massey

Easy.  I do not believe that an attack that only affects a very limited class of enemies is "advantageous".
 
If it's intended to not affect normals, or mind-controlled good people, or animals, or animated objects... then great!  That means the player has a good solid idea of how his attack is supposed to work.  He's not gonna be mad when he can't slice through a door with his magic sword, and we're all on the same page.
 
Do you think the player is just going to walk around stabbing people to see if they're evil?  "Hey, it's cool everybody.  It's cool.  That baby was totally evil.  My sword wouldn't have hurt it otherwise.  Honest."  Just because someone is evil doesn't mean they're deserving of death.  You might have an evil old man who hoards his money and hates other people, but that doesn't mean he's committed a crime or anything.  You just can't slice his head off because he's a hateful old grouch.  There would be roleplaying penalties to randomly stabbing people.
 
What's he really getting out of it, anyway?  Detect evil, requires successful attack roll, OAF, linked to HKA?  That's what, like a single character point?  It's not a big deal.

The game mechanics dictate many of the "sweet spots" for stats.  If people are using a 10D6 average attack, then they're going to average about 35 Stun.  If you've got an 8 PD/ED and 20 Con, that means a normal attack will leave you missing your next action.  Buying up those stats so that you can take an average damage hit without being Stunned just makes sense.  Higher Speed is always helpful as long as you've got enough Endurance to make it to the post-12 recovery.
 
The very first character I ever built was a power armor guy.  I hadn't seen any of the published characters and didn't understand the system all that well.  This was in 4th edition.  His OCV/DCV was 5, because I didn't realize that such things were important.  Our team's first adventure was a Danger Room type scenario.  Our GM had played before, but none of the players had ever tried Champions.  So he let us fight each other and try out our characters, with the idea that we'd then rebuild after the session and fix all the various problems we had.
 
We were a bunch of players with zero experience in Champions, but very familiar with rpgs in general.  It took us exactly one battle before we each had a big list of changes for our characters.  Our second drafts looked very much like classic Champions characters, with Dex and Con scores in the mid-20s and Speeds of 5 to 6.  Those are simply the most effective places you can spend your points.

Emphasis added - we need to precisely define how this works.  Is there an objective standard of "Evil" to be applied here?  What is it?  Is it subjective?  Relative to whom?  That which my character considers Evil?  Does the target consider himself Evil.  Human sacrifice to placate the Volcano God is not evil according to the High Priest of the Volcano God - it's just necessary, perhaps even virtuous.
 
 
OK, so now we are into some definitions.  We know this will have no impact on normal people, probably including a lot of agents, non-sapient thinks or objects.  That is limiting.  It's not useful against most members of that OtherNation Super-Team, even if their objectives are not aligned with ours, and it's not useful against those world-conquering aliens who are only trying to provide resources for their starving people who have nowhere to live.  Or is it?  We need to DEFINE that capital-E Evil.
 
Having defined it, what proportion of those I would like to be able to attack are, in fact, capital-E Evil?  If such individuals are truly the worst of the worst, and we are in a morally ambivalent game with many shades of grey, where there is some bad in the best of us and some good in the worst of us, it may be hugely limiting (-2).  If it's a mix - lots of EEEEEvil villains, but also a lot of selfish or mislead goons, robot servants and animals/monsters just trying to get by with a yummy human meal, maybe it-s a -1.  if it's a SuperFriends game, it may as well be "does not damage objects or automatons", and maybe -1/2 or -1/4.
 
Why don't we ask the player "how limiting do you expect it to be in-game?  Do you expect the sword will be useless in most combats, generally useful but requires careful selection of opponents to target, or only rarely ineffective?"  Phrasing the limitation question in those terms often forces the player to consider the ramifications of those point savings, not just the other kewl stuff he can afford with the points shaved off here.  At least, when it rarely works, you can gently remind the frustrated player that YOU TOLD ME you expected that it would rarely work when we set that high limitation.
 
 
Excellent comment.  Too often, it seems we always assume the player is out to get something for nothing, rather than trying to bring his vision of the character, with advantages and drawbacks, to life through the game rules.

Generally speaking there are a lot of things which are not evil which would be helpful if the character could cut them but would have no effect on. Some things to keep in mind.
 
1) Does he have other means to hurt things and people who wish him harm but are not evil? Beyond just STR of course. Does he have a normal sword also? He is limiting his character enough by only using his evil bashing sword on Dark Palidan, Black Harlequin, and/or Blowtorch and not on Foxbat, Lady Blue, and Ladybug. So it's a limitation. 
 
