Christopher R Taylor

At the risk of derailing the thread, I do agree with you.  More skills means more stuff to buy.
Hero started to react to this by having meta skills like "I know stuff: 11-" or "Science of any kind: 13-" but these kinds of things aren't on the general skill list and seems to be a case of Hero being in confict with itself.
The official 5e Lucha Libre hero suggested giving every PC a 8- "man about town" skill that let then know about anything and everything on an 8- because in the source material Masked Wrestlers seem to just randomly be able to read ancient Aztec or rebuild Airplanes because they are just really cool dudes, but a Masked Wrestling Service Station worker would still buy Mechanics 11- on top of the free skill.

So it's official and it isn't.  I'd like to see that sort of thing as a campaign choice like points or no points for equipment is.

Long story short: the mechanics are 90% the same as 4th.

From a Hero system perspective:
The costs for several powers have changed
The details of how several powers work have changed
A couple powers were altered to be subsets of other powers (Transfer is now a Drain and an Aid bought together instead of a separate power for example)
Figured characteristics have been removed (buying more con no longer gives you more stun, you buy each separately).
5th edition allowed characters to throw multiple attacks on one attack action.  Apparently this was *always* intended to be in Hero since 1st, but wording was ambiguous.  Now it isn't, and 6th carries on in this.  It ended up not being as big a deal as was feared, but it's a thing.
Characters are no longer required to have as many disadvantages
There are new powers, new advantages, new ways of doing things, new stuff
 
The original 6E grew to two books of just rules with extensive examples and options.  For some folks this got to be too much.
The most recent version of the rules is in Champions Complete, which dials back the wordiness quite a bit and fits Hero and Champions back into one book again.
Champions Complete and 6E book 1 and 2 are basically the same rules, Champions Complete is just more concise.

From a Champions Perspective (if you are playing supers)
Starting characters get more points, the feeling was this does a better job of simulating modern comics
Campaign limits/suggestions make characters hit harder and take hits a little less well.  This isnt a change in the rules but a change in the recommended builds.  It makes fights go quicker
*Lots* of stuff in the "Champions Universe" has changed.  When 5th came out the universe was reshaped to only include characters that Hero actually owned and took another crack at lots of characters.  6th ed mostly kept what 5th had put into place.

Overall:
If you already have all your old books and just want to play with those, go ahead. 
If you want to be able to use the more modern books, I'd go ahead & pick up the 6E rules.

I suppose it all goes back to that fallacy Starlin had Thanos parrot in the original source material, that life and death are out of balance because there are more beings alive today than have ever lived and died previously. That's not even true of humanity, let alone all the varied life forms on earth and all the other planets that have been born and died over billions of years.

It kind of makes comic book sense, where outrageously advanced technology is built by some kid in his basement.  I cam climb walls, I should make web shooters!  Good thing I am an A student in my high school!
 
I preferred Booster Gold's approach though: steal fairly common tech from his time period and go back in time to get rich and famous as a superhero.
 
====================
 
OK attached is the rough draft of the current GM book.  it has a lot of gaps where art and character sheets will go, and the maps will be redone (as they are quite old having been repurposed from 1981 over the years, or just not applicable).
 
The Player Book will be shorter, more art-packed, and focused on jsut what you can do as a player rather than how things work.  THat I'll get to next.
 
WHAT I AM ASKING FOR FROM EVERYONE HERE:
 
Artwork (villain and viper agent costume designs, incidental art, cover art) Editing (check for spelling and grammar, errors in layout, anything forgotten that needs to be in there, and any possible messups in rule explanation) Playtesters (run through the adventure in the format its done with -- as a tutorial -- ideally with new players)  
Please if you can, give me a hand here.  The more we work together on this, the quicker it gets out there for people to use.  That means quick as you can on editing and artwork, if you can contribute.
 
Champions Begins GM Book.pdf

It kind of makes comic book sense, where outrageously advanced technology is built by some kid in his basement.  I cam climb walls, I should make web shooters!  Good thing I am an A student in my high school!
 
I preferred Booster Gold's approach though: steal fairly common tech from his time period and go back in time to get rich and famous as a superhero.
 
====================
 
OK attached is the rough draft of the current GM book.  it has a lot of gaps where art and character sheets will go, and the maps will be redone (as they are quite old having been repurposed from 1981 over the years, or just not applicable).
 
The Player Book will be shorter, more art-packed, and focused on jsut what you can do as a player rather than how things work.  THat I'll get to next.
 
