Cantriped

I see that claim/desire posted frequently... but I don't think Hero Games actually can/should attempt to release a free-version of the rules. It is almost impossible to cut any more from 6th edition than CC/FHC did and still have a functional ruleset (even for limited-use play). Unlike other systems (such as Pathfinder) which can make money selling pregenerated content and optional rules for their core ruleset (because you cannot easily generate such content yourself); Hero Games cannot afford to give up the core ruleset because of its toolkit-like nature. The aforementioned systems can usually just choose to omit extra options that the system can function perfectly well without (like certain classes in the case of D&D 5th edition Basic); Hero has very few game elements that can be cut without significantly impairing the system's functionality. You might be able to save a few pages if you cut most of the Talents, and any/all genre advice/example game elements... but I don't believe that you can still have a functional version of Hero System without the Powers & Modifiers systems (you can't explain any of the equipment, or at least a quarter of the combat/environment rules without making reference to them) So the issue is: Once you've got a functional version of the core ruleset (such as CC, FHC, or 6e1&2), you don't actually need anything else to run pretty much any campaign you want, and it defeats the purpose of such a publication to include a less-than-functional version of the core ruleset (Since consumers will be likely to judge the entire system based on however much of it you initially present to them). For example, you don't actually need Champions​ to run your 'One-Punch Man Hero' campaign, Fantasy Hero​ to run your 'Lord of the Rings Hero' campaign, or Star Hero​ to run your 'Star-Trek Hero' campaign. A competent GM who is familiar with the source material and their primary rules reference can run any of said campaigns with just CC, FHC, or 6e1&2. Best case scenario they save you a little time and consolidate your research, worst-case they are essentially entirely unnecessary or even unhelpful (the former is more often the case when home-brewing a setting, the latter when adapting an existing setting to Hero). The exception to my above comments would be that if Hero Games ever does finally close its doors for good. I hope the release some version of CC/FHC to the public domain first. It would be sad to see the system forgotten evermore because whomever holds the IP can't afford to do anything with it (or bought it only to keep others from using it).

Disarm isn't overpowered because it goes both ways. Not only can the PC disarm the NPCs, but they can disarm the PC right back. Plus there are any number of ways to generate a character who is effectively immune to the maneuver. The same goes for any of the "Control" maneuvers. In a heroic campaign anybody who really needs a weapon to function likely has as much Strength as they can muster. So the maneuver is generally only useful if the attacker has invested more heavily into the tactic than the defender, or if the defender cannot Abort To Block for whatever reason (or isn't as invested in Block as you are in Disarm). This is of course assuming the defender even uses weapons. Disarm is less than worthless against most Monsters because they've nothing to disarm, and often break the Strength Maxima as well; so you might not win even if they did.

Indeed, there are very few historical suits of armor that cover every Hit Location (Gothic Plate being the only one I can think of off the top of my head). Almost all historic armor would use one of the variants of Armor Coverage. For odd corner cases you can use my Hit Location Probability Charts to calculate the actual chances of being hit in an unarmored location, and use that to calculate the appropriate Activate Roll/Armor Coverage Level; that is literally one of the purposes I wrote them for. An issue that isn't made any easier by the fact that the Mass limitation is just god-awfully awkward to use. The Expanded Focus System or my simplified variant is much better in that regard since you can simply define the appropriate Mass for the Foci (which in my system determines the Foci's BODY, and in some cases increases the modifier's Limitation value).

'If something is claimed to be fail-proof... it isn't.' PS: in fact... someone claiming that something is fail-proof essentially guarantees it will fail later in the episode/session.

As much as I dislike the "vagueness" of it. I prefer the position CC/FHC takes regarding stacking Flash. Which is to say that it depends entirely on the special effect of the Flashes in question. Although Steve's answer does fit with the general principle he holds that you have to be able to percieve the Target Effect of a Sensory Power to be affected by it.

