LoneWolf

I am not aware of any rules that prevent a mental power from affecting an uncurious target. In some campaigns that have a dimension of dreams might mean that to find a dreaming target you might need the advantage Transdimensional, but that is up to the GM. Being unconscious may prevent some mental powers from being able to do much. For example, mind controlling someone to attack a target when they are knocked out is not going to be very effective. It also brings up the point what are the surface thoughts of someone who is knocked out? Do you need to read deeper than surface thoughts to affect them with telepathy? Which also brings up the question of what happens when someone is dreaming and what level is that?

As long as you link the clairsentience to the teleport it looks fine. Being able to always target a specific location while still being able to use clairsentience normally would be more powerful than normal. Putting the linked limitation on it has enough restrictions balance out.

With the hero system you can build anything you want in multiple different ways. Concept and special effect are incredibly important to the hero system. Before you spend a single point think about what you want your character to be. The Hero System is open ended which means there is no limit to strong a particular power or stat can be. In Theory you could spend all your points on STR. In practice that is a bad idea because your character is unbalanced. The character concept portion of the book has some guidelines on various power levels to try and ensure that all characters in a game will be of a similar power level. These are only rough estimates, not something written in stone. For example, it lists the stat range for a standard super heroic game as 10-40 and has DC range of 6-14. Having a character with a 60 STR would probably be ok as long as they did not have anything that raised the damage above the DC maximum. Having a 60 STR plus and martial art that adds an extra 4 DC would probably not be acceptable. There are two basic ways to create the character you describe. The first way is to build the modern solider first, and then add the powers he gets from being a demi-god with the limitation in hero id only. The second is to the power multiform. This will result in two separate characters each with their own abilities. With the multiform the characters cannot use the abilities of the other form. For example, Thor would have absolutely no knowledge of medicine while in the Thor form. For the ancient warrior I would probably go for a low-end brick and focus more on skills. Greek mythology tends to favor skill over brawn, with Hercules being the exception. But it depends on what type of character you want. If your character is more along the lines or Ares than Athena than maybe the higher STR and berserker mode fit. Some extra STR would be appropriate, but probably does not need to be more than 30-40. I would take some skill levels and maybe some extra DC on his martial art.

Instead of AVAD you could simply take the limitation limited power (-1/2) normal defenses apply. That would not require you to take does body as it would still be going against its normal defense. That would work out, so it costs the same as a normal attack. So, buy 26-1 RKA for 25 points, or for the full 60 active points it would be a 3d6-1 which would cost 40 points. This way does not get as much stun through, but it does get body through.

Buying it as a penetrating killing attack with the AVAD and does BODY is a rules legal method. The extra advantage requires a GM approve it and would be a house rule. The cost is fairly similar, but the KA has a higher active cost and END cost. To me that suggest that the additional +1/4 is too low. I would bump that up to an additional +1/2 instead. Since what you really are asking for is to apply penetrating to two different stats buying it twice seems to be about right. Since penetrating is a +1/2 advantage this should be a +1.

What I would do is to buy the attack as a killing attack and take AVAD (-1/2) with the defense being normal defense and applying the penetrating to that. Common to very common changes it to a limitation instead of and advantage. Buy the attack at 1/3 the number of dice you would as for a killing attack. Since for every BODY you take you do a minimum of 1 STUN this makes both the BODY and STUN penetrating. You roll the damage like it was a killing attack but apply your non-resistant defense. The cost penetrating is offset by the AVAD so it works out to be the same cost as a regular killing attack.

