Cantriped

Steve Long is incorrect, and obviously did not review the 6th edition rules carefully enough before replying to that rules question. His entire basis for argument regarding DPSLs is that "maneuver penalties" are not a "condition" and therefore PSLs do not apply to them. This statement is utterly false. First off; the term "condition" is never defined or rather 'contemplated' within the Hero System Sixth Edition at all. So if we want a definition, we must use one of the real ones. Such as: "the circumstances affecting the way in which people live or work, especially with regard to their safety or well-being." A penalty to DCV as a result of performing a Combat Maneuver qualifies as a circumstance that affects the way in which people "work", especially with regard to their safety (in that fighting can be very dangerous work) so per common English, A DCV Penalty imposed by a Maneuver is still a condition, and since unlike OPSLs no exception was made by the rules, that definition stands. Secondly; 6e1 84 explicitly notes that DPSLs "can only [be used] to reduce or counteract a specific type of negative DCV modifier." which supports my assertion that CV modifiers are, in fact, a "condition". Especially considering that DPSLs can only be applied to conditions and that they can only ever be used to offset DCV modifiers. The statement regarding OPSLs is accurate though, you explicitly cannot use them to offset Maneuver penalties.

When you chose to Hold Action, you Hold until a condition occurs, and your action always takes place afterwards. If you Hold Action using the CC example of "I wait until he strikes", you don't get to take your held action until after his strike has resolved. That is why my example condition was "I wait until Ogre moves next to me." because that is the action that comes immediately before Ogre can Strike me, and by using the aforementioned condition, my Held Action will come up at the same time as Ogre's Strike action. Which leads to a DEX off because Teleporting isn't a Defensive Action unless I Dive for Cover; which I obviously don't want to do for some reason since I could have simply Aborted my Held Action to do so instead of dealing with all this complicated BS. I think it is set up that way on purpose so that there is no way for a character to simply "not be wherever they are hitting" without making a DEX Roll (and therefore have a chance of failure).

And 6e1&2 as well. There were really good (if needlessly complex) rules in one of the APGs for giving Foci more Object-like characteristics. However other than that every example of equipment with BODY (such as everything from Fantasy Hero, and HSEG) is the result of such characteristics being arbitrarily assigned to them without any game mechanics to support them. There are guidelines for determining the BODY of Objects based upon their mass which could be used to estimate a BODY score. But the mechanics of Foci don't really support using it so you'd have to house-rule how Foci with BODY work, or use the version from the APGs.

You misunderstand my argument, I said we were taking those two lines from the Dispel description "at face value". The example doesn't say you destroy one of the device's powers... it says you destroy (or ruin) the device. Per the rules for Foci, a device isn't "destroyed" until all of it's powers are lost. Therefore to "destroy" a device using Dispel is to "deprive it of all of its powers" by definition. So per said argument you only need to be able to beat the highest active point power bought through the focus (Defender's 60 APs Multipower) to destroy the entire focus (and every power bought through it) with Dispel. You could argue that his Power Pack is a separate Focus from the Powered Armor itself based upon how they are listed, but that just lets you deprive him of almost the same number of CP worth of powers using an even smaller Dispel (since the power pack is only 40 APs, and he needs it to fuel most of his powers). Dispel is not an Adjustment Power, therefore it is not subject to the Halving rule that applies to "raising" or "lowering" a "defensive" game element using an Adjustment Power (considering that Dispel doesn't raise or lower anything, it wouldn't apply even if it were an Adjustment Power).

If the basic suit is always the same, but you tack on modules (or extra armor) as needed, than it is probably going to be best to use a VPP to represent the modules. If you want to go full on Iron Man 3, than each suit is a Computer-Controlled/Assisted Vehicle, and you paid to have a few dozen extras (there is typically a lot of latitude given when applying the +5-point Doubling Rule to vehicles); for mechanical purposes all those extra suits in Iron Man 3 probably had the same stats. Considering he had been pumping out extra suits to cope with his PTSD for a while, I doubt there was anything particularly innovative about them. Multiform can also work, but I don't like the way it replaces your normal characteristics & skills, making it unsuitable for representing Power Armor that other characters can use. Perhaps a Vehicle with Multiform (which has been house ruled to allow its Alternate Forms to be other Vehicles on the grounds that it is a Vehicle itself, and not a character as the rules normally assume) that takes Extra Time and an RSR (Inventor) Roll to activate... which you could then buy multiples of to represent a character that has a limited number of suits of Powered Armor at a time, but which can have any combination of them he needs (Need three Hulkbuster suits and a Spacesuit? No problem!)

