mrinku

Okay, I misread the section. It does say the penalty applies to alll the attack rolls, so it'll be -3 to both Grabs, including the normal Grab -1. Thanks!

Multiple Attack is a new one for this old 4e hack, so just checking to see I have something right. Is it fine to use it to do two Grabs against two different targets, then Slam one into the other? And that would break down as: Multiple attack action uses a Full Phase and makes the character 1/2 DCV plus -2 DCV for the Grab Grab Target 1 (-1 OCV for Grab). If unsuccessful, nothing else happens but your DCV is worse than if you'd just done a single one and you lost the first half phase of your action (this is probably a moot point, though, since you would have to already be standing next to both targets). If you have grabbed them, you'd probably choose Control as the action. Grab Target 2 (-3 OCV: -1 for Grab and -2 for the second attack). If unsuccessful that's the end of the action. You still have hold of the first target. If successful you now have hold of two targets and can Slam target two into target one. Sound about right? And on subsequent turns to keep slamming one into the other just as a normal action?

Meh. Just go with the points the player got for it. If Velma's player wants to lose them regularly, it's Common. If they're less careless, Uncommon. Edit: Actually I was just reminded of Professor Branestawm who had five pairs of spectacles (sometimes more) but was constantly losing them. In his case it's definitely Very Common, Greatly. As would be his Psych: Absent Mindedness.

Good DEX, CSLs, PD and Breakfall can allow a character to fall safely from quite high up. Plus the old Acrobatics rolls to grab/snap flagpoles, awnings and such on the way down. Normally you take 10d6 for a 20m fall (about 7 stories, definitely a tall building). This write-up would walk away from that even without the shield, probably not even stunned. If he braces the shield to land on it the stun damage should be minor. If he makes a Breakfall roll at -5, he halves that. Even if he only has base level Breakfall at 13-, he's got a 9- roll with his overall level, better if the Combat Levels are allowed, which they probably should. Putting the shield aside, if he makes that Breakfall roll, he lands on his feet or rolls and comes up fighting while shrugging off a puny 5d6 normal damage.

Well, people ARE tough. It's FAR easier to smash though a typical wall than a body... and a matter of leverage. Cars have thin metal and glass walls and are actually very easy to overpenetrate, despite the total mass of the chassis (tip: hide behind the engine block). But you are going to get very different results depending on effects. A Flamethower is going to set a car alight, and likely get stopped until it literally burns to a shell, while anti-tank rifle can pretty much ignore the car as far as shooting through one door and out the opposite one as far as energry loss goes (but it would provide soft cover).

Aside from an absolute power you could prevent deterioration and death with a REC Aid, a bonus to the skill of the treating physician, or just by GM fiat requiring that the right antibiotics/rare herbs/holy relic were obtained (which could be an adventure seed). But I do like the adder idea on Heal.

I'm always in favour of using maneuvers instead of tricky power builds to do the same thing

Or the special effect of an area effect. One thing that could reasonably do it would be a self-propelled missile that's continuously adding thrust and not just losing energy when it hits things. Worth noting too that even a 12d6 Blast isn't likely to do any significant strikethrough on a defense 2, 10 BODY target

Yeah, looks fine, and I'll add +1 to the above comments about leave the combat maneuvers as just that. I assume the stardard maneuvers are still being used? Just do that list with the martial ones added, or replacing those standard ones they're an upgrade of. IMHO the combat maneuver system is the real gem at the heart of the HERO system, and it's pretty easy to understand.

As far as penetrating living targets... it's just not part of the original Champions superhero genre. Knockback handles the aspect of powerful blows that might affect a second target, but people remain intact. And in realistic settings, it doesn't come up enough to be worth a regular rule IMHO. Bullets do all sorts of bizarre things once they enter a body and hit bones (even soft tissue will affect the trajectory...) and continuing on in a dead straight line is NOT guaranteed.

Yep. Infrequent for a modern setting (in fact anything much after the 1500's IMHO). On the other hand, an illiterate character in an earlier time might also count for infrequent, especially if their job wasn't very sight dependent. Severity based on how bad the eyes are. I'd definitely be Greatly Impaired.

Firstly, depends on the special effects and some modifiers. Most No Knockback attacks probably shouldn't damage anything except the original target since they're not meant to have any momentum. Other attacks are clearly only going to affect their stated target, no matter how powerful (For example, a disintegration spell). Others, like a cannonball, are likely to smash through weaker cover and hurt. Assuming the situation allows for strikethrough damage, I think the rule of thumb is that the attack loses 1DC for each point of defense and body in the object destroyed.

That's a fair call, although as originally framed you'd have to have been using a ranged attack at close range for there to be any distinction As an actual defence, this idea is more of a side effect, really. It won't affect ranged attacks from further away (once the explosion effect reduces it enough), it won't have any practical protection against an opponent that grabs you (sure their OCV will be drained, but they've already grabbed you and now it's down to STR...) or against most area effect attacks (including itself, if you run into another character with the same power). But I'm sure the OP realises all this.

