. The odds against that seem pretty high to me. If you want to assume that intelligent life is really rare, fine. I'm saying that if intelligent life is relatively common, the idea that humans are going to be first/best into space is a bit of a stretch. Those traits are hardly unique among species even on the one planet we do have good data for. Agent Smith's monologue about "Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment" is utter nonsense - every species of life on Earth multiplies as rapidly as it can, expands as rapidly as it can - see rabbits in Australia - and exploits its environment as much as it can. Species that don't, tend to get squeezed out by those that do because that's how evolution works. Humans are just better at it than most; which is how we became the apex predator on this planet. Which leads me to speculate that any species that becomes the apex species on their planet is likely to have evolved with those same traits, unless evolution itself works radically different on their planet for some reason. That example was just to point out how different fields are far more interconnected than we typically think. Physics informs our understanding of biology, which informs our understanding of medicine, which informs computer science, social sciences, yadda yadda. They don't evolve in isolation. Sure, not every species is going to develop things at the exact same pace and in the exact same speed we did. But the idea of some other race discovering FTL travel early on but still using wooden ships and crossbows is a highly entertaining fantasy, but nothing more. Humans don't think in terms of billions of years. And we can barely get most people to pay attention to worry about climate change, let alone the sun dying. If we reach the stars it will be in spite of those traits, not because of them. Again, I have no problem positing the existence of a race(s) that thinks so differently than us that they never developed space travel yadda yadda. But the notion that nobody else is going to figure it out before we do seems not only wildly improbable but frankly kindof arrogant.

I agree that full Automaton Powers for significant characters is problematic, not to mention expensive. There's certainly nothing wrong with having "systems knocked offline temporarily" (ie - Stunned/KOd). I don't see why not. I'd certainly go with "Must stay close." "Grantor pays END" works, assuming the weapon requires END, not Charges.

What possible logical reason would there be to expect that? If other races have been around for hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands of years longer than us, why wouldn't at least one of them be more advanced than us? Seems pretty damn statistically unlikely, unless intelligent life is just really really rare. But if you want to tell stories with other spacefaring races, either they all happened to achieve spaceflight at about the same time we did (staggeringly improbable), or they reached spaceflight long before we did but then plateaued for some reason and haven't advanced much since (makes little sense), or some of them are going to be more advanced than us in at least some areas. Sure, it doesn't have to be equal across the board, and I agree it's more interesting when they aren't. (And the Malvans are a comic-book trope, not a serious sci-fi race.) But if all alien races are less advanced than us in all/most areas - which is what you suggested above - then you've got some major logical hoops to jump through to justify why.