Surrealone

Well, to be fair, a well-rounded team of 6 supers only tends to need 1 solid tank (e.g. Hulk) and 1 off-tank (e.g. Captain America).  The bulk of the rest of the team SHOULD be focused on damage ... and both damage dealers and support types tend to have glass jaws by their very natures.  A good ratio (IMHO) tends to be 3 damage dealers of different disciplines (e.g. martial artist, flying energy projector, and maybe a gun guy?) and one support provider (e.g. buffer/debuffer or perhaps tactical support a la darkness, barriers, etc) ....  or possibly 2 damage dealers and 2 support types if you want more versatility at the expense of longer fights.  However, any way you cut it, that's often 4 squishies in a team of 6.  
 
Note that mentalists can be damage dealers, support, or both -- depending on build.  Also note that when you add one to your team (who is likely a glass jaw much like Professor X), you also invite the GM to join the mentalist arms race, which will likely force more of a support role in order to defend the team from other mentalists.
 
My point is that 2/3 of a well-rounded team tends to be squishy ... and while the off-tank can often soak 2-3 times the hits of the squishies, it won't be able to soak what the real tank can.  Nor should it.

Well, to be fair, a well-rounded team of 6 supers only tends to need 1 solid tank (e.g. Hulk) and 1 off-tank (e.g. Captain America).  The bulk of the rest of the team SHOULD be focused on damage ... and both damage dealers and support types tend to have glass jaws by their very natures.  A good ratio (IMHO) tends to be 3 damage dealers of different disciplines (e.g. martial artist, flying energy projector, and maybe a gun guy?) and one support provider (e.g. buffer/debuffer or perhaps tactical support a la darkness, barriers, etc) ....  or possibly 2 damage dealers and 2 support types if you want more versatility at the expense of longer fights.  However, any way you cut it, that's often 4 squishies in a team of 6.  
 
Note that mentalists can be damage dealers, support, or both -- depending on build.  Also note that when you add one to your team (who is likely a glass jaw much like Professor X), you also invite the GM to join the mentalist arms race, which will likely force more of a support role in order to defend the team from other mentalists.
 
My point is that 2/3 of a well-rounded team tends to be squishy ... and while the off-tank can often soak 2-3 times the hits of the squishies, it won't be able to soak what the real tank can.  Nor should it.

5er p103 also goes on to say:
"CHANGING A POWER'S ENDURANCE COST: The Reduced Endurance Advantage (p267) can halve a Power's END cost, or reduce it to zero. The Endurance Limitations (page 289) can make a Power cost END even though it normally does not, or increase a Power's END cost. Some Powers have their own special rules for changing their END cost."
 
5er p253 also adds:
"A power that has Charges does not cost END to use."
 
Taken together, you have quoted the base rule of thumb that things cost END ... and I have quoted the modifiers to the base rule -- which can and do modify END cost.  Your quote from 5ER p425 appears to be specific to Maneuvers and Actions that use STR -- which is to say that if a weapon based on Charges doesn't have a STR Minimum, then there's no STR use required to aim, resist recoil, etc. .... and, thus, there should be no END cost unless the Costs Endurance Limitation was taken on the Charge-based weapon.
 
The 6e rules are actually more clear, as they place a number of the above concepts in one place (6e2 p39) rather than scattering them throughout the books -- resulting in a stronger correlation between the base rule of thumb for END costs and the modifiers to those costs that can come into play:
"Powers: Most Powers cost 1 END per 10 Active Points in them. For example, a Blast 8d6 (40 Active Points) costs 4 END each time it’s used; a Blast 8d6, Penetrating (60 Active Points) costs 6 END per use. Some Powers, like Resistant Protection, Clinging, and Mind Link, do not cost END at all. See the individual Power descriptions for information (or the reference table on 6E1 162). Powers that normally cost END may have the Advantage Reduced Endurance (which
reduces the END cost to half or zero) or the Limitation Increased Endurance Cost (which makes them cost more END than normal)."
 
 

Maximillian, V.I.N.CENT, and old B.O.B. from The Black Hole come to mind as interesting and diverse synthetics.

I watched for free via a subscription service to which I'm subscribed.  Yes they could have done more with the whole movie.
 
And hey, I rather liked 'gun kata' as a discipline in Equilibrium.  I prefer and used the term 'discipline' instead of 'scientific' because a] disciplines can be learned, b] martial arts are disciplines, c] 'kata' suggests the gun-fu in Equilibrium was supposed to be martial in nature, and d] disciplines don't have to entail cold/hard science.  Frankly, I think the movie strongly implies the Cleric was a master of various disciplines ... and the science-angle you picked up on from the movies was just the screenwriter's attempt to explain how bullet dodging was a learnable discipline.