As I understand it: Cheshire is free to Hold Action "Until Ogre Moves Next To Him". However at that point, Ogre wants to punch Cheshire at the same time Cheshire want to teleport away from Ogre. This is literally a perfect text book example of when the "Who Goes First" rules apply (CC 137). Because Cheshire's action isn't covered under the list of "Defensive Actions" (defined under Aborting An Action, CC 138), both characters attempt DEX Rolls. If Ogre wins, he gets to punch Cheshire first (who most likely teleports away if he's still conscious). If Cheshire wins, he gets to teleport away, and Ogre has nothing to punch, and may continue to advance, or hurl an object instead (since he hadn't yet committed to the action like he would have if Cheshire had Aborted to Dive For Cover, Ogre can still decide to do something else).

There you go, citation provided. However, since PSLs do not modify your OCV or DCV at all, the OCV/DCV checklists are not relevant to their function. You apply a PSL just like any other type of skill level, and when the appropriate condition occurs it modifies whatever penalty you would have suffered by the number of levels you applied without exception. For DPSLs you may select any condition, including those whose penalty is relative to your DCV (i.e. ones that reduce your DCV to 1/2 or 0)

Foci don't have a BODY score to Dispel (or against which to target a Transform). The example given in CC of "the ability to destroy or ruin devices" is directly contradictory to the power's mechanical function "Allows a character to turn off another character's Power (chosen at purchase). Further except for the line "Dispel is more effective... against objects (which must be repaired, recharged, or rebuilt)", there is no text supporting how that works mechanically. However if you take those two statements at face value (ignoring the lack of any supporting mechanics for their function); Dispel Objects (defined as the object disassembling itself) would be the amongst the most horrendously overpowered options available thanks to how god-awful cheap it is to dispel things; and the fact that nobody is going to be able to use that object again for the rest of the session (or possibly longer depending on what you dispelled). There would certainly be no point in using Drain/Suppress on objects if you can more permanently destroy it less expensively using Dispel instead. For example, with 90 APs: I can use a 6d6 Drain Object to drain 21 CP from one of Defender's Attacks, or his Power Pack (either of which will return in 4 turns), or I can use a 20d6 Dispel Object to destroy his entire suit of powered armor instead, effectively Draining 236 points (which will not return until Defender can rebuild his armor, a task that cannot be performed during combat)... oh and outing his secret identity. All with just one attack roll and an effect roll.

This is also misunderstood. There is nothing prohibiting you from purchasing OPSLs to offset Noncombat Velocity penalties. However, you are explicitly prohibited from purchasing OPSLs to offset the "-v/10 OCV" you incur from performing a Move Through (or the flat -2 penalty for Move By, or the variable penalty for Multiple Attack, etc...) by the phrase "Nor can he buy OPSLs to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver..., or to counteract the Unfamiliar Weapon penalty..." (6e1 84). Which is actually the only statement in the rules defining conditions which PSLs cannot be applied to. So you can have a positive OCV while at Noncombat Velocity, you just can't do it buy purchasing MSLs, CSLs, or Conditional OCV. In fact, I can't find anything in the rules prohibiting a character from using a martial maneuver (such as Passing Strike) at Noncombat Velocity (thus far I've checked CC, 6e1&2, and HSMA), except for a note saying that reasonable GMs might ignore the rule that velocity-based martial maneuvers don't cause feedback damage if the player tries to do something stupid like Charging into a Brick Wall at Noncombat Velocity (HSMA 249). So Velocity Man could buy Passing Strike, Mega-Running, and a stack of OPSLs to obliterate objects on impact without suffering any damage himself; despite a notable lack of Resistant Protection capable of absorbing the 102d6 Normal Damage dealt by a 1km/phase Passing Strike. However I don't think most sensible GMs will allow such a character, even if they are legal per RAW.

Yes the halving will occur last in the checklist so that all possible bonuses (such as from buying Conditional DCV) have already been applied. However PSLs do not, at any point modify your OCV or DCV (except indirectly), so the checklist isn't relevant to their function at all. The basic mechanical function of a PSL is to reduce penalties caused by a specified condition (regardless of when said condition occurs). So it doesn't matter when the, Flat, 1/2, or 0 DCV penalty is calculated, any DPSLs you've applied to the action will still reduce that penalty by an amount equal to the number of DPSLs applied.

The "full rules" also support my arguments. See 6e1 84-85 regarding Penalty Skill Levels. The language regarding OPSLs not applying to counter maneuver penalties is explicitly spelled out there too. Likewise this language is omitted from the rules specific to DPSLs (which are written as inclusively as possible). 6e1 84-85 do go a step further in making is explicitly clear that OPSLs/DPSLs cannot increase OCV/DCV generally, only to "reduce or counteract a specific type of negative DCV modifier." See 6e2 73-78 regarding Multiple Attack, specifically Combat Skill Levels (6e2 77): where once again 6e supports CC by calling out that "characters cannot buy Combat Skill Levels specifically with Multiple Attack". Per 6e1 69-71 & 84-85, Penalty Skills Levels are "a type of Skill Level", while Combat Skill Levels do not appear to be; in fact 6e1 69 explicitly notes that "Characters can use Overall Levels as CSLs", further reinforcing that they are mechanically distinct. It stands to reason that since 6e and CC both call out CSLs specifically, but never make any mention of either SLs or PSLs, that those rules do not apply to them.

