NuSoardGraphite

It was quite good. Hopefully this is the beginning of the DCEU changing its fortunes.

LOL, no.

Agreed. A knight who regularly practices lance charges from horseback would likely develop one of the Martial Maneuvers to use it with purely for efficiency sake.

Domt use real weapon. Add Difficult to Dispel.

OAF works. You dont need the damage shield. Its just a lot of people are stuck on the idea of damage shield being an elemental aura surrounding something so tend to use that to represent an elementally wreathed weapon. Its not necessary though.

Why is the damage bonus of a killing attack halved? That is a completely ineffective attack and not indicative to what the maneuver would actually do to a target in the source material. That needs to be fixed!

Something on this level?

I thought it was an experimental Russian pilots suit meant to be able to handle high g-force maneuvers and tough enough not to shred due to friction.

5th edition is my go to. It is like a more detailed and malleable version of 4th edition, which is the version I started with (though I did play some 3rd ed stuff too) so that is what I prefer.

Crits = Max rolllable damage. Fumbles = GM fiat giving the character a disadvantage. In the midst of combat thats generally a slip and fall and 1/2 DCV or disarmament as the weapon slips from their fingers and flies away in a random direction.

Yes, there is. Its just much slower. You use less dice, but add AoE and Continuous on the Transfer. Then increase the maximum by +2 for each additional character point spent. It should look something like this 1d6 Transfer (15) +20 maximum effect (10) Continuous (+1) Area of Effect radius (+1) 75 active. Full phase activstion (-1/2) only vs biological organisms (-1/2) Total points 38. With this you would roll 1d6 of Transfer per phase. If you want it to drain and transfer multiple characteristics, then it will cost significantly more. Continuous allows the character to activste the power the continue draining without using a phase. The area of effect it 5". The maximum is 26 character points transfered, which is pretty significant. 26 points of Strength. 13 points of Body or Con. 8 points of Dex. 13 points of Ego, etc. The limitations are it takes a full phase to activate, so essentially the character has to stand still. You could also add Concentrate to that if you want to further reduce the cost. And the limited effect of Only works on biological beings meaning the drain cant be used on robots or vehicles or buildings or anything of that nature. At 75 active the cost isnt too bad. It is a powerful effect. If used to drain Con or Body or Stun or Endurance, it can be an ability that turns the tide of battle.

Ant Man is not a side character. He is supposed to be a core member of The Avengers. I would add Wasp to that as well. The Guardians of the Galaxy didnt come in till Phase 2. In Phase 2 they needed to jntroduce the wider Marvel Universe that exists beyond the earth and the GotG was an absolutely brilliant way of doing that. When it comes to DC, Green Lantern should be that vehicle. And Marvel is still not focusing on side characters aside from the GotG. Black Panther, Dr Strange and Capt Marvel are all core characters. They could do the Inhumans because Blackbolt becomes a major mover and shaker in the Marvel Universe (esp if they plan to introduce The Illuminati). They could do Namor as well. What Marvel is not doing is wasting time on doing a movie about The Wrecking Crew, or giving Elektra a stand alone film. They had set up the wider marvel univers within the galaxy. At the point where GotG came out (phase 2) the situation on earth had been pretty well established. Thus GotG informed audiences of the political situation in space and showed them exactly how powerful and how feared Thanos was. And it also gave us the necessary back story on the Infinity Gems, so now we can namr them within the other films without needing that exposition. Guardians handled that. It was time. They dont have to do that with the movies. They have 40+ years of history with most of these books. All they have to do is figure out what version of the characters they want to go with, which stories they want to tell and put it together so it all makes sense. When they started the movie franchise, the first few films might have been trial and error seeing what resonated with audiences. But they are well beyond that now and reaching deep into long established Marvel lore to advance the franchise itself. Likely somewhere in the middle of those extremes. We spend as many years as we need to. We need to establish the rules first. Make introductions. Let the audience become familiar with and get comfortable with the characters. Then you destroy their world and change everything. It will resonate with audiences a whole lot more that way. Just look at the box office of the Marvel franchise. They are quite obviously doing something right. I would have preferred that Antman been a founding member. And I would have liked to have seen Ultron introduced in an Avengers film and be helpful to the Avengers first, then betray them. It would have had much more impact then. Speaking of Vision. The fact that Jarvis became Vision was awesome. Jarvis was introduced in the original Iron Man and had been in every movie that featured him. Audiences knew and were comfortable with Jarvis. So when Vision spoke with Jarvis voice, the average movie goer feels as if they already know the character. There suddenly isnt this new character that needs history and background in a team movie where there is very little time to do that. I am acknowledging this approach. I would say this for any studio attempting a long running and wide reaching movie or tv franchise. Not just for comic book movies.

I dont for a second buy Whedon just putting Thanos in the end of the film as a bonus for the fans. Why? Because the Emmissary spoke to Loki in the middle of the film mentioning "The one who put the scepter in your hands" meaning Thanos. Why would that line be in the film if Thanos was just an easter egg. It was a part of the plan, thats why. Whedon is full of crap.

Hey, I'm just giving my opinion on what I think they need to do to get the feel right. Whether or not they actually even attempt the relationship dynamic is conpletely up in the air. (Personally I would love to see a creepy love triangle between Batman, Batgirl and Nightwing to show just how effed up their dynamic is, but I dont think they would go that far).