I was calculating from the perspective of HA as the base power (compared to a character using No Range Blast for example). Regardless your initial 10 points of STR is still "10 free APs of HA" if you look at HA as "simply limited STR". Except that a No Range Blast actually costs more than HA or equal dice; at least 25% more even sans Characteristic To Damage. So they aren't, in terms of cost, in any way the same. As a 10-point adder, It is only "dirt cheap" if you willfully ignore the 50+ points the character has already spent to have a 60 in the given Characteristic that might instead have been better spent almost anywhere else. As a 10-point Adder, you basically aren't getting any "Free APs" out of using a CON To Damage Blast (instead of just buying more Blast). It doesn't need a clause regarding Drains because you already can't add a Characteristic you don't have (because it was drained) to the DCs of an ability, nor can you add said characteristic to the ability at all if someone drains all of it. Anyway, like I said above. I may revise or remove the modifier from my project after I've had an opportunity to playtest it appropriately. It isn't going into one of my projects slated for publication anytime soon anyway. However, I do appreciate you taking the time to give me your opinions even if we disagree, and I will bear them in mind during said playtests.

Pretty much, with the clarification that and Accessible Foci isn't just easily taken away, you can be disarmed of it. An Inaccessible Focus can only be taken away "over your dead (or unconscious) body", and doing so should basically take as much time as it takes to 'equip' the foci to start with (which is why Full-Plate/Powered Armor doesn't typically take the crazy amounts of Extra Time it deserves). I'm not really fond of OIHID so I cannot comment on it... but Restrainable is really great for representing items that might normally be Accessible Foci, but aren't because they cannot be taken away or broken; such as an indestructible magic sword you can summon/banish at will, but still can't use to escape a Grab/Entangle. All of the above being why Dr. Destroyer doesn't take Focus, Restrainable, or OIHID on his "suit of powered armor". The armor is protected by mechanical fiat from being be destroyed, disabled, removed, stolen while he sleeps, etc.

Thank you for the credit! I also want to mention that I have really enjoyed watching this thread (and thus your world) develop. I might not like (or comment upon) every individual section. But it is clear from your posts the level of attention and love you are giving the setting. Finances allowing I'll probably be purchasing a copy when it becomes available! Meanwhile, back on topic: Realistic weapons and armor are their own special kind of researchers hell. I'm certainly no expert, but my research (mostly conducted online) indicates that mechanically speaking there are really only four 'types' of armor: Cloth Armor: One of the broadest categories, "Cloth Armor" includes all your pliant forms of protection: including comic book super-suits, soft leather armors, quilted/padded cloth armor, early bullet proof armors made from silk, etc.) Chain Armor: This category is the narrowest, it typically only refers to pliant forms of protection composed of interlocking metal rings worn over some kind of pliant material (to prevent chafing and pinching). However, in a fantasy or sci-fi setting materials other than metal might become practical. For example, elves/druids might use magic to make wooden chainmail possible, dwarves might use magic to make stone chainmail possible. Scale Armor: Another fairly narrow category, it typically refers to semi-pliant forms of protection composed of fairly small metal plates ("scales") affixed to a pliant backing. I also include Brigandine (aka lamellar armor), Coinmail and Ringmail (coins/rings sewn unto a leather backing, the closest realistic equivalent to Studded Leather of D&D fame) in this category. The differences between "Scale Armor" and "Plate Armor" (see below) are mostly just in regard to the size of the rigid bits, and how they are affixed to the backing (if at all) Plate Armor: Likely the broadest category (in terms of number of real-world styles and materials represented), Plate Armor includes all of your rigid forms of protection, including some typically classified as "light armor". The lightest "Plate Armor" likely being Cuir Bouilli (aka boiled leather armor), and the heaviest being Gothic Plate Armor (which was composed of interlocking plates to allow almost full mobility, and basically had to be made custom for the wearer) (aka the "Full Plate" of D&D fame). However this category also includes Splint and Banded (aka Laminar armor) such as was used by many cultures (including the Romans and Japanese). Most importantly though... almost none of the real-world armor's were composed of just one category. They were almost all piece-mail and covered different parts of the body (Hit Locations) with different categories of armor (providing differing levels of Resistant Protection depending on category and material). All of which makes it really awkward to try to represent both realistically and mechanically in Hero. For example, almost every form of Plate Armor is worn over what could be classified as Cloth Armor (typically a quilted or padded armor of some kind), and with the exception of Gothic Plate the Cloth Armor covers parts of the body (Hit Locations) that the Plate Armor cannot (joints usually). An example of how I handle some of these issues can be found in my Bell Cranel example. Under Normal Equipment, he is listed as wearing a suit of (soft leather) Cloth Armor covering almost every location, over which he wears a suit of very light (metal) Plate Armor that only covers a few locations (IIRC it is little more than a half-breastplate, pauldrans, faulds, greaves, and bracers).