No it doesn't... Reducing a penalty to DCV, and gaining a bonus to DCV are not the same thing mechanically. Although to be fair in practice the end result is the same in some circumstances. Applying a PSL doesn't give you additional DCV, it offsets (i.e. reduces by an amount equal to the number of PSLs) a defined penalty. It doesn't matter if the penalty is a fixed value, or one relative to your current Combat Values; all that affects is how many PSLs you need.

As a general rule, you can use an applicable* Defensive PSL to reduce a 1/2 DCV effect. You simply need a number of PSLs equal to half of whatever your current DCV is to negate the entire penalty. For example, a character with a maximum DCV of 6 needs 3 PSLs to completely negate being at 1/2 DCV. If they only had 1 PSL, their maximum DCV would be 4 under the same circumstances (the result of reducing the -3 penalty from being at "1/2 DCV" by 1). * You are never explicitly prohibited from purchasing Defensive PSLs to offset the Multiple Attack Penalty in Champions Complete. Multiple Attack only prohibits you from purchasing Combat Skill Levels for it; it never mentioned Penalty Skill Levels, which are a different skill entirely. Further, Penalty Skill Levels only explicitly prohibit Offensive PSLs from counteracting maneuver penalties. What this means is that per RAW in CC, you can buy "+X to offset Multiple Attack penalties with All Attacks" as 3-point Defensive PSLs, but not as Offensive PSLs. This is also why Two-Weapon Fighting, which is equivalent to "+2 to offset Multiple Attack Penalties with All Attacks (as 3-point Offensive PSLs) (6 APs); Only While Two-Weapon Fighting (-?)" is instead a separate 10-point Skill. Simply buying more DCV with the Limitation "Only While Performing A Multiple Attack" is also perfectly legal, but not particularly cost effective because per RAW nothing is preventing that DCV from getting halved by the Multiple Attack too. So you effectively have to pay 10 APs per +1 DCV (sans abuse of rounding), which you then modify to a cost of between 5 and 3.3 CP per +1 DCV (with nothing preventing your "Multiple Attacking" DCV from exceeding your normal DCV. Compared to the cost of 1 to 3 CP for Defensive PSLs (which could still be modified downward if appropriate).

I would use an appropriately Limited 1d6 Penetrating RKA as my preferred chassis for RAW-legal "Focus-Destruction" in CC. Make it Autofire if you want to be able to destroy multiple functions at once. Very few Foci have Impenetrable Defenses, and the ones that do probably deserved to survive anyway. Using Dispel on an object is a legal method of destroying it (Banishing it technically) if you assume that the object was created via Object Creation (the power from one of the APGs) or Alternate Magic Item Creation Rules (from Fantasy Hero; and which are based on the Differing Modifiers rules, but function more like a really slow Summon). Otherwise I've never been really fond of it because of how poorly defined the mechanics of using Dispel on Foci are, and how cheap Dispel is compared to the 'damage' caused by having your entire suit of Powered Armor fall apart.

In Pathfinder, Gnomes were once fey (they magically became "Humanoids" over the centuries so Paizo wouldn't have to rewrite Charm Person). It emphasizes the Illusion and Trickster elements of Gnomes from 2nd edition D&D. They also have wild anime hair colors because a short-folk with a green and red stripped locks of hair needed to be a thing. For fun I once ran a short Pathfinder campaign in a demi-plane called Bag (it was in a Bag of Holding) which was populated mostly by Gnomes, and worshiped "The Great Gnome" who created Bag. Halflings are pretty much just short, agile, humans. in Pathfinder's core campaign setting they've been used as slaves by humanity for centuries in some places.

The solution depends immensely upon the genre and expected style of the campaign: In a typical Heroic High Fantasy campaign, acquiring treasure is one of your groups the primary objectives. In addition, characters are often expected to cope with equipment related obstacles (broken weapons, expended consumables, etc). So characters should not be expected to pay CP for treasure acquired during an adventure, nor should they be allowed to pay CP to acquire treasures between adventures either. In a typical Superheroic Champions Campaign, having a particular piece of equipment (like a suit of powered armor) might be the only thing separating you from a normal person. In addition, acquiring treasure isn't usually only of the objectives of the adventure. So characters should be expected to pay CP for any treasure they acquire during an adventure (assuming they choose to keep it), and be allowed to pay CP to acquire treasures between adventures as well (within reason of course). In an atypical Heroic campaign (such as those encouraged by Dark Champions), characters are expected to acquire stockpiles of equipment which they must manage. Such campaigns would use the Resource Point Rules; which are something of a compromise between the "typical" campaigns described above.