700pt characters or not, a 24d6 PRE attack is ludicrous for a GM to have thrown at a team when he KNOWS their PRE levels cannot withstand anything near it. An average roll on 24d6 would be 84 pts of effect (i.e. +44 effect on average against the character with the 40 PRE ... who was presumably the strongest of the bunch, Presence-wise).  Thus, as a player, I'd say that rather than GM'ing fun for all, you intentionally (either by design or by omission/negligence in thinking through what you did) GM'd a one-shot fight that you knew (or should have known) your PCs could not withstand -- which is typically fun for no one, save maybe you.
 
Presence is arguably the most cost-effective combat ability in the game -- especially given that PRE-attacks take no time (see 6e2 p18 under Actions Which Take No Time) and, therefore, per RAW may be done whenever a character wishes, as often as a character wishes ... without any regard to the character's SPD. (i.e. PRE attacks can be done on Segments where one does not have a Phase -- making them useful for setting things up in advance of a character's Phase.) With that in mind, most GMs who understand the power and cost effectiveness of PRE ... impose reasonable limits on PRE.
 
Thankfully, most players buy as much PRE as makes sense for their concepts without munchkinizing the hell out of it like you appear to have done with your lich (especially buying it on a focus, IMHO) ... and most GMs tune their villians' PREs appropriately for the PRE levels of their campaign (which you appear not to have done with your lich).
 
Plainly put:
I feel you loaded your baddie with an 'I Win' button ... and then you pushed it. If your players enjoyed it, there's a term I'd use for them: masochists.

Does the alchemist have the equivalent of a quiver ... to make potion vials/bottles instantly-accessible/ready much like a quiver makes arrows instantly-accessible/ready for the archer?  If so, then it would make sense to treat them in a consistent manner with Fast Draw ... but if not, you have a solid place on which to hang your hat for treating them differently.  

I guess I have to look at this the way I'd look at any other attack... how does it stack up against the accepted defenses and level of play the group has accepted?  24d6 Pre Attack is crazy powerful if you know that 1) even at 700 pts, the players have never bought PRE defense to match their other defenses, and never were lead to expect to need it... and 2) with their actual PRE stats being 40 or less... that is like having 40 or less stun.
 
So, not only are PRE attacks END free, can happen in 0 phase, and have no RAW way to recover from them except time... oh, and also Area Effect for free as well... and automatically hits... the attack was against people with no defense and very little "stun".  Would you have hit the team with a 0 phase, automatically hits, 0 END, are of effect 24d6 Energy blast against a team that had practically 0 defenses and 40 or less stun... and call that fair? Oh... with the added effect of a near permanent side effect of mind controlling one of them.
 
hmmmm...
 
I mean... I get it... everyone games differently... but I'd feel it totally justified if my players punched me in the face real hard and quit the game if I did that to them.

HM is correct that an actual sling is, indeed, counter-intuitive when it comes to adding accuracy, as someone who can barely throw something well with his/her hands ... likely can't properly operate a sling with any reasonable degree of reliability.
 
There is, however, a noteworthy exception: the staff sling.  This is effectively a lever with a pocket in which to place an object to be flung -- something that's light, simple, easy to use, and reliable ... without needing nearly the release timing and specialized practice/knowledge required for an actual sling.  Throwing Skill Levels (aka PSLs for Range Mods when throwing) on an OAF sound just fine to me.
 
I would allow Fast Draw to be used to get the staff sling, sling, or whatnot out quickly, but I would NOT allow it to be used to speed reloads, since its use in speeding reloads is for magazine changes (not single-shot reloads) ... and staff slings, slings, and the like are not magazine-fed.
 
The CSL depends. If the staff sling, sling, or whatnot is only usable for throwing potions because of its construction, then I think it's a 2pt CSL ... but if it can also be used to lob ammunition used to do damage, then I think it's a 3pt CSL for a tight list consisting of potions from the VPP, sling stones, and other ammunition suitable for a sling (cast lead balls are, for example, ideal ... and presumably this alchemist does things with lead, right?!)
 
Surreal
 
P.S. Notice I avoided use of the word 'clips' when talking about Fast Draw since, as a firearm instructor, it pains me to see a magazine improperly called a clip. You have no idea how badly I loathe the 'Clips' portion of the 'Charges' RAW. Here's why: )
 
 

HM is correct that an actual sling is, indeed, counter-intuitive when it comes to adding accuracy, as someone who can barely throw something well with his/her hands ... likely can't properly operate a sling with any reasonable degree of reliability.
 