2) With certain limitations, it is up to the game master to exactly state what the limitation's value is. We don't know exactly how much of something you wish to put into your game. Or what you consider 'evil' enough to trigger the limitation. It is best to think of that limitation as "Not VS Good Aligned Beings, Neutral Aligned Beings, And Non-Sentiant Things". This excudes lots of things which someone with such a weapon would want to cut if he could (A wooden door, or the rope around a pore damsel's body, or some brush which is blocking your way). In my opinion, that is worth a -1 limitation regardless of if the player attempts to use it as a normal sword or not.
 
3) Even if the sword doesn't harm the victim doesn't mean there won't be consequences for swinging it around. Sure it passes harmlessly through Donald Trump (stupid is not equal to evil after all). But try telling that to the Secret Service who just riddled you player's character with Brickbuster Bullets.

Easy.  I do not believe that an attack that only affects a very limited class of enemies is "advantageous".
 
If it's intended to not affect normals, or mind-controlled good people, or animals, or animated objects... then great!  That means the player has a good solid idea of how his attack is supposed to work.  He's not gonna be mad when he can't slice through a door with his magic sword, and we're all on the same page.
 
Do you think the player is just going to walk around stabbing people to see if they're evil?  "Hey, it's cool everybody.  It's cool.  That baby was totally evil.  My sword wouldn't have hurt it otherwise.  Honest."  Just because someone is evil doesn't mean they're deserving of death.  You might have an evil old man who hoards his money and hates other people, but that doesn't mean he's committed a crime or anything.  You just can't slice his head off because he's a hateful old grouch.  There would be roleplaying penalties to randomly stabbing people.
 
What's he really getting out of it, anyway?  Detect evil, requires successful attack roll, OAF, linked to HKA?  That's what, like a single character point?  It's not a big deal.

Wow...entertainers complaining about high tax rates.  That's not exactly new, is it?
 
"let me tell you how it will be"
"that's one for you, nineteen for me"
 
That was George Harrison (and the other Beatles') tax rate in the mid-'60s when the song was written.
 
There is a definite psychological barrier when tax rates go above 50% and more than half of every additional dollar earned goes to the government. 
 
A key element of modern tax systems is ensuring everyone pays their "fair share".
 
A key challenge for modern tax systems is achieving the slightest consensus on what, exactly, that "fair share" is at all income levels.
 
Politicians are very good at fanning the flames and helping the population expect that they will get more government services than they will pay in taxes.  Guess what? Everyone cannot get more than they pay for.
 
And, like it or not, high earners have a lot of choices.  50 Cent could renounce his US citizenship and move to a Caribean tax haven without too much difficulty.  If he weren't in the US, his citizenship would not even matter.

Every time we reason from effect we're going Doylist.  Why should this be different?

A Cosmetic transform can add or subtract up to 2 levels of Striking Appearance.  It can adjust Distinctive Features or other appearance-related complications by up to 5 points.  It can change hair, eye or skin colour.  All of these seem likely to have in-game effects similar to a switch in gender.  A major change to one's DNA?  Sure - but that is a special effect, not a game effect.  Serious impact on social situations?  Sure - but try maintaining your secret ID as an American Indian when, suddenly, you are Asian instead.  That's without the possibility that your skin instead is turned flourescent orange.
 
We're not changing SFX, adding CVs, defenses, skills, DCs, advantages or complications, which covers most examples of Minor transforms.  Major?  Blindness, Fire Blast is now a heatstroke Drain, swapping limbs, creating objects out of thin air or bigger changes to CVs, defenses, skills, DCs, advantages or complications.
 
Unless there is some reason that the in-game impact will be markedly greater than purple skin (not "changes in biology which are more substantial", "game effects that are more significant"), it seems like a Cosmetic transform to me. 
 
"But what if the character was female and pregnant?"  Well, as a Cosmetic Transform, I will suggest that the pregnancy is on hiatus while the character is male, and on returning to female form, is still pregnant with no ill effects. 
 
"But she was VERY pregnant - and 'he' can't be!"  True - looks like we got rid of 5 points' worth of Distinctive Features in the course of the Transform.  Not that I think the GM gave the expectant mother 5 extra CP to spend in the obvious part of her pregnancy anyway.
 
As to "summon infant", which member of the couple has the Power, and which one is a Focus/Special effect?  That seems like dangerous territory.  I don't feel the need to stat up the power of transforming blood sugar and oxygen into energy, so I'll pass on statting up natural reproductive processes, no more necessary and potentially a lot more inflammatory, as well.

Well, there are different ways of representing a huge, invulnerable dragon. The question I have is, what would you use this writeup for? Traditionally dragons are supposed to get slain, but it would be extraordinarily difficult for this dragon to be slain by anything.

