Cantriped

I dislike that the rules for Falling and Knockback don't mesh with one another or the rules for Velocity-based Maneuvers. Most especially I dislike the fact that the Iconic Hero System Speedster's best tactic (Passing Strike and similar maneuvers) is actively punished by investing in Speed instead of Movement. All velocity-based game elements should be measuring Velocity based on the same formulae (like Velocity per Turn or Segment for example). I dislike that you can have AVAD become a Limitation (I.E. the defense is more Common than before), yet per RAW such a power still has to take Does BODY (as a separate, prorated +1 advantage that eats up Active Points) regardless of the sum value of AVAD+Does BODY. I dislike many of the rules regarding Adjustment Powers... Including the completely unnecessary 'halving' of Effect when positively Adjusting a Framework Slot (which made a lot more sense back when Elemental Controls were a thing). I dislike the inconsistency between the rules for Foci, and those for Objects. I like the mechanics of the combat system: I like the way Maneuvers work, and I love the way Aborting and Holding Actions is set up. I like the Hit Location Tables, and fact that the other "optional combat rules" are part of the core toolkit. I like that the modular 'code-like' nature of Power Construction allows me to create extremely complex combinations of mechanics in a very concise format that can be read without ambiguity by an experienced player/GM.

I would have to do more research to be sure, but I might represent this story element with a Severe Side Effect on the Absorption, Aid, or Transfer (in older editions) power of the "Power-Drainer" that causes an appropriate amount of Normal Damage (No Normal Defense, Does Body) if they continue Draining or Transferring after they've "topped off" their Aid/Transfer (hit the maximum effect for said positive adjustment). Optionally, such side effects could also include losing all of the Aid/Transferred points immediately as they 'overfill their power bladder til it explodes'. The "You want it? Than take it all!" would be a Power Trick on the part of the victim where they force the attacker to Drain/Transfer more of the affected power than they normally might have (up to the maximum possible Effect Roll of the Drain/Transfer). They might also lower their Power Defense (if any), and Push the drained power (so that there are more APs to Drain/Transfer).

Getting people coming from various editions of MurderHobo, The RPG to realize that those levels of lethality are unacceptable in most Superheroic Genres is a bit difficult. Even people who've played Hero before slip into bad habits if they've been playing too much D&D, Pathfinder, etc.

Yeah, the RAW is fairly clear, and I doubt it is going to break the game to halve to effects of Positive Adjustments in yet one more circumstance... I just don't like that particular rule very much. Thankfully though it rarely comes up, Absorbtion and Aid/Boost are uncommon powers in my experience. Maybe one day I'll write a house rule for Adjusting Power Frameworks that is more to my taste.

I don't think it is correct to treat Foci Perceivability and Power Perceivability as equivalent game elements, nor can I recall any current rules which state that the two elements have any direct impact on one another. A suit of armor defined as OIF Resistant Protection is still Inobvious (usually to Sight and Hearing) by default; it doesn't become Obvious (a -1/2 limitation by itself) as a result of taking OIF (-1/2). You have to make a PER Roll to determine that the character wearing the armor is gaining the benefits of Resistant Protection... however, because the Foci itself is Obvious, once you've perceived the power itself, no roll is required to deduce that the suit of armor is providing that power (instead of the character's natural toughness or something). In the case of the Green Lantern (and similar characters), nearly all of his powers should have been bought Obvious (in terms of Power Perceivability), as well as requiring an OIF; because the effects of his powers are always really Obvious. Even his resistant protection, given that it creates that foxfire glow around him which is the universal visual sign for 'don't fudge with me'.

While I accept that there is a degree of metagame logic behind the existing rule. I disagree with the principle behind this argument. The purpose of a Power Framework (in 6th/CC/FHC anyway) is simply to provide the character a discount for accepting restrictions on how/if those powers can be used together, and their comparative power to one another. Effectively halving the result of any positive Adjustment Power applied to the slots of a power framework isn't a restriction that supports that purpose.

