Ndreare

Oops, THURSDAY, not Wednesday.

Yes, 
I am using a 60 AP limit. So anything over 60 costs double for the portion over 60. But I do not place that restraint on the pool, (or on VPP pools) only on the powers in it/them.

Sure, if you felt the need to. Technically, Characteristics are Persistent already, though obviously STR is odd in that it also costs END to use w/o 0 END applied to it.
 
As far as "invisible", it's really the _items_ in the bag that are not "visible" in the sense that the bag is opaque and blocks line of sight. The item itself is still visible if you can establish line of sight, as is the magical container it is stored within.
 
Do you make a vehicle with a trunk or other storage compartment take "invisible" on its strength because people can't normally see what's in them? What about a normal mundane backpack?
 
For me it's a "meh", especially given I use Equipment Pools for fantasy. For some mundane items I don't even bother w/ a write up...like "Rope" or whatever and just assess some nominal point cost because the discrepancy of all the things they can be used for and the point cost of simulating all of that via detailed modeling using the Powers mechanics is simply out of line with their importance to the narrative and / or their purpose from a purely gamist perspective and it's much easier to simply rely on shared understanding of what they are capable of and a hand waved resource cost based upon relative considerations. 
 
But I wouldn't be put out playing in some other GM's campaign that wanted to go the other way. YMMV, of course.
 

 

As a 90 AP power would cost 120 points in this campaign, I would simply require that it be considered 120 points of the pool.  The other players either paid 120 points for their own 90 AP powers or they don't have any such powers.
 
 
This is a consistent issue for Hero if players are engaged in an arm's race with the GM rather than building interesting characters and expecting to be challenged in-game.  Both characters in your example have one less power they can use while the niche power is in play, so they both have reduced efficacy.
 
 
If my character spends 150 points and buys three 50 AP attacks, they can use those three attacks together as a Combined Attack.  This character spent 150 points on a pool and 15 points on three slots (at least).  Why is it unfair that he can use his 165 points to do the same combined attack someone who spent 150 points can do? 
 
 
6e changed that rule.  I recall specifically suggesting that change back in the day.  If the pool allows a Blast, Flight and a Force Field to work at the same time, why should it not allow a Flash, Blast and Drain to work at the same time?
 
As you note "one huge pool" is not a lot different from "three smaller pools".  If there is no issue with the latter, there should be no issue with the former.
 
I recall reading the first edition of Mutants and Masterminds and thinking they lifted a lot from Hero/Champions.  One thing they did not lift, and Hero should, was the suggestion that, as a GM, you should be looking for ways to say "yes", not reasons to say "no".  It sounds like you are not concerned this build will be unbalanced.  I tend to agree.  He will be very flexible, and likely should consider evolving this into a VPP.  So what?
 
If he were really looking to abuse this, I would expect him to structure for 180 points to have three max AP powers going at once.  He has already reduced his raw power, offsetting his flexibility.

IIRC, that was true in 5e, removed in 6e.
 
Edit:  Found it!  5erp311, "However, a character may not combine two or more slots from a single Power Framework as part of a multiple-power attack, even if he has sufficient reserve or base points to use both slots at once."  
 
6e1p399, "A character can make a Multiple Attack (6E2 73) with two or more slots in a single Power Framework, provided he has enough reserve/Pool points to allocate to the two or more slots used in the attack simultaneously. A character can use slots from two or more different Power Frame - works to perform a Multiple Attack, assuming he obeys all the rules for such attacks."  So it looks like that's already a Multipe Attack, not a Combined Attack, by RAW.

Yeah just using STR means you're carrying it out in the open as usual, it just doesn't bother you in terms of encumbrance.  But, I mean its a quick and easy method of handling the issue.

Strength only for encumbrance makes sense, but then wouldn't you want to make it persistent and possibly add invisible power effects?
 
 

I think 6th edition is a good idea to use because its most current and it helps new players stay up with what Hero is doing now (and gives you more new content that doesn't require changes), but people should play what they like and enjoy.

You should definitely use the 6e rules for killing attacks, because the STUN Lotto sucks.

I went down this path with 4e recently, looking into what to include from 5e and 6e. In the end, I decided to not only not import anything, but to also strip away most of the house rules I've built up over the years and just run 4e RAW aside from using 1/2d6 for the STUN multiplier (which I've been doing since the early 80s). If anything comes up in actual play that can't be solved with a simple spot rule or table ruling, I can look into importing something from 5e or 6e, or just make something up like we used to do.
 
And it's been working well so far. No complaints, no issues. And no need to reference a document filled with rules changes! Just open the book and read.
 
(I did incorporate the errata into the text with handwritten notes and pasted-in printouts).

Depends on whether you use them much, but the change to VPP control costs (1/2 maximum AP in the slots) was a marked improvement to the framework, IMO.
 
 

I recommend the Transform rebuild, the Area Effect rebuild, the addition of range to Drain, the cheaper Armor Piercing cost, DOT advantage, and yeah the Unified Power mechanic.

For me, using the Unified Power mechanic in character design to replace Elemental Control was a great help and made things simpler. 🙂

While not official I have built them as follows. 
 
Extra Dimensional Movement (a single pocket dimension,  OAF bag -1, objects must through 1' wide opening -1/4)

Yes, 
I am using a 60 AP limit. So anything over 60 costs double for the portion over 60. But I do not place that restraint on the pool, (or on VPP pools) only on the powers in it/them.

Large Multipowers with lots of slots can invite decision paralysis during combat.
 
Having three powers active at 50 points each does not sound abusive to me.

Yeah...print to PDF was removed some time ago due to compatibility constraints (dated libraries which wouldn't work with current versions of Java or HD's code).

You can (as you know) run HD6 and HD3 (or other versions) alongside of each other, though I wouldn't necessarily recommend running older/outdated versions of Java on your system (or, at least, a system that you care particularly about).  Other than that, pick an export format that you like in HD6 and use the PDF print functionality in the viewer of your choice for that format (browser, Word, etc.).

Maybe this file? 
 
 

So I submitted my games for Dragonflight. 
 
Three games
1) A Small Matter of Glory. Star Trek Adventures Klingon (2d20)
2) Shadows over the Darkwood. (Fantasy Hero 5thR)
3) Containment (Fall of Delta Green/GUMSHOE)
 
Looking forward to it again this year.  I had a blast at last years con. 
 

Maybe this file? 
 
 

Maybe this file? 
 
 

Not sure which "link" you're referring to. I just downloaded the file attached to Steve's post with no problem.
 
Perhaps if you look it up in the free file downloads, you'd have better luck getting it there?

If you're talking about the Default Print Template, it's unpacked from the .zip download into the same directory as HD6.jar
 
Also available in the Downloads section (along with many others).

The thread title made me think the ghost of the dead creature giving you a rating out of 5 (1 star, would not recommend!)

I don't see it in 6E1 under Summon, and that'd probably be the only place it would be.  It's not in APG or APG II.  Might be in a Fantasy supplement.
 
Generally, feels too campaign-specific, and probably situation-specific, to say anything but GM decides what it's worth.  A summon that's for non-combat minions, this'd likely be pointless, for example.  
 
I'd also say that in most cases, anything summoned is just disposable.  Yeah, I know of at least one setup where the summoner takes feedback damage, but it's not the norm, I think.