Something that blocks a wide variety of attacks should be expensive especially if the thing being blocked is fairly common. Being that you said these attacks are not common it will be cheaper. Normally a gaze attack requires more than just looking at the target. Usually, they require the user to meet the eyes of the target. That means that they are never area of effect attack, which means that they all require normal attack rolls and have a limitation must meet gaze. As other have said Cyclops’s eye blast are not really gaze attacks. The way I see it there are two ways to avoid a gaze attack. The first is if you cannot hit your target because of a high DCV. This is probably the easiest but is not guaranteed to work. Buy this as extra DCV and MDCV only vs. gaze attacks, with the limitation only vs gaze attacks (-1). That works out to be 15 pts for +5 DCV and +5MDCV. The other way to do that would be to purchase have non-sight-based combat sense. Buying targeting on one of your other sense groups costs 20 pts, or you could pick up the talent combat sense.

How is an NND that does body a house rule? The book lists does BODY as a +1 Advantage. With any NND you need to have a reasonably common defense. There are a lot of objects and creatures that do not have souls. Robots and other automations usually do not have souls, nor do most objects.

If you use EGO for this what happens when a different power drains EGO. The OP wanted to avoid drains for this attack but drains are still part of the game and EGO drains with different special effects still exist. When you make a house rule you need to consider all the ramifications of what you are proposing to change. Using EGO to determine when someone means that EGO suddenly becomes a lot more important and the cost for it should be adjusted. This comes close to making EGO a super stat that everyone needs to buy up instead of what it currently is. As to Duke Bushido’s stating spirits do not have body. That is does not seem to be part of the rules. I looked in the 5th edition bestiary and the Ghost is listed as having 10 Body. From the looks of it that was from some specific supplement and should be considered a house rule. By the book spirits have a BODY stat. To me the most elegant solution would be to write it up as an NND that does BODY with the defense of being object or creature without a soul or spirit.

I guess what it really comes down to is what type of character you are running and how detailed you want to get on his background. Personally, I prefer characters that are fully fleshed out. When I choose a background for my character, I try to give them the skills that someone with their background would actually have. So, if I am playing someone who is supposed to be a super scientist, I will give them all the skills that he should have. In a Champions game I usually have their powers and skill complement each other. Unless the characters background is something like a construction worker or a high school student, they will usually have a decent number of skills. It is not that hard to find uses for most background skills. Unless the campaign is strictly combat, and your skills are really off the wall you can usually get some use out of them. Something like PS basket weaving may be completely useless, but SS Chemistry is not hard to get something out of.

For me it is not so much about being good at your day job, as it is that characters should pay for things that will affect the game. When your day job is something that can affect the game, you should have to pay for it. If your character is a lawyer and you want him to be able to deal with red tape, he should have the skill Bureaucratic. If he is good at tricking people into telling more than they intended, he should have conversation. You can’t just take PS lawyer and get that for free. The same thing goes for PS pilot. Background skills are supposed to be just that, and not substitute for actual skills.

This is what I have been saying the entire time. The way I look at it the PS has some value in that it allows you to do thing the way they should be done. Combat Piloting or TF planes, allows you to fly the plane, but does give you the knowledge of all the protocols and regulation to operate as a pilot. Someone with the full skill without the PS can fly a plane but may make mistakes in protocol or procedure that could cause issue. For example, when flying from California to New York the character without PS pilot would not know how to register the flight plan and may accidently fly through restricted air space. This might end up with a fighter jet showing up and telling the “pilot” to land at the nearest air base. The same thing is true for other PS. PS electrician would understand all the regulation of how to do things and would also the right way. People seem to think I am saying you charge more for the ability to do the same thing, but that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is having a PS allows you to do a better job because it takes into account things outside the actual skill. It can also act as a complementary skill to the main skill. The character with PS pilot has been trained in how to do things the right way and is not just winging it. He has been trained how to handle situations that may come up so is able to handle them better.