With the boy/girl gun we're talking about turning a target into a gender-swapped version of their self.  
 
A Severe Transform can turn a human being into a frog, a stone statue, a shrubbery, or thin air.  Severe is overkill.  
 
A Major Transform can grant a human the ability to shoot fire blasts from their hands or fly with wings.  
 
A Cosmetic Transform can turn a human into a different human.  I'll stipulate that a Cosmetic Transform can turn a human into a human of the opposite gender in appearance only...
 
Is turning a human into the same human of a different gender, qualitatively the same as granting them the ability to fly or shoot fire?
 
(Have any of you seriously played in or run games where the ability to become pregnant and give birth amounts to a Power for which the character should pay points?)
 
Minor Transform is enough to "work minor changes on the target's functions".  How is changing someone's gender not this?  Especially compared to the ability to fly or throw energy blasts?
 

Major Transform can change people into microwave ovens.  Boy to girl is not a Major Transform.

If you admit soul and Motown into the arena, then one must consider Aretha Franklin and James Brown here as well.

In game terms, the function doesn't change at all.  There is no difference in game terms between male and female.
 
 
 
I find no rules for being pregnant in the book.

Summon Missile
 
Slavishly loyal automaton which is destroyed on impact.

Probably has a copy of Fast Times at Ridgemont High as well.  God bless that man.

Two solutions come to mind. The first is that the "heat seeking" is just a special effect of a missile that is very accurate. It doesn't really matter that it is using IR as a targeting mechanism.
 
So something like: +8 OCV, only versus targets with a heat signature (-0), OIF (-0), etc. 8 RP
If the fact that it might not hit until a later phase become extremely important you could implement this as either a subset of Damage Over Time or Delayed Effect. You might have to house rule parts of it to make it fit your exact requirements.
 
The second would be if the exact method where it flies around looking for a particular target heat signature is important over multiple phases... build it as a vehicle with an AI. It should not require a lot of points, mostly it's a detect, RKA, and flight with some bonuses to perception to avoid other things. Note that this has the advantage / disadvantage of allowing it to be attacked and destroyed.
 
- E

After viewing the disappointing post-debate polls, Trump asked Kushner how to do better in the following debate.
 
Jared said, "Be positive, spread your positivity, and after all is said and done, try to come across as a patient person"

*flips through channels, sighs heavily.*
 
Your powers grow weak, @Old Man.

Those are called Oompa Loompas

I hope Chris Christie pulls through. I hear he was in the running to be cast as Bouncing Boy in DC's Legion of Superheroes movie.

The game mechanics dictate many of the "sweet spots" for stats.  If people are using a 10D6 average attack, then they're going to average about 35 Stun.  If you've got an 8 PD/ED and 20 Con, that means a normal attack will leave you missing your next action.  Buying up those stats so that you can take an average damage hit without being Stunned just makes sense.  Higher Speed is always helpful as long as you've got enough Endurance to make it to the post-12 recovery.
 
The very first character I ever built was a power armor guy.  I hadn't seen any of the published characters and didn't understand the system all that well.  This was in 4th edition.  His OCV/DCV was 5, because I didn't realize that such things were important.  Our team's first adventure was a Danger Room type scenario.  Our GM had played before, but none of the players had ever tried Champions.  So he let us fight each other and try out our characters, with the idea that we'd then rebuild after the session and fix all the various problems we had.
 
We were a bunch of players with zero experience in Champions, but very familiar with rpgs in general.  It took us exactly one battle before we each had a big list of changes for our characters.  Our second drafts looked very much like classic Champions characters, with Dex and Con scores in the mid-20s and Speeds of 5 to 6.  Those are simply the most effective places you can spend your points.

Both Viper and Until agents were in the original book.
 
Enemies I included GENOCIDE agents.
 
The authors of Enemies I were the old school Hero Games people.

Going through the table of contents, they were:
Glenn Thain, Bruce Harlick, Steve Peterson, George Mac Donald, Ray Greer, Steve Goodman, and Stacy Laurence.
 
Enemies II added Steve Perrin, Kevin Dinapoli and Mark Williams.
 
We know that Steve Goodman crunched the numbers before 1e Champions was published. Other people repeated this once it was published (I did, too, partially.)
 
The only way that low values could have happened would have been if it had been enforced. Otherwise, the maths just doesn't support it.
 
Most of the "problem" is the mismatch with later published normal focused games. Without those, nobody would care.
 
 

The "standard" values are set by the game system itself, through there being optimal values for certain characteristics.
 
As a result, if you try and force characters into a particular (non-optimal) range, you will end up with character concepts that cluster at the high end of the range.

Kenny G