By definition, an Adjustment Power can only​ affect the value of a Characteristic or Power (CC 45). Since a Power Framework is an entirely different class of Game Element (it is neither a Power, nor a Characteristic), logically you should not be able to Adjust it. At all. Ever... You should​ only be able to adjust them Powers themselves, not the container they were bought through, and based on Steve's previous rulings, any adjustments made to said powers should have no impact on their usage within the bounds of the Framework. For example, if you have a 30-point Multipower Reserve with a fixed slot containing a 30 APs Blast, and that slot gets positively adjusted by 10 points you should end up with a 40 APs Blast (that uses 30 points of the Reserve); likewise if that slot gets negatively adjusted by 10 points you should end up with a 20 APs Blast (that uses 30 points of the Reserve). However... We've got this annoying set of clauses under Adjusting Power Frameworks (CC 46) that throw a monkey wrench into that logic by defining rules for something that shouldn't work. Negative Adjustments of Framework'ed powers work more or less how I think they ought too, but the rules for Positive Adjustments have always seemed a little wonky and ill defined to me. Assuming I understand the mechanics correctly myself, in CC if you Positively Adjust a power in a Multipower Reserve, you have to split the points of effect between the Blast, and the Reserve that 'pays for' or 'fuels' the Blast. Which result in only getting a 35 APs Blast in the above example instead of 40 APs. Even though frameworks aren't a legal target for the Adjustment Power in the first place (not being a Characteristic or Power for example, or not being a Blast for another)

Resistant Protection, Damage Negation, and Damage Reduction are all listed as Inobvious by default; which means that an opponent can only tell that the power is Active (or that they even have such a power) by making a PER Roll (usually Sight or Hearing-based). I do not think you can normally make a PER Roll to ascertain the existance of a given power if it isn't Active (barring some kind of Discriminitory Detect that targeted Spells, Mutations, Technology etc.). Buying the power through an Obvious (or Inobvious) Focus doesn't actually change the Percievability of the power itself. That quality merely defines how easy it is to ascertain whether or not the power comes from the Foci instead of the Character once you've realized they have the power. In that regard, technically speaking a suit of plate armor defined as OIF Resistant Protection should also be taking Obvious To Sight And Hearing (-1/2) unless it is somehow light enough to wear clothes over it easily and doesn't clank when you walk. But the Perceivability Rules get ignored fairly consistently by most authors of pregenerated equipment it seems.

Damage Shield changed some, but not much really. Damage Shield is a pretty good idea, and the big downside to using a Damage Shield instead of a Trigger activation is that Damage Shields only react to melee attacks. Being hit by an enemies' Blast isn't going to set off the Power in a way that penalizes them. Yeah this power will affect everyone you designate (and can hit with your Force-Lightning when they enter the area), and generally reduce their OCV/DCV by 2. You could make this power Zero END and Persistent, and just maintain it all the time as a kind of "reactive defense". If ever your character is attacked by somebody you haven't already pinged with the effect, you can simply Abort to reactivate the power and hit them with the penalty before they've even thrown their first Attack Roll. Although I still have concerns that simply buying levels of DCV with Usable Simultaneously would be more cost effective.

Okay, so when the character is attacked, arcs of lightning erupt from the wound, striking anyone within range that the character designates (and can successfully hit)... and making them magically less accurate while they remain within range?

I was given the impression that magic still existed in the MCU. Iron Man has always been starkly Anti-Magic, he refutes it even when it is clearly right in front of him. However I could have sworn that Thor said that amongst asgardians what humans refer to as science and sorcery were a single discipline, not that magic didn't exist.

Heaven Forbid we use a Catch-All Power for its intended purpose. If you don't like solutions in the form of a Hammer, don't present problems in the form of a Nail. Also note that I also suggested using Drain instead.

IIRC it was actually "Thou Shalt Have No Gods Before Me". So the prohibition isn't explicitly against holding multiple faiths, so long as the petty desert war God gets the biggest altar...

Indeed, Classes of Minds were a thing right up until the publication of Champions Complete​. I am so glad they are gone now.