WHAT I AM ASKING FOR FROM EVERYONE HERE:
 
Artwork (villain and viper agent costume designs, incidental art, cover art) Editing (check for spelling and grammar, errors in layout, anything forgotten that needs to be in there, and any possible messups in rule explanation) Playtesters (run through the adventure in the format its done with -- as a tutorial -- ideally with new players)  
Please if you can, give me a hand here.  The more we work together on this, the quicker it gets out there for people to use.  That means quick as you can on editing and artwork, if you can contribute.
 
Champions Begins GM Book.pdf

That's only one approach to building a character. Compelling villains need to have understandable motives, not ones we empathize with. Thanos is a force of Nature. Do people read "To Build a Fire" and say, "Gee, I'm sure glad I didn't end up like that freezing Winter day! That could have been me!"? Nope. Do people watch any of the movies or TV shows featuring Hannibal Lecter and empathize with Hannibal? No. Because he's a monster in a human suit. There's not enough humanity in him to empathize with, and you aren't at any risk of becoming Hannibal through a few bad life choices. But his arrogance? His rage? His appreciation for the finer things, and for good manners? Those are understandable. I could fill this little text box with examples, but I'm recovering from thoracic surgery and not inclined to put in the effort today.
 
You don't dogmatically apply one writing technique to every villain you create. That's a lack of understanding the options on the table. That's amateur hour.
 
 
--- ------------------------------------------------------- screw this post merging nonsense ---------------------------------------------
 
 
 
Yeah, they certainly didn't have the opportunity to slowly roll the concepts out over a decade worth of movies. Shame, that.
 
 
See, that wasn't necessary, and it was done so hamfistedly that every discussion of the plot of the movies comes back around to the stupidity of the plan.
 

You could sell his obsession with Death with a single soliloquy extolling the virtues of Death (and this has been done in many genres of many media), then reveal that he's talking to the Marvel version of Death, who simply turns her back on him and walks away. Cut back to his facial features going through the emotions of rejection, settling on a look of grim resolve. Not that hard to sell.

I do think that Death wouldn't have been quite as difficult a buy-in for casual viewers as Eternity, the Living Tribunal, and other Marvel cosmic characters. People have been seeing it personified as the Grim Reaper and such in popular culture for centuries.

And here we get back to how the plot in the films was nonsense and "loves death" made more sense, creating a far more unique and interesting bad guy.

OK as I get a first draft down to sections of this I'm going to post them as pdfs here for people to look over and comment on.
 
My goals are these:
To create a package that has a book for GMs and a book for Players For each book to be fun, easy to read, and teach the system The scenario is in tutorial format (familiar to gamers) introducing concepts one bloc at a time, until they know enough to play the game without the tutorial I'm using the old Viper's Nest/Microfilm Madness scenario updated for modern times (so, no microfilm) Each chapter has an intro to the rules used in this section, then the episode of the scenario Players will have pre-made PCs to choose from in very familiar and well-loved archetypes with fun and colorful names and costumes Each entire book should be slender and filled with images for all ages The end result is intended as a free product for players to download and use Ideally, eventually, I'd love to see this packaged as a box set with dice, a map, a GM screen, that kind of thing.  
Please be constructive and positive, any nit picking or troublemaking comments will be cheerfully ignored.

Maybe a form of 0-point DNPC for Hogan’s group?

I'd base the presence on the effectiveness of the illusion how well they believe it and how much they see through it.

In would say "statting it out in game terms" can include "this will have no significant in-game effect, whether positive or negative, and therefore is a zero-point ability".

The short version is because a haymaker is specifically a type of punch.  Not just in game, but the real-world bastard swing from which the maneuver draws its name.  The early editions even ackowldeged this.  It was never specified as a consulation prize, but it always felt like "here is something for your brick, since he has no ranged attacks."
 
I had never heard of the idea of "haymakering" an energy blast until Red October and 4e, where the idea was being bandied around a lot.  I never thought it would gain a lot of traction so I ignored most of that chatter (primarily I just lurked and a-mailed anyway).  I was secretly pleased not at the idea of haymakering an energy blast, but that the general apparent lack of knowing what haymaker actually meant suggested an over-all drop culturally in real violence.  I hadnt considered the prick in gun or gang violence, so I guess even that joy was misplaced. 
 
at any rate, I still don't allow it for more than hand-to-hand and some melee attacks.  I may change my mind when 7th edition includes rules for bouncing punches and spreading cudgels.
 