*Groan* PS: Groans are the highest form of complement for wordplay & puns.

I don't have a problem with putting the "Of Opportunity" suffix on the Foci modifier. Although if we're gonna go to the effort to defining a new quality of Foci, I think that "Of Opportunity" should be a separate quality from either Obviousness or Accessibility that halves the value of the Focus (minimum -1/4 perhaps). That way you can have an OIF Of Opportunity (Aluminum Cap; -1/4) that is 'obviously' providing Magnet-Man his Mental Defense, can easily be replaced at any grocery story, but can't easily be taken away (by disarm and such); or have an IAF Of Opportunity (Notebook & #2 Pencil; -1/4), that doesn't 'obviously' provide The Teacher with his ability to edit enemy statistics (defined as a suite of Boost/Suppress Powers), can easily be replaced at any office supply store, but can easily be taken away (by disarm and such) Personally though It bothers me much more that Foci of Opportunity are officially considered OIF instead of IAF by default. They have the same modifier value, so it doesn't really matter much; but in terms of principle it has always seemed backwards to me. I think Foci of Opportunity should be considered Inobvious by default because the powers they represent most often involve the character's ability to use a mundane object in an unintended or downright impossible manner. For example, even in a superheroic world I doubt most folks would expect Magnet-Man's mental defenses, or The Teacher's statistical editing to actually come from those commonplace foci. Further, being easier to replace isn't the same as being harder to take away, so it makes sense to be able to define a foci that is both​ easy to replace and difficult to take away (as an IIF of Opportunity). In terms of the Design Principles behind Foci, it also really bothers me that after all these years there is still this disconnect between the rules for Foci and the rules for Objects. Foci have rPD/rED, and lose a power whenever they take BODY damage until they run out of powers to lose. Foci also have a fixed size and mass, mechanically speaking. Meanwhile, Objects have rPD/rED and BODY, and cease to function when their BODY is depleted (and are destroyed when they reach Negative BODY, much like Characters). However they also have mechanics based on their actual size & mass (their BODY is typically derived from their Mass). I dislike this disconnect so much I adapted and simplified the Expanded Focus Creation Rules (from APG II I think...) creating a simpler system where Foci work like other Objects, and you can simply define the Size and Mass of your Foci (which then determines to-hit modifiers and the Foci's BODY more realistically).

...I'll update the list next time I fall into a Nerd-Hole.

HA costs 4 CP per DC (due to the Mandatory Limitation), and after adding your default STR (of 10) you end up with a 3 DC (15 APs) Attack that only costs 4 CP (and 2-3 END). Ergo +11 "free" APs. Irrelevent to my analysis. That is a balance issue inherent to the core rules. It exists regardless of whether or not my Modifier exists. All my modifier does it level the playing field by extending the same benefits to any Attack Power. Also Irrelevant to my analysis. Any Characteristics above default are still being paid for with CP (and with END in use). All that matters for the purposes of my balance analysis is how many APs are being generated "for free" as a result of the modifier. This is a legitimate concern. Do you think it would be better balanced as an Adder then (one worth +10 CP perhaps)? Doing so would compensate for the "free APs" being generated on powers like Blast, and it's value still wouldn't be included in the special calculation for Added DCs, but it would (slightly) increase the cost of applying other Advantages (even ones that Extra DCs aren't calculated against). Once again irrelevant to my analysis. This is an issue inherent to the core ruleset not my modifier. You can already produce the same results with multiple Linked HAs/HKAs less expensively. IIRC there was a Rules Question posited to Steve a while back about the END Cost of STR when applied to Combined or Linked HA/HKAs... but I couldn't find it nor can I remember what the answer was.

Nay. Although the Universe is only ~13.8 Billion Years old... the Heat Death of the Universe won't occur for 1 Googol Years (10100 Years). I ran out of names at Vigintillion (which is 1063 ​Years). However sometime after about 1 Quadrillion Years the Sun will be a Black Dwarf and solar systems will no longer exist... so same difference?