In order to penalize CVs I suggest Change Environment (-1 OCV/DCV are worth 5 APs each I believe). Since you want the effect to emanate beyond you, No Range and Area Of Effect are must haves. Since I assume you want it to emanate from you as you move you'll need GM's permission for the effect to follow you. In 6th edition at least Area of Effect Constant No Range Powers do not move once activated by default, they only follow the character at GM's Option. I believe you were also inclined towards making it a Selective Area Of Effect; so that it targets whomever is in the radius that you want to affect, but you have to make each roll separately. I don't like Explosion, or see any benefit to using it, I think it will just slow down the game and complicates the build. However if you are going to use it anyway, you need to define the total radius (as normal) as well as how quickly the effect loses potency. For example Area of Effect Explosion (16m Radius; Loses -1 OCV per 4m). I vaguely recall the rules were a little different for Explosions between 5th and 6th, but either way these are still things that should be noted. Since you want it to Trigger, you need to define what the Trigger Condition is ("Being Attacked" I assume). However, the trigger condition must be "easily verifiable". In other words an opponent has to be able to tell that the Trigger is set before​ he attacks you and sets off the power. Really though I'm not sure what the benefit of having trigger on the power is in the first place. It would be cheaper and arguably better to just making the power Zero END and Persistent, then simply only ever target people in the radius who might attack you. For that route I might suggest a Limited modifier to make the power only penalize Attacks directed at you or including your area, that way questionable allies are only penalized if they betray you. If you go with Trigger anyway, I would suggest making it Instant (instead of Costs END Only To Activate). There is no point in maintaining a Constant Power between Phases when it will activate itself automatically whenever you need it too. In fact I think it is more convenient since I don't think the Trigger can reset while the power is still active. In addition, I think the Trigger should include the Misfire quality, because the power could go off accidently when he is "attacked" by someone throwing a ball in his general direction, or a strong wind pushing him with its Strength CONS The obvious Con of such a power is that it only penalizes opponents who attack you from within the Area of Effect. Snipers will trigger the effect, but be unaffected by it, and other characters can simply back peddle until they leave the radius. The other obvious Con it that it still doesn't protect you against Area of Effect Attacks unless the attacker or someone else has already triggered the effect, and they are attacking from within the limited area of effect of the power. Just buying DCV (or even Usable Nearby DCV) with a similar special effect would likely have been cheaper for you, and more effective (also much, much less hassle for the GM). PROS The obvious Pro, once activated, you aren't just effectively increasing your own DCV, but that of your allies, and even the Area itself (which is normally impossible). Stacking is gonna be a problem. I'm pretty sure that multiple instances of penalties from the same Change Environment don't stack (but I could very well be wrong). At the very least I wouldn't allow you to maintain an effectively infinite number of overlapping, stacking, Zero END To Maintain Area of Effect Selective Explosion Change Environments that only grew in number the more times you were attacked, until you became impossible to hit until the next time you slept. I think Drain would be more appropriate for a triggered cumulative short term effect that penalizes OCV of selected targets in an Area.

No you misunderstand. Change Environment is one of the "Catch-All Powers" and can have significant combat effects. What it cannot have are significant combat effects which replace existing powers or beneficial effects. So you can use Change Environment to impose enormous penalties to any given Success Roll (such as penalties to PER Rolls defined as shade), but you cannot use it to grant even the most minor bonuses (such as a bonus to PER Rolls defined as light), or simulate other powers (such as a Killing Attack or Drain/Suppress).

You don't need both Personal Immunity and Selective Target; you can already choose not to select yourself thanks to the latter. Also, your build should note the size of the Area, and how quickly the penalties fade off. My 5th is very rusty, but IIRC it looks like this power will only affect targets (you select) within ~8" (~16m). If you successfully hit them with the effect (you have to attack each target's DCV individually when they enter the area), you will penalize them regardless of who they choose to attack while affected.

Dropping Classes of Minds as a mechanical concept was the biggest (and in my opinion one of the best) changes in CC/FHC. Mental Powers now work on all game elements built as Character's (including Mechanon) unless otherwise limited. I was never very fond of the idea that mentalist had to pay a premium on already expensive powers just to prevent a character from declaring themselves immune to the effect for free (by playing an Alien or Machine Class Mind in a typical Champions Game for example. I think it is more fair now that the Mentalist gets a discount if they can only affect certain targets (as opposed to not paying a premium). According to CV1 103 Mechanon counts as both a Human and Machine Class Mind for the purposes of mental powers. In CC/FHC if the robots are built as Characters (or AI Computers), they can be affected by unmodified Mental Powers, but might be declared Machine Class Minds for the purpose of unusual mental powers which target or exclude specific classes of minds. Other forms of robot (such as Bases, Vehicles, Automatons, and Objects/Foci) are unaffected by Mental Powers unless they are controlled by an AI Computer that is​ affected by Mental Powers. Basically, your origin/special effects don't give you any particular advantage against Mental Powers anymore. Personally, I generally against using Mental Powers (such as Mind Control) to affect things without an EGO or DMCV (such as a Vehicle or Object/Foci). Anything sophisticated enough to control with mentalism should also be sophisticated enough to have a Computer built-in so that it legally can be. The common campy cinematic version of Technopathy is just Telekinesis, Only Versus Machines anyway.