For me, the "basic" list for a new Herophile should include: Champions Complete (or Fantasy Hero Complete depending upon preferred Genre) Champions Powers - But don't bother with Hero System Grimoire, if you need spells, just apply your magic system's casting procedures to powers found within Champions Powers instead. Hero System Equipment Guide - All the prebuilt equipment you'll ever need, for almost any type of campaign. Hero System Bestiary and Champions Villains I-IV - HSB provides all the prebuilt creatures/characters most GMs will ever need, and the Champions Villains books are invaluable for running a superhero campaign, but otherwise unneeded. Hero System Martial Arts - Contains invaluable game elements and optional rules related to Martial Maneuvers and Martial Artists difficult to find elsewhere. The Ultimate Vehicle (for 5th edition) - Contains a huge number of example vehicles, as well as optional rules for vehicles which were never republished for 6th edition). The Ultimate Base - Like the Ultimate Vehicle, lots of optional rules for bases, and some good example bases too. Updated to 6th, but less useful than The Ultimate Vehicle frankly. Champions or Fantasy Hero - Depending upon preferred genre of course. Champions contains a superhero gallery (which you can find an expansion for here in the store) that is invaluable for helping new players build standard superheroes. Fantasy Hero contains an extremely useful price list/example economy and optional rules useful for a fantasy campaign (I prefer my old 5th edition copy, but both 5th or 6th edition copies are equally useful for running a 6th edition Fantasy Hero Campaign). Aaron Allston's Strikeforce - The quality of this book cannot be overstated. While expensive for it's size, the print quality is very high (hardbound, with full color art and solid graphic design). Furthermore, the GMing advice ("The Strike Force Method") alone was worth the price of admission, the campaign setting and characters were just gravy for me.

"Team Viper is blasting off again!"

Yup, now you can buy 1 pip HKA and deal 1d6 HKA with your default 10 STR; and continue to increase the damage of said HKA infinitely so long as you can afford all those sources of added DCs (STR, Velocity, MAs/CSLs, etc).

Not necessarily. I'm not talking about decoupling the ability to add STR to HAs/HKAs. So that 1d6 HA still has the advantage of doing 3d6N, while the 1d6 Blast has the advantage of a 50m range. Taking away either of those advantages (Adding STR or Ranged) is worthy of a -1/2 Limitation, so under my proposal they would have the same cost.

In 6th edition HA is 4 CP per 1d6 (the mandatory Limitation value was reduced from -1/2 in 5th to -1/4 in 6th). I think the fairer argument would be that Strength (and by extension Telekinesis) is Underpriced, not that damage classes are from HA are overpriced. If STR were 2 CP per point (and Telekinesis 3 APs per point) than HA wouldn't need a mandatory limitation to be fairly priced (or a draconic restriction on taking Range modifiers to be balanced). Alternatively, if the dice of damage produced by strength alone was somehow inferior to other sources of Normal Damage, than getting similar dice of damage for the same price wouldn't be unbalanced. For example, if STR Damage was naturally Reduced Penetration, but STR could still be used to add to HAs and HKAs normally.

Watched as a Complication has always implied active surveillance to me. In order to be worth points, there has to be somebody in particular who cares about and is taking note of your every action (or as many of them as possible). Templates should only contain those game elements which apply to everyone​ who takes them. I don't believe every soldier is worthy of being Watched that closely, so I don't think such a complication should be included in the template.

Bath Towel: 7-point Multipower Reserve (7 APs); All Slots OAF (-1), One-Handed (-0), Real Weapon (-1/4), STR Minimum (3; -0). Cost: ​3 points. Slot I: Cosmetic Transform (Wet Target Into Dry Target; Target Recovers By Getting Wet) 1d6, Constant (+1/2), Zero END (+1/2) (6 APs); Conditional (Must Maintain Grab, or Target Must Be Willing; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), Side Effect (Towel Becomes Wet After Transforming A Target; -1/2), Towel Must Be Dry (-1/2). Cost: ​1f points. Slot II: ​HA 1d6, Zero END (+1/2) (7 APs); Requires A Dexterity Roll At -1 (-1/2), Towel Must Be Wet (-1/2). Cost: 1f points. Total Cost: 5 points.

Likewise, 25 CP per Level is my estimation as well. Which means most Normals are effectively between 1st and 4th level, and Standard Heroes (175 point characters) are effectively 7th level (which is why the spellcasters can afford cool spells like ​Fireball and ​Invisibility).