You are still paying for the characteristic though. Best case scenarios: You are paying 7 CP for a 1d6 Blast with Strength To Damage (+1/2) (or 5 CP for a No Range Blast) and adding your base 10 Strength to it for a total of 3d6 Blast; gaining the equivalent of +8-10 "free" APs (Depending on Range). A normal HA is still a slightly better deal since you pay 4 CP for +1d6 HA and add your base 10 Strength to it for a total of 3d6 HA; gaining the equivalent of +11 "free" APs (likewise HKA gets +10 "free" APs in this situation). In either case, you are still going to be paying 5 or more CP for any additional DCs bought through Characteristics beyond that point, those additional DCs will simply have secondary benefits (such as Lift Capacity for Strength, or Stunned Threshold for Constitution). You are also going to paying the same amount of END you normally would have, since CON or EGO used to increase DCs costs END just like STR does (so 1/5 in Heroic games or 1/10 in Superheroic) I might decide to adjust the advantage values, or remove the advantages entirely after play-testing. But for the moment they don't seem any more abusive than game elements which already exist.

So I was trying to calculate to cost of Time Travel... and things got a little out of hand... So I'll just leave this here: SUPER EXPANDED TIME CHART Note: The value in parenthesis is the number of increments down the Time Chart starting from 1 Turn. 1 Turn (1) 1 Minute (2) 5 Minutes (3) 20 Minutes (4) 1 Hour (5) 6 Hours (6) 1 Day (7) 1 Week (8) 1 Month (9) 1 Season (10) 1 Year (11) 5 Years (12) 25 Years (13) 1 Century (14) 5 Centuries (15) 25 Centuries (16) 100 Centuries(17) 500 Centuries (18) 2,500 Centuries (19) 1 Million Years (20) 5 Million Years (21) 25 Million Years (22) 100 Million Years (23) 500 Million Years (24) 2.5 Billion Years (25) 10 Billion Years (26) 50 Billion Years (27) 250 Billion Years (28) 1 Trillion Years (29) 5 Trillion Years (30) 25 Trillion Years (31) 100 Trillion Years (32) 500 Trillion Years (33) 2.5 Quadrillion Years (34) 10 Quadrillion Years (35) 50 Quadrillion Years (36) 250 Quadrillion Years (37) 1 Quintillion Years (38) 5 Quintillion Years (39) 25 Quintillion Years (40) 100 Quintillion Years (41) 500 Quintillion Years (42) 2.5 Sextillion Years (43) 10 Sextillion Years (44) 50 Sextillion Years (45) 250 Sextillion Years (46) 1 Septillion Years (47) 5 Septillion Years (48) 25 Septillion Years (49) 100 Septillion Years (50) 500 Septillion Years (51) 2.5 Octillion Years (52) 10 Octillion Years (53) 50 Octillion Years (54) 250 Octillion Years (55) 1 Nonillion Years (56) 5 Nonillion Years (57) 25 Nonillion Years (58) 100 Nonillion Years (59) 500 Nonillion Years (60) 2.5 Decillion Years (61) 10 Decillion Years (62) 50 Decillion Years (63) 250 Decillion Years (64) 1 Undecillion Years (65) 5 Undecillion Years (66) 25 Undecillion Years (67) 100 Undecillion Years (68) 500 Undecillion Years (69) 2.5 Doudecillion Years (70) 10 Duodecillion Years (71) 50 Duodecillion Years (72) 250 Duodecillion Years (73) 1 Tredecillion Years (74) 5 Tredecillion Years (75) 25 Tredecillion Years (76) 100 Tredecillion Years (77) 500 Tredecillion Years (78) 2.5 Quattuordecillion Years (79) 10 Quattuordecillion Years (80) 50 Quattuordecillion Years (81) 250 Quattuordecillion Years (82) 1 Quindecillion Years (83) 5 Quindecillion Years (84) 25 Quindecillion Years (85) 100 Quindecillion Years (86) 500 Quindecillion Years (87) 2.5 Sexdecillion Years (88) 10 Sexdecillion Years (89) 50 Sexdecillion Years (90) 250 Sexdecillion Years (91) 1 Septendecillion Years (92) 5 Septendecillion Years (93) 25 Septendecillion Years (94) 100 Septendecillion Years (95) 500 Septendecillion Years (96) 2.5 Octodecillion Years (97) 10 Octodecillion Years (98) 50 Octodecillion Years (99) 250 Octodecillion Years (100) 1 Novemdecillion Years (101) 5 Novemdecillion Years (102) 25 Novemdecillion Years (103) 100 Novemdecillion Years (104) 500 Novemdecillion Years (105) 2.5 Vigintillion Years (106) 10 Vigintillion Years (107) 50 Vigintillion Years (108) 250 Vigintillion Years (109) And so on (or not since I ran out of names for numbers at this point)...