 
 

The big difference between a dagger, say, and a longbow is that a longbow properly used is at its maximum power already when properly used.  A dagger properly used is very rarely at maximum effort, and becomes wildly inaccurate when you attack with its maximum damage (from you at least), which means that haymaker perfectly represents that maneuver.  That's why I don't allow ranged attacks of any kind to be haymakered (or energy blasts from StarKing, or mental illusions from the egoist, etc.  Pushing can represent giving it your all but haymaker is an all-out, wild, swing-for-the fences punch or swing.

Golden Age is characterized by superheroes being invented and developed, they were new and the ideas of costumes, patterns of behavior, bad guys, even the idea of how to draw and write a comic were being developed.  Heroes were usually very good guys with very clear morality, but sometimes would kill -- or just let people die they might have saved -- because they were such bad guys.  Batman let someone fall into a vat of chemicals and die "he had it coming".  Superman literally threw a general over a forest at the horizon in one early comic.  Nazis are often the bad guys, or mobsters.
 
Silver Age is more kid friendly stuff, following the early Comics Code Authority and usually with kids involved (sidekicks, a gang of kids who get into trouble that the hero saves, etc).  Stories were absolutely wild and without any connection: the world gets turned into a cube of swiss cheese then back again, and the next issue, no mention or repercussions of that.  Science is more the focus, magic is about gone.  Commies are usually the bad guys, along with a bizarre variety of evil scientists, aliens, etc.  Zero continuity.
 
Bronze Age starts pushing the boundaries of the comics code, making things more edgy and reintroducing banned themes like undead and drugs and crime.  Heroes are flawed and have human characteristics, are more limited in power, and focus more on what they do when not saving the world in stories.  Continuity is king, carefully crafted universes start to be the norm for comic books.  More ripped from the headlines type bad guys and events.
 
Iron Age is EXTREME!!!!1!1!! with huge muscles and guns, and lots of violence and little heroism going on.  Characters are exaggerated versions of themselves, where a lean, fit superman becomes a monstrous body builder that is as huge as the hulk.  Stories are more driven by the LEET artwork with huge splash pages rather than the story. Continuity takes a back seat to what is cool.  Everyone seems angry, or at least constipated.  Dark, violent, and angry.
 
Modern Age has kind of abandoned almost all of the established patterns of superheroes.  Few have any real secret identity they care about any longer.  Few have any sort of code of ethics or nobility.  Many don't even really have costumes as such.  They're more just people with powers doing stuff with powers in action adventures or stories about how they hang out with their ethnically diverse cast of buddies and once in a while do something involving superpowers.  Continuity is irrelevant.  Often heavily partisan or political in tone.
 
I highly recommend the Explain This Comics Guys podcast for history on all this and a lot more.

Golden Age is characterized by superheroes being invented and developed, they were new and the ideas of costumes, patterns of behavior, bad guys, even the idea of how to draw and write a comic were being developed.  Heroes were usually very good guys with very clear morality, but sometimes would kill -- or just let people die they might have saved -- because they were such bad guys.  Batman let someone fall into a vat of chemicals and die "he had it coming".  Superman literally threw a general over a forest at the horizon in one early comic.  Nazis are often the bad guys, or mobsters.
 
Silver Age is more kid friendly stuff, following the early Comics Code Authority and usually with kids involved (sidekicks, a gang of kids who get into trouble that the hero saves, etc).  Stories were absolutely wild and without any connection: the world gets turned into a cube of swiss cheese then back again, and the next issue, no mention or repercussions of that.  Science is more the focus, magic is about gone.  Commies are usually the bad guys, along with a bizarre variety of evil scientists, aliens, etc.  Zero continuity.
 
Bronze Age starts pushing the boundaries of the comics code, making things more edgy and reintroducing banned themes like undead and drugs and crime.  Heroes are flawed and have human characteristics, are more limited in power, and focus more on what they do when not saving the world in stories.  Continuity is king, carefully crafted universes start to be the norm for comic books.  More ripped from the headlines type bad guys and events.
 
Iron Age is EXTREME!!!!1!1!! with huge muscles and guns, and lots of violence and little heroism going on.  Characters are exaggerated versions of themselves, where a lean, fit superman becomes a monstrous body builder that is as huge as the hulk.  Stories are more driven by the LEET artwork with huge splash pages rather than the story. Continuity takes a back seat to what is cool.  Everyone seems angry, or at least constipated.  Dark, violent, and angry.
 