The problem with letting background skills duplicate other skills is they are considerably cheaper. The base cost of a background skill is 2 points and can be reduced with skill enhancers. That brings the cost of a background skill down to 1 point. The cost for increasing the background skill is also half the cost of a normal skill. If I can purchase PS Fighter Pilot and be able to do anything combat piloting does why would I pay the extra points? If this is the case all skills would end up being PS and no one would buy regular skills. If I have a character with 20 normal skills that will usually cost 60 points. If I use PS instead the cost drops down to 23 points. I actually had a player try to do something similar. He did not take 20 PS; I think he had 10 or so. They included Pilot, Electrician, Mechanic, Navigator, Locksmith, Computer programmer, and Inventor and a few other I can’t remember. The other thing people are forgetting is that all characters get a free 2pt PS as an everyman skill. That means the character that takes combat piloting does not actually have to pay for it unless he has other PS.

I used combat piloting as an example because years ago a buddy of mine could not understand why he could not use the skill enhancer to reduce the cost of piloting. Transport familiarity will allow you to operate a vehicle in normal circumstances. It does not cover anything fancy and does not allow you to engage in combat in the vehicle. You are always considered to be out of combat while driving. It basically allows you to move from point A to point B and avoid routine obstacles. Combat Piloting allows you to do everything the transport familiarity does, but also includes dangerous or tricky maneuvers. It allows also allows you to engage in vehicle-to-vehicle combat. You can also deal with unusual or unexpected obstacles. Profession skill Pilot does not allow you to fly a plane at all. For that you still need either combat piloting or transport familiarity. What it would cover is being able to use those skills in a commercial environment. It would cover things like flight plans, takeoff and landing protocols, how to communicate with the towers or other people dealing with flight. It would also include knowing all the regulations dealing with flight. The character who wants to be a pilot should really have both Combat Piloting and Professional skill pilot. If you know how to fly an airplane but don’t really know all the protocols and regulations you would not have the professional skill, but a licensed pilot would have both. You could get by with just a transport familiarity, but most licensed pilots will have combat piloting.

You make a Security Systems roll. The first sentence of the description of the skill states it allows you to locate, recognize, evade and build various types of alarms and traps. It even lists retina scanners and tripwires in the examples of what it covers. Finding and Disarming traps is what the skill does. Background skills cannot be used for things that are covered by other skills. If you want to fly a plane you need the skill combat piloting, not professional skill pilot. Background skills are designed to cover things that rarely affect combat, but a character by concept should be able to do. If what the character does is covered by a full skill you need to have that skill to be able to do the task. The background skill may be as complementary skill, but without the actual skill your character cannot do the task. The complementary skill rules allow you to use another skill that may be related to the task to boost the chance of success in the primary skill. So, if a character with both security systems and electronics is trying to disarm a trap that is using electronics, he rolls first makes the electronics roll. If he makes the electronics roll it gives him a bonus to his security systems roll to disarm the trap. The bonus is +2 for making the roll and for every 2 points he makes the roll he gets an additional +1 to the roll. You can have multiple complimentary skills. So, if the trap also involved a computer, computer programing would also be complementary. It is the GM’s call as what is complementary. The rules for skills are actually very well done in the Hero System and does not really need any modification. Most people who try and make them better don’t really understand them and usually end up trying to solve a problem that does not exist. About the only thing that may need to be done is to create a new skill for something that is specific to the game you are running.

That is what complementary skills are for. The skill chart for languages and science make since because they are variant of the same skill. Realistically there is not really a lot of difference between speak one language or another. They allow you to do exactly the same thing. There is however a huge difference between rewiring a circuit and removing a trip wire. If you are disarming an electronic trap electronics is a complementary skill to security systems. If the trap is a pit trap being a genius in electronics will not matter in the slightest.

That type of driving is more due to the fact he is driving a specially designed car. You are not going to be able to do that in a Honda Accord. The car will probably require a highly skilled driver to control it. If I were building that car I would probably have a very high combat speed and the advantage no turn mode. Add the limitation requires a skill roll on the movement and possibly side effects of uncontrolled movement on a failed roll. The car and the driver would both have a very high SPD as well. The driver will obviously need a very high driving roll to handle the car. In a Dark Champions game have the character buy the car using the vehicle rules. I don’t think you really need to create a new set of rules, the character just needs a car cable of doing that, and the skill to drive it.