You can already buy multiple linked HAs or HKAs to do much the same thing... and people don't. So I'm not really worried enough (about people using the advantage to get the equivalent of Reduced Penetration) to bother writing in a prohibition against it.

I didn't say it wasn't legal, I said it wasn't intended. As for why it isn't appropriate, the answer is: Because of the nature of Advantages and the math surrounding them, and because the shenanigans you and Lucius cited were not how I intended the modifier to be used. The intent was to allow things like a Mental Blast that added your EGO to its Effect Roll, or for the character to buy an Independent Advantage that let them use their DEX instead of their STR to wield a Rapier. Not to let you pay 15 CP to add 60 APs or more to a 5 APs Attack Power (by applying all your primary Characteristics to it). I've rewritten the modifier now to more accurately match my intent. Now you can only ever apply one Characteristic to the Effect Roll of an Attack Power using this modifier, and you must choose the added Characteristic from a limited list (STR, DEX, CON, INT, EGO, or PRE).

While as I've written it that might technically be legal... the intent was not to be able to apply more than one Characteristic to Damage (which is why HA/HKA cannot take the +1/2 level of the Modifier). I'll be doing to double checking on the RAW for modifiers in CC/FHC, and possible adding a clause to said modifier explicitly prohibiting such shenanigans. Thanks for the catch.

This has more or less been my experience as well. Generally speaking if the player is paying attention to the game, they already have a decent idea of what they want to do when their Phase comes up. The problem is though that these new-fangled smart phones are just too damn distracting. Its so bad I typically ban the use of phones at the table except for dice-rolling or rules referencing. I expect that if you are at the table, you are paying enough attention that you don't have to be reminded what just happened to make your decision. Naturally though it is okay if somebody needs to step away from the table to make a phone-call, answer a text, use the restroom, and I'll happily give them a recap when they return. However, this has little to do with SPD, and everything to do with Player Etiquette. Regarding SPD, the most frequent time I see players who are paying attention suffer Analysis Paralysis is when their speed is so high they are taking multiple actions between the phases of other players, or when they need to wait for a slower character to react to their action, but don't want​ to 'waste' their phase by Holding it.

The Hero System Grimoire replaced the Fantasy Hero Grimoire I ​& II. Although I feel like it did a really poor job of it, the options entries for the 6th edition were bland, and unhelpful. I feel like I'd generally be better off just slapping Spell Procedures onto entries from Champions Powers. ​Fantasy Hero​ was updated with name, but not content, intact. Much of the 5th and 6th edition content was the same (such as the equipment lists, and the Alternative Magic Item Creation System), but select things were omitted in favor of "consolidating" them into other source books (such as Hero System Skill​, which I'm not sure had a 5th edition equivalent). The most notable differences between the two were: The works of literature they reference. The 6th edition references were decidedly more modern and trendy, the 5th edition references felt very classic, even when it was contemporary. The example magic systems and spells were very different, and generally more detailed in the 6th edition version. Dark Champions​ (and its sister supplement, ​Dark Champions: The Animated Series​) were never updated. However, Steve Long did release a document containing updated Package Deals for Dark Champions.​ Which is likely as close as we're gonna get. Thankfully the rules to build weapons haven't changed that much (although you should still recalculate just to be sure) and Dark Champions contained relatively few full write-ups of Super-Skills or Equipment built as Powers. Neither Pulp Hero nor Ninja Hero were updated to 6th as Genre Books, but as I own neither I can't comment on their compatibility with 6th edition. Hero System Basic (and it could be argued ​Champions Complete and Fantasy Hero Complete​ to an extent) were derived from ​5th edition's Hero System Sidekick. Which was originally how I learned Hero, reading it through before tackling the copy of Hero System 5th Edition I'd been gifted. Almost none of the Setting books were ever converted; but many can be used in 6th edition with minimal alteration to what Game Elements were presented. As Hyper-Man mentions above, Hero Games lost steam before they finished the Core Line, so Hero System Vehicles (the 6th edition equivalent to ​Ultimate Vehicle​) will likely never see the light of day, which is truly a shame because it is oft referenced by sourcebooks and supplements that did get published... Honestly, 5th edition was more or less the Golden Age of Hero System Products. 6th edition is arguably a superior ruleset (my dislike of the 6th edition rulebooks themselves aside) but it isn't nearly as comprehensive.