Modern Age has kind of abandoned almost all of the established patterns of superheroes.  Few have any real secret identity they care about any longer.  Few have any sort of code of ethics or nobility.  Many don't even really have costumes as such.  They're more just people with powers doing stuff with powers in action adventures or stories about how they hang out with their ethnically diverse cast of buddies and once in a while do something involving superpowers.  Continuity is irrelevant.  Often heavily partisan or political in tone.
 
I highly recommend the Explain This Comics Guys podcast for history on all this and a lot more.

I only allow haymaker for melee weapons or fists, but I allow a variant that lets you take all the same penalties but then get a +4 bonus to called shot attacks.  A super-careful aim rather than a super-strong attack.
 
Bows have an absolute limit on how much you can "draw" them and how much power you can get out of them.  No amount of extra effort will make them suddenly hit harder than proper use.  If you can make a bow hit harder by drawing it more, then you've not been using it correctly before.

I'd buy the raw land as a base. Significant villagers could be DNPC's for the base.
 
And have the ability to tax the inhabitants as a special effect of the wealth perk.
 
The buildings which the villagers place on the land are generally of negligible value in game or wealth terms. If you're planning on having the whole game take place in the fiefdom and having the PC defend his land though, you'd have to define every building and decide whether the character is going to pay for that building. I wouldn't really worry about it unless the PC starts improving the land or making it a mecca by doing such things as building a grain mill.
 
If there's a significant church or abbey on the land, that's typically going to be owned by the religious organization rather than the lord but it will be his obligation to the organization to defend that site and/or the worshippers. Conversely, it will be the lord's obligation to make sure no rival churches and worshippers are established within his fiefdom.

I only allow haymaker for melee weapons or fists, but I allow a variant that lets you take all the same penalties but then get a +4 bonus to called shot attacks.  A super-careful aim rather than a super-strong attack.
 
Bows have an absolute limit on how much you can "draw" them and how much power you can get out of them.  No amount of extra effort will make them suddenly hit harder than proper use.  If you can make a bow hit harder by drawing it more, then you've not been using it correctly before.

Over on TVTropes they call it Flanderization.  "The act of taking a single (often minor) action or trait of a character within a work and exaggerating it more and more over time until it completely consumes the character."

Named after Ned Flanders from the Simpsons.  In early seasons he was a basically nice, ordinary, prosperous guy who went to church and had a family that loved each other, in contrast to the Simpsons.  A few seasons later he was a Christian Zealot that didn't insure his house because that was like gambling.  He has gotten much worse sense then.

Mr. Drysdale definitely got more and more cartoonish over time, but so did most everyone else on that show.

I try not to look too deeply and try break down the ramifications of using the Infinity Gauntlet.  Things tend to fall apart quickly.  For example, Earth's human population has risen approximately 1 billion every 12 years for last 50 years ago.  So, using Earth as an example, humanity will be back to its original population in 50 years with exponentially far less life to help sustain it.  Pretty stupid.  Also, if you REALLY wanted to help and you can basically do anything, why not just double or triple all available resources on inhabited planets or turn all moons into massive resource-laden Gardens of Eden and double all planets that can sustain life, etc.
 
I just focus on Thanos = INSANE!!!  This is the choice a psychopathic mass murderer with a brilliant, yet incredibly disturbed mind would make and the heroes must stop him at all costs.

Viperia was a great character, I really liked the 4th edition VIPER book.  They took it less seriously and more classic comic bad guy agency.

This one is actually from me, a few tactical call outs from a Champions campaign in days past that I posted.  In Strike Force, Allston listed a few of the moves that the team had as well as their shout outs to announce it or call for it; these are the ones the team in my campaign used:
 
Birdglass: throw/teleport a flier into a surface combining their momentum with the throw.
Blind Swing: start a haymaker, then teleport/throw/carry a victim into its path.
Disrupt: knock down/throw in the air/stun/blind a target so they are reduced DCV for special low-OCV attacks.
Fastball: Throw a slower melee ally at a target for extra impact damage.
Piledriver: fly straight down at the ground with target as a move through and at last moment teleport away, leaving target to hit
Sandwich: two attackers hit the same target at the same time from opposite sides to stack knockback and coordinate for stun.
Unleash Hell: Use AE attacks even though they will hit me.

I'm not seeing a need for the entourage in this case. Sounds like the PCs have enough oomph to deal with low level encounters.
 
Remember you run the risk of overshadowing the PCs and the players if you give them a bunch of much more competent NPCs to hang out with.