Yeah - I was still thinking 4e, where this was indeed the case. I've just had a close read of the CC entry and now understand. However Change Environment doesn't sound much like what the OP actually wants anyway... I think some kind of Damage Shield is probably what he REALLY wants. Then there's no convoluted trigger set ups. I'd probably throw in a limiter to prevent the effect happening when the character struck someone else, since this is meant to be a retaliation effect. I figure that to be worth about -1/2 to lose that perk while also allowing him to touch friends safely. With 6e: 2d6 OCV Drain (20pts) AE (Surface, self, +1/4), Constant (+1/2), Costs Endurance only to activate (+1/4), (40pts Active) No Range (-1/2), Only if struck by another (-1/2) (20 pts Real) That would reliably drain 1 OCV every time you were hit, and be close to -3 every second blow. Drains normally recover at 5 points per Turn, which is only one point of OCV. You COULD make it Selective, but that's only going to matter if someone hits you who you don't want to affect. Doubt that's worth the points, myself. No Idea how 5e does damage shields. I'm sure someone will build one.

Yeah... I'd not overpower its damage class. It's a lethal little bugger, but how much ability has it demonstrated to do major property damage? If I recall correctly it's mostly been used to kill (and threaten) regular people and punch small holes in stuff (which can certainly *result* in high damage if directed at critical locations). I'd definitely go AP and/or penetrating over more dice. Maybe some CSLs to offset hit locations? Yondu uses Covered Head Shots a lot; a 2d6 RKA AP vs a x2 BODY location is pretty killy. Against sufficient armour, it's got nothin'.

Accesible foci can be targeted in their own right, by definition. You can use a standard Entangle on a gun without affecting the entire holder, and they'd have to remove the entangle to use the gun again. Besides, who says those web tricks are standard Entangles? I'd have thought your basic webslinger would have at least Variable Advantage, if not a Multipower or VPP (Webbing tricks).

So, back to 4e and earlier rules, eh?

Change Environment isn't meant to have any significant effect on combat, which this does, so it shouldn't be allowed. You will also need to justify the power. Why does this happen? What is the special effect? It might be a magic spell, mutant hex power, psionic hypnosis or something else. The special effect will often suggest other options or modifiers.

Ahh, henchmen ain't that fussy. Anyway, maybe he grew his own mutated bird-men? For characters whose main power is flight, Move-By is a good maneuver to specialise in. CSLs in Move-By, Move-through and Grab-by will only set you back 3 points each, and maybe some defences that only protect against the feedback from those to represent his mastery of hit and run tactics. Non-focus wings are often Restrainable. Some Life Support against cold (and a high CON) would be appropriate for high flying. If you haven't yet, go see Spider-Man Homecoming . The Vulture always was one of the best flight-based characters.

It's still probably more elegant to use Duplication. The "base character" thing is pretty much just for accounting purposes and largely becomes academic once you move to Inherent, which prevents the duplicate from being dispelled. The only ongoing thing is to keep the experience point accounting correct. Per the "Identical Duplicates" rules out of CC both still pay the cost of Duplication, and use the same character sheet. That plus No Recombination (-0), Inherent (+1/4) and Mind link sounds pretty much right.

GURPS has its core basis in reality checking. I think it's often struggled doing the more fantastic aspects of some genres. I do generally rate it better than HERO for settings where powers (including spells) aren't in use. I get what he's saying about not liking the move from 3e self contained books to following a GURPS style core-rules-and-setting-books one, but the truth is that there was a cordial back-and-forth between the two game design streams from the start. Champions clearly took some core concepts from Melee/Wizard/The Fantasy Trip (happened to be my original fantasy RPG, second RPG after Traveller), while GURPS overtly borrowed elements from Champions. I was there too during the 3e -> 4e period and it never much bothered me one way or the other.

Just the big Red Flashing STOP Sign and utter requirement for GM approval. You also don't really need Personal Immunity AND Selective Target unless you're expecting Missile Reflection, and it's hard to see this being particularly reflectable unless you're delivering the effect using bullets. What special effect are you thinking of to justify this, anyway? 32 points would buy +4 combat skill levels in 5e (I think), or +6 HTH ones, which as Christougher points out will have the same effect as a personal defense. But I do get that there's a difference between making yourself harder to hit and reducing a target's ability to hit others... this would extend to them attacking any target, even ones outside the area of effect. Edit: Further thoughts... 4e didn't really have anything directly equivalent, but since 6e makes OCV and DCV normal characteristics, you could get the desired effect with Drains and Suppresses, unless I'm missing something.

No set rule for me. Always a matter for discussion with the player as to what they want... I've even used the "fill in the blank" approach where the particular hunted isn't defined until we've started play. But I've also just picked an appropriate character out of an Enemies book. One player wanted to be hunted by his evil twin.

Hawkman also shows far more skin than PG But I will concede that sometimes the cut of her leotard's lower end is pushing it. Depends on the artist, of course.

It's interesting how much attention that feature of her costume gets... but she actually shows significantly less skin than most female supers - her arms, shoulders, neck and back are covered. Basically it's just the thighs and some of her chest. It shows no more actual cleavage than (for example) Wonder Woman's, Poison Ivy's or Black Canary's costumes. Heck, a lot of male supers are much less dressed.