There is also the oddity inherent to the Velocity Rules that makes it such that the Speedster's most iconic tactics, the Passing Strike (and other Velocity-based maneuvers), favor a Lower Speed and Higher Movement over a Lower Movement and Higher Speed; assuming for the sake of example that both characters have equal Velocities Per Turn. In that regard It is entirely possible to build a Speedster with the same SPD as everyone else and have them function perfectly well within their role. Such a speedster simply displays their Speed differently: such as by having even higher combat and noncombat velocities, even more Autofire shots, and even more skill levels limited to overcoming Rushing penalties. It just feels inherently 'wrong' to us for the same reason a Martial Artist without Martial Arts feels wrong... Its all in the name (and our heads). The argument that Speedsters need more SPD to burn actions on defense and recovery is something of a vicious cycle. They need to Abort to Dodge more often because they spent points on SPD that might otherwise have gone to DCV and Defenses. Likewise they need to take more Recoveries because they are taking more individual actions in between their free Recoveries, and therefore spending more END, sometimes inefficiently because a percentage of every attack is simply being soaked by their enemies defenses.

I generally agree with your principle here, though I disagree with the specificities. Some of those qualifiers would reduce the commonality or strength of the complication significantly. The standard form of Casual Killer​ from ​Dark Champions 5th Edition ​is listed as Very Common, Strong.

The HA/Blast distinction shouldn't really exist. It should have been changed in 6th edition to a single power named "Normal Attack" with Hand-To-Hand and Ranged permutations just like Killing Attack. HA doesn't really need a mandatory Limitation to justify its existence. Even though it would have the same APs value as Strength, it would still serve it's function as a carrier for Advantages (such as Area Of Effect, Armor Piercing and Ranged). I would also have been okay with STR (and Telekinesis) costing more to compensate. I agree to the extent that I actually wrote an "Add Characteristic Modifier To Damage" modifier (it Applies To any Attack Power) for my Toolkit. As a +0 Advantage it lets you change HKAs and HAs from being based on STR to some other Characteristic (such as DEX or EGO). As a +1/2 Advantage it lets you add a Characteristic (such as STR, DEX, or EGO) to any Attack Power other than HA/HKA. Any characteristic used to increase Damage in this way costs END, and you can buy Reduced END for any such Characteristics as if they were STR.

If the original poster only wanted 5th edition advice, he needed to note in the thread title or original post. Me citing CC is no more irrelevant than you citing the Hero System Equipment Guide. ​Further, the legality of RBS HA is dependent upon which sourcebook you use as your primary rules reference. I use CC as my primary reference, so in the case of any conflict between the printed RAW of CC/FHC and 6e1&2, CC/FHC wins. It is generally an accepted principle of game design that if two rulesets are considered members of the same edition (which CC & 6th edition commonly are, regardless of my opinions on the subject) than if you use both rulesets any changes made in the newer version overrule the older version (such as the elimination of classes of minds, and the implosion of categorized skills). Per 6e1 you are correct, because Limited Range, Ranged Based On Strength, etc, are all explicitly defined as permutations on Ranged (just like Usable As Attack is a permutation on Usable By Other). However in CC, Limited Range, Range Based On Strength, and Ranged are all separately defined modifiers (CC 109, 112, and 113) (unlike Usable As Attack, which is still a permutation on Usable By Other). While HKA explicitly allows either Ranged or Range Based On Strength (CC 73) without ever actually prohibiting Limited Range (which it also qualifies for), Hand-To-Hand Attack only explicitly prohibits the application of Ranged (CC 70), yet it otherwise qualifies for all three. In both cases the refer to the specific modifiers in italics, not to general categories of modifiers. For example, Hand-To-Hand Attack doesn't say it cannot take "any range modifier" (a category which Limited Range, Ranged and Range Based On Strength would all be members) it says that it cannot take the "Ranged​ Advantage" specifically.

Agreed! I typically prefer to limit the starting SPD of 400-point Standard Superheroic Characters to SPD 4 for Non-Speedsters, and SPD 6 for Speedsters. I also set Velocity Per Turn Maximas for Non-Speedsters such that if I do allow them to have higher SPDs, they eventually have to start selling back their Movement Rates to keep those hypercompetent normals and such from out-running cars.