There is, however, a noteworthy exception: the staff sling.  This is effectively a lever with a pocket in which to place an object to be flung -- something that's light, simple, easy to use, and reliable ... without needing nearly the release timing and specialized practice/knowledge required for an actual sling.  Throwing Skill Levels (aka PSLs for Range Mods when throwing) on an OAF sound just fine to me.
 
I would allow Fast Draw to be used to get the staff sling, sling, or whatnot out quickly, but I would NOT allow it to be used to speed reloads, since its use in speeding reloads is for magazine changes (not single-shot reloads) ... and staff slings, slings, and the like are not magazine-fed.
 
The CSL depends. If the staff sling, sling, or whatnot is only usable for throwing potions because of its construction, then I think it's a 2pt CSL ... but if it can also be used to lob ammunition used to do damage, then I think it's a 3pt CSL for a tight list consisting of potions from the VPP, sling stones, and other ammunition suitable for a sling (cast lead balls are, for example, ideal ... and presumably this alchemist does things with lead, right?!)
 
Surreal
 
P.S. Notice I avoided use of the word 'clips' when talking about Fast Draw since, as a firearm instructor, it pains me to see a magazine improperly called a clip. You have no idea how badly I loathe the 'Clips' portion of the 'Charges' RAW. Here's why: )
 
 

Alright, got my vote in for Darren Watts’ Golden Age Champions.  (As of this writing that makes him only 11 votes behind Sentinel Comics, which has 99 to Darren's 88.)
 
Keep it going...

Well, since the Focus is typically the gun, the ammo usually ends up being nothing more than a special effect to properly represent the Charges/Jammed/Burnout limitation(s) as taken on the Focus.  As far as different ammo types on a Focus, that's usually represented by either a MP or a VPP on the Focus ... with Extra Time (half phase, only to activate) to switch slots or change the pool (to represent a magazine change to one holding different ammunition) ... and Charges on the slots or the specific VPP power (to represent only so much ammunition of a given type within the magazine(s) represented by Charges on the slot or VPP power).  Many a GM will allow Fast Draw to apply to the Extra Time ... since it represents a magazine change (and since Fast Draw is capable of mitigating the usual half phase mag change).
 
But to be fair, there's really not a huge variety of ammunition for most small arms.  Caliber tends to dictate capacity (since bigger rounds take up more space and weigh more) ... and once the caliber is chosen, capacity only varies based on how much extra weight/bulk you want to carry in terms of magazines.  i.e. It's not like there are a plenthora of options to choose from within most given calibers.  I can't just run out and buy .45 ACP armor piercing rounds ... or .45 ACP incendiary rounds ... or .45 ACP penetrating rounds ... or .45 ACP explosive rounds.  Instead, my choices are basically: wad cutter, full metal jacket, hollow point, and match grade ... with a special note for tracer rounds.
 
Using the .45 ACP example, in game terms, full metal jacket is likely the de facto standard on which the .45 pistol's damage is centered (which I'll express as Xd6 RKA) -- i.e. no delta and nothing special about those rounds.  Hollow points probably takes that .45 ACP from Xd6 RKA to Xd6+1 RKA ... while wad cutter/match grade are geared for competition shooting (the former intended for punching very clean holes in paper ... while the latter is constructed for improved ballistic coefficient/aerodynamics) ... and, thus, each is probably something closer to Xd6-1 RKA in terms of output.
 
Regarding the tracer rounds I mentioned:
There -are- tracer rounds, but they tend to be available only in calibers commonly used by the military -- are spendy -- and are tough for non-military folks to get because they're just not that common.  These guys sacrifice pretty much all of their damage by burning their material as they fly -- to allow the user of the Focus to roughly see where s/he is shooting. By and large they are used as either training aids (for night ops training) or are staggered (as in every 3rd or 5th round) in magazines (or belts) of autofire weapons that are intended for high volume shooting at night -- to help improve night shooting accuracy (via night shooting penalty reductions; I'd represent tracers with PSLs to offset penalties imposed by natural darkness - that only work at night or in similar situations)  .... when/where FLIR is not available.  They also have the side effect of giving away the shooter's position -- so no using Stealth with tracer rounds at night once the shooting starts.
 