...and they just might become the next Supervillain the Superhero faces.​

In 'real-world sword combat' (to the limited extent I have been exposed to it) most Disarm attempts follow a successful Block, or sometimes Dodge. As a defensive combatant it is one of the few methods you have available for securing a decisive victory (that doesn't necessarily involve death).

Indeed they are separate powers, more or less so dependent upon how you price them. Which is why I cited a personal opinion/preference instead of actual rules text. Honestly though... I've never used a hard Active Point cap in any of my campaigns (they are really more like guidelines, or suggestions). So I was really just citing a hypothetical preference. All in all, if the opponents in your campaign can already handle 15d6 Normal Damage, adding either Indirect (Source & Path Vary From Use To Use; +1?) or Double Knockback (+1/2) isn't gonna change much in terms of lethality. So I would allow either without much concern if I've already allowed a 15d6 Normal Damage attack. The only concern I would have is the character using the combination of the two to create synergistic bonus damage by Double Knockback'ing the target into whatever surface they are closest too or standing upon. As long as my big bad-guys can still withstand that trick being used at least once, while still being fairly vulnerable to other character's best tricks, than I'd allow it. Otherwise I would very carefully consider prohibiting it. Nobody wants an Effective DC Arms Race (only the GM can win those, and our goal is more or less to lose... just barely).

IIRC, you can use appropriate Martial Maneuvers to resist similar ones. For example (again IIRC), you should be able to use your Exert Bonus STR from Martial Disarm to resist being disarmed yourself. Otherwise you can just buy Limited STR as a power, with Only To Resist Disarm (-2) (and maybe Zero END). Or buy extra DCV/CSLs Only To Resist Disarm.

Which edition is your player updating too; is he updating from 5eR to 5eR, or 5eR to 6e1&2/CC/FHC? What value/level of Indirect is the player taking? (the values listed above suggest a total Advantage Value of +3/4 on the Indirect Blast). If the character is purchasing both Naked Advantages in the "For this one power specifically" form: It would cost 37 APs for Double Knockback, and 56 APs for Indirect. The character would be able to apply either or both modifiers to the blast simply by paying the appropriate amount of END, and he'd effectively have a 75-168* APs power. Personally I would consider Naked Advantages/Independent Modifiers (same thing different edition) when I determine whether or not the character's abilities exceeded the Active Point Cap of the campaign. So in the above example, the character wouldn't be allowed a potential 168 APs Power if I set a cap of 75. If he's going to (or you plan to make him) purchase them such that they only apply to enough APs of Blast to fit within 75 APs... I'd have to do some maths to double check, but I'm pretty sure the character will be better off just purchasing the variations 'normally' as three Multipower Slots: 15d6 Blast (75 APs), 10d6 Double Knockback Blast (75 APs), and 8d6 Indirect Blast (70 APs) because accounting for the possible +1 1/4 in Advantages with a pool of 75 APs would reduce the maximum Blast he could purchase to 6d6 (30 APs w/o modifiers, 67 APs w/ modifiers).

Part of that might be because Steve Long didn't write CC, so there are lots of things in it that don't mesh with Steve's view of the rules. However all of the examples in CC which use Time Limit are Instant Powers with Lingering Effects (and are examples of Time Limit as a Limitation). The mention of Blast in the description of Time Limit as an Advantage (CC 117) is harkening back to its roots as the Lingering modifier (of ​Fantasy Hero AFIK). The design intent presented then was that you placed Lingering/Time Limit (as an Advantage) on a spell to define that you only had to perform all the spell procedures when you first cast the spell, and then for the duration of the spell thereafter you could activate the power without performing such procedures again. Usually those procedures included things such as Gestures, Incantations, expendable Foci, a required Skill Roll, and lots of Extra Time.

IIRC the +2 DCV granted by the Small size template is​ representing the "-2 to OCV" from the Target Size modifiers. Similarly the +2 to Stealth represents the "-2 to Perceive" from the Target Size modifiers. The complication has nothing to do with the character's Target Size modifier, instead it represents that Small characters also typically suffer more Knockback, and have even shorter Melee Reach, cannot reach the high shelf, may be impeded by terrain larger beings simply step over, etc (none of which are easily represented by existing game elements)...