Then the character is not gliding he is flying. He would have to follow all the rules of flight including paying END. Since characters who have flight can glide he could switch to that, but that will go back to the problem of taking two half moves and his maximum speed will be half his inches in flight. It is actually cheaper to buy extra leaping linked to gliding than to buy it as flight. For 3 points I get +8 leaping linked to gliding (characters start with 4m leap), 6 points gets me 12 gliding (-1 limitation gliding). The limitation on flight would be a -1/4, so 12m of flight cost 10 points.

Gliding and leap are different movement powers. Flight along surface is still flight and follows all the rules of flight including turn mode. Gliding is a restricted form of flight to begin with. He needs the advantage for it to function like leap.

In order to do so you need to apply the advantage usable as second mode of movement. Gliding in 6th edition is a limited form of flight.

You are right about the full move being popular with speedsters. I buddy of mine was playing a speedster with a martial art where most of the maneuvers had full move element. A held action is usually the key to defeating any speedster. I have defeated several that way with my own characters. The problem with the full move element on a ranged attack is that the attacking character is never going to get near his target. With it the character can remain hidden and only be visible when he is attacking. Most of the people I game with have been playing with the Hero System for decades and have a very good understanding of how combat works. 90% could use this maneuver to make themselves incredibly difficult to deal with in combat.

The moving shot cost 5pts and gives you a -1 OCV, so your math is correct. The reason it cost double is that it allows you to run move your full move away from the target. For a character specializing in ranged attacks this is incredibly powerful. With a HTH maneuver I move to my target so after my attack I usually end up next to him. A move by may allow me to be a short distance from my target, but still fairly close. If I am not next to them chances are they can make a half move and still be able to attack me. With a ranged attack that is not going to be the case. The reason it is not in the chart is it is too expensive to be used for much. To even use it at all you have to have a -1 restriction. There are not a lot of restrictions you can apply to it. Putting half move required on that is abusive and any sane GM is going to veto that. Applying more helpful elements pushes it into the super maneuver category. Personally, I would not allow the moving attack in a game I am running. It is way too powerful for a ranged specialist. The only thing that would be able to get near you would be a speedster.

Gliding states that from the ground you start with a velocity and altitude equal to your upward leap in meter. But in game terms you are not actually combining movement types. Your upward leap is being used as a limit on your starting movement. Since your upward leap is usually half your leap a character with 12m leaping and 12m gliding starting altitude and velocity would be 6m. He would need to accelerate to gain his full gliding speed using the gliding rules for acceleration. If the character is high enough when he starts, he can gain his full gliding speed. Since you are not actually leaping the rules for leaping do not apply. The only way to combine movement type is to do so as a full phase action, basically you take two half moves. This means that a gliding character will often be better off using his starting upward leap to glide. For example, if I am 3m away from a cliff and want to use my full gliding it would be better to leap from the ground so I can use the full gliding instead of using 3m of running to reach the cliff and half my gliding as to make a half move.

Duke Bushido is correct, and the rule book specifically mention this on page 284.

I agree with Duke Bushido that the SPD chart is one of the defining things about the hero system. It allows so many different tactics beside the old trade blows. A single point of SPD can be a huge advantage especially in a heroic campaign where the SPD tends to be lower. If I am a 4 SPD and my opponent is a 3 SPD, I start out defensive in 12. Then in phase 3 I go balls to the walls offensive. My opponent can either cancel his next phase or take my attack. If he cancels, I keep on the offensive on my 6. If he does not cancel and attacks me on 4, I cancel my 6 and switch to defensive. If he acts in 8, I cancel my 9 to go defensive, if he had canceled his 8, I again go all-out offensive and still go defensive in 12 if I need to. Basically, I get 1-2 phases where I can safely attack him while still being defensive for all of his attacks. If my opponent is faster than me, I can sometimes go mostly defensive and wait for him to make a mistake that I can exploit.