Additional note:
Bullet weight (heavier versus lighter) within a given caliber doesn't tend to mean harder hits ... instead, it tends to be a tradeoff between speed/trajectory and wind resistance of given caliber bullets.  i.e. A lighter bullet of a given caliber shoots faster and flatter than a heavier one of the same caliber ... but a heavier one of the same caliber is not as affected by the wind and retains more of its energy at longer distances than its faster/lighter brothers of the same caliber.  Thus, I don't see stun multipliers or BODY damage changes as germane to the bullet weight conversation within a given caliber, since bullet weight within a given caliber choice is mostly about accuracy under certain circumstances ... and we're talking a +1 to offset range/wind modifiers, tops here ... only at and between very specific range thresholds for given calibers (i.e. immaterial at short distances for given calibers).
 

See where this is going?  Most of the real meat/potatoes of guns are in:
caliber choice -- which will tend to dictate damage output optic choice -- which will tend to offset range penalties quality choice - which will tend to dictate whether the focus has an activation/jammed/burnout roll slop (i.e. tolerance) - this one's kind of weird and represents a tradeoff between accuracy and reliability.  The AK-47 is a great example, you can let it get dirty, treat it badly, and it will be super reliable despite its low quality and cost ... but to do this it has sloppy/loose tolerances that result in a less accurate firearm than, say, the M16 (when it is clean, anyway).  You can tighten those tolerances, of course ... and when you do so, you'll sacrifice reliability to gain back some accuracy.  
Now if you want to go crazy and make up a bunch of guff (akin to Green Arrow's quiver of totally ridiculous arrows) ... then you'll basically be creating a pile of totally ridiculous ammo for your game -- i.e. stuff that's just not out here in the real world.  A great example would be the tranquilizer bullet (from the XXX movie) ... or the splatter dart bullet (from the same movie).  That's bogus stuff for Hollywood's sake.  Sure, there are tranquilizer guns ... but they are specialized guns with specialized darts ... that use blanks or compressed air to propel the darts.  i.e. Someone didn't just pop some special ammo into a typical gun to get a tranquilizer round; they used a special gun with special darts.  (i.e. Different Focus, entirely...)
 

Tying someone to a chair is effectively an Entangle employed against a given character -- one that should have appropriate advantages and limitations for whatever form the Entangle's bonds take (i.e. duct tape? rope? hand cuffs? Spider Man's webbing?).
 
Escaping said Entangle with Desolidification or Teleportation should absolutely be possible unless:
The Entangle is purchased with the Cannot Be Escaped with Teleportaion (+1/4) advantage and/or the Affects Desolid (+1/2) advantage The SFX and/or limitations on the Desolidification or Teleport powers dictate they should not be usable to escape the specific Entangle (given its definition, special effects, advantages, and limitations) ... and the GM rules as such (As an example: Desolidification that doesn't work against extremely dense materials ... and the person is bound to the chair using special handcuffs made of Bogonite, known for its extreme density in a lightweight package)

Tying someone to a chair is effectively an Entangle employed against a given character -- one that should have appropriate advantages and limitations for whatever form the Entangle's bonds take (i.e. duct tape? rope? hand cuffs? Spider Man's webbing?).
 
Escaping said Entangle with Desolidification or Teleportation should absolutely be possible unless:
The Entangle is purchased with the Cannot Be Escaped with Teleportaion (+1/4) advantage and/or the Affects Desolid (+1/2) advantage The SFX and/or limitations on the Desolidification or Teleport powers dictate they should not be usable to escape the specific Entangle (given its definition, special effects, advantages, and limitations) ... and the GM rules as such (As an example: Desolidification that doesn't work against extremely dense materials ... and the person is bound to the chair using special handcuffs made of Bogonite, known for its extreme density in a lightweight package)

Tying someone to a chair is effectively an Entangle employed against a given character -- one that should have appropriate advantages and limitations for whatever form the Entangle's bonds take (i.e. duct tape? rope? hand cuffs? Spider Man's webbing?).
 
Escaping said Entangle with Desolidification or Teleportation should absolutely be possible unless:
The Entangle is purchased with the Cannot Be Escaped with Teleportaion (+1/4) advantage and/or the Affects Desolid (+1/2) advantage The SFX and/or limitations on the Desolidification or Teleport powers dictate they should not be usable to escape the specific Entangle (given its definition, special effects, advantages, and limitations) ... and the GM rules as such (As an example: Desolidification that doesn't work against extremely dense materials ... and the person is bound to the chair using special handcuffs made of Bogonite, known for its extreme density in a lightweight package)

For those of you whose mooks need more firepower, I bring you mini-gun punch without mini-gun fuss.  Meet the Empty Shell Defense XM556, a suitcase-sized, electrically driven "microgun".  Simply equip each of your mooks with the gun and a backpack containing a battery and a crap-ton of belted ammunition, and they'll give the opposing heroes a night to remember.  Weighing in at a paltry 16lbs (unloaded weight) and measuring a mere 22" in length, this microgun is smaller than most shoulderable firearms and comes with a point and click interface (see that red button?!). Availability is limited to your nearest military prototype test range, so consider a quick smash & grab to obtain upgrades for your mooks.
 
The ESD XM556 -- proof that good things DO come in small packages!
 

 
 

Wrong.  I give you the M&P 15-22 Integral ... by Innovative Arms: https://www.innovativearms.com/portfolio/iasw-integral/ 
 
The loudest sound this rifle makes is the sound of the action cycling (which is what you're hearing in this video).  For comparison, each cycle of the action makes about the same amount of noise a compound bow makes when releasing an arrow -- making it as silent as a bow and/or crossbow ... and probably a LOT quieter than that WWII commando crossbow when you consider the noise and time of re-cocking it (since the full cycle of the M&P 15-22 entails re-charging the weapon).

 
Yes, it is that quiet ... with standard or even high velocity ammunition, no less -- due to the barrel porting that's covered by the suppressor.  (At the range I've been asked if mine was a pellet gun!)

I believe the statement that particular foregrip makes is: "A mall ninja owns the firearm to which this foregrip is attached."

Magic armor that can stop bullets would likely render a bow obsolete.  A magic bow that can penetrate magic armor when a gun can't ... would  likely render a gun obsolete.
 
I think you get the point: there's a rock, paper, scissors thing going on with the projectile technologies as they relate to the armor technologies -- one that magic likely can't resolve.  (In fact, it would likely only change what is a rock, what is paper, and what are scissors ... without actually solving the dilemma?)

I think the range stats listed can be misleading.
 
A lot of engagements have a range defined not by the rifle's capabilities, but by the distance at the time the firefight starts. In jungle and urban settings, whoever initiates the combat has a great capacity to force the shooting to start at point blank range.
 
Further, hunting is a bit different. A good hunter stalks their prey and fires on a commonly non-moving, unaware target, usually not under appreciable cover, and most often not attacking.
 
Shooting something that is attacking is a whole different ballgame. I forget the name of the statistic, but within 21 feet, statistically speaking, knives have tended to be deadlier in actual cases of gun vs. knife scenarios. Combat situations do a number on aim possibly being one of the factors, although drawing the weapon itself is an issue as well. Adrenaline dump is far more a factor in combat scenarios than in hunting scenarios.
 
Hunting accuracy is closest to the skill of a sniper not under fire aiming at a target. It is not a good measure for firing under other combat situations, no one shoots as well when being fired upon as when not being fired upon unless they are simply aiming and not caring about whether they are shot.
 
Regardless, modern firearms are more accurate at further ranges.

So this has been around for a while but never had much 'splash'.  It's the CZ Bren 2, a 5.56 NATO chambered sub-machine gun featuring a super-short gas system allowing it to work well with barrels as short as 8 inches -- when suppressed. Weight is 7.5 lbs; magazine capacity is 30; and the rate of fire is 850 rounds/min.

$1149 MSRP.  Dang they're proud of it!

Well, if he's going to use a punt gun he'd better meet the (very high and ugly) minimum strength requirement ... or it needs to be mounted and crew-served.
 
 
 
Yes.  In addition to evil ducks I seem to recall seeing a Daffy Duck, at one point in my travels...

when a Monster (or Supervillian) really NEEDS to be shot...  
 
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/12/06/truvelo-cms-20x42mm-anti-materiel-rifle/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheFirearmBlog+%28The+Firearm+Blog%29
 
 
great weapon for the low level brick... 

It's probably done to avoid any potential for confusion between a Nerf gun and a real one ... in the event that someone were to paint the Nerf gun black and take it to school.
 
I also suspect that mechanically the lightweight Nerf darts and/or balls require different mechanisms and approaches to fire them efficiently and effectively ... compared to cartridges that leverage a primer and smokeless powder to expel bullets from a rifled barrel using expanding gasses.  After all, it's tough to create a blowback, blow forward, gas operated, or recoil operated Nerf gun when the Nerf darts/balls don't have cases or powder from which create blowback; don't have powder driving bullets to create blow forward; don't entail expanding gasses to allow for direct impingement or piston-driven gas operated systems; and don't create recoil energy, themselves, which can be leveraged for recoil-based autoloading.
 
Put another way, if the action is used to fire/launch a radically different type of ammunition -- then you should expect the action, itself, to be designed for that difference and, thus, be radically different, itself ... when compared with other actions.