TranquiloUno

The moons in my world act as kinda...transformative magical dynamos. Pulling in raw solar energy\magic and transforming it in to more abstract forms\colors. 
 
Gods are creatures that have acquired various lunar artifacts that allow them to directly tap that lunar power.
The catch being that the more of these artifacts you can find and bond to the more your personality becomes warped by them. 
The primary way they warp personalities is to drive them to acquire more power and lunar artifacts and control and to project their lunar influence on the world. And to make them more than a little paranoid (reasonably expecting that all other gods are in fact plotting against them).  
 
I'd specifically wanted fairly weak gods in contrast to typical (ie, D&D) fantasy RPGs. I think of the tougher ones as being kinda on the level of JLA members (Bryne era Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, etc). Or maybe like The Dominator from The Black Company novels.
 
So they are driven to gain power and influence the world. But while\if they are on the planet they are vulnerable. Super tough, but vulnerable. 
But while they on on their moons they are unable to directly effect events. 
 
Priests can then channel through their connection to a lunar deity. In return for doing the gods will and abiding by the psycho-spiritual nature of the moon in question. 
 
So the end result is gods that are both "weak" and active. They tend to have specific kingdoms\realms they have a patron relationship with and can directly channel lunar power to their chosen priests (provided their moon is in LOS to said priest) if they choose. Potentially burning the priests out in an excitingly literal way.
 
They then drive these kingdoms\heroes\etc to do their will. And also secretly hunt down more lunar artifacts. Both to bond them (if of their own moon) or to hide them from the other gods of the other moons. 
 
The Great Northern Church of Hexor is fighting Ostermark for control of The Labyrinth because both Hexor (the god) and Illisius (patron god of Ostermark) know there are lunar artifacts (and other nasty magics their mortal followers can use on each other) there. 
The Grey Elves had Boccob (god of the purple moon) as their patron and were able to create the Sathen Empire because of that patronage (and to serve his purposes). 
 
That kinda thing.
 
But they can die, is the point. And be replaced. And are magically warped to crave power and influence.
And while they've got loads of resources and mortal orgs and immortal secret knowledge of the world secrets and hidden treasures and magical caches on the planet they are personally only 350-500pt supers (5th) in a world of 225pt (max-ish) mortal types. 
 
I'd kinda modeled them off of aspects of The Star Rider from The Dread Empire books, the JLA, the aforementioned The Dominator, and the idea that gods could be statted out...and killed. There's nothing special or extra-rules-y about them. 
 
 

I don't.  In fact, the vagueness of the divine in my world is a plot point.

As long as you're tacking the impossible I'd love a solid fix to the issue of low power entangles with the Takes No Damage From Attacks advantage. 
 
I only run Fantasy HERO so having enemies reduced to 0 DCV - even momentarily - results in fight ending called shots to the head. 
I've considered limiting the DCV penalty from Takes No Damage from attacks entangles to 1/2 DCV, but would love to hear your thoughts.

An excellent point.  I do think however that we are looking for the killing attack mechanic to carry a big burden.  I do not think that these changes on their own give us what we want, the question we need to be thinking is whether this is a decent tool for the toolbox.
 
I think that the proposed method for killing attacks is probably very cinematic.  I like it for that reason.  If you are playing a grittier game then there needs to be more in there, and I think that this is a better platform to build even the grittier elements.
 
In the Johnny Cash scenario, I would expect that the GM has toned up the gritty aspect of this world.  Mooks have the Phys Lim that they take 2x BODY from killing attacks and the GM uses BODY multipliers on hit locations, so a gut shot is 3x BODY, on top of the 2x for being a mook a saturday night special doing 3D6K (equivalent of the old 1D6K) will average 3 BODY (x6) which is 18 and more than enough to take any mook out.  Even hitting them on the leg (a 1x multiplier) will do, a minimum of 6 BODY, disabled and crying in pain.
 
The hit locations would add an element of swing to your 1920's gangster games (see what I did there) and the physical limitation allows deadliness to be ramped up even further, without even thinking about defences etc.  It is this level of customisation that should be the selling point of the game system.  Having the core mechanic deliver more predictable damage makes it possible to have the same weapons have wildly different effects on mooks, soldiers and bosses despite them all wearing the same cut of suit...
 
 
Doc

https://www.outsideonline.com/1784106/how-long-can-humans-hold-their-breath
 
I reckon 2 minutes in a cinematic game looks reasonable, if not slightly stingy.
 
Doc

I think the behavior in the LARPS is more about there mostly only being PCs\factions. I could be *very* wrong about that since I never played Mindseye Theatre\LARP VtM but my impression is since it's mostly PCs it's inherently PvPish in that....there's not really a lot of other folks to conflict with.
 
I've definitely seen that dynamic in other LARPS I've played that lacked NPCs. Nobody else to fight or conflict with? Well...it's gonna be PvP then most likely.

I pitched a pretty strong origin story for them all. It was a near future setting that didn't have supers until the accident that creates the PCs (and the opposition). So, again, it wasn't a long campaign, and I think the on the run, new supers, wanted criminals stuff definitely constrained even the parts of the campaign I was wanting to get to, which was, like Gnome BODY (important!) says above, mostly Shadowrun\Ocean's 11 with powers.
I was hoping to make it past that to the point they'd start their own super-villain plots but we only got as far as them taking over most of the drug trade in Las Vegas and heisting a single experimental regeneration device (which was partly improvised due to my getting a headshot on a PC during an encounter with some SWAT folks).
 
I expected to keep them at the on the run stage for another session or so. They'd always be wanted criminals (probably) but they'd started to acquire resources but they'd acquired enemies\opposition to go with it (shadow government faction and the mad scientist(s) responsible for the origin story). 
 
 
 
I would guess fairly strongly. The pitch was the classic, "You're a death row\other prisoner trading time off your sentence for being a test subject" + "mad science experiment goes horribly wrong" (you saw that coming tho, I'm sure).
So while they were all convicted criminals in some way there was no requirement they be Hideously Evil or Deeply Villainous.
 
Also it was fairly low powered (rather than the classic attack\defense\movement setup it was more 1-2 of those and maybe 1-2 other minor features) and they all had DF of some kind. So they had less ability to blend in, less ability to solo or go solo (even apart from the Dependency on being in proximity to each other). I think they might have had a Susceptibility to attacking each other too or something just to lay it on extra thick. Don't remember now. 
 
AND, crucially, I had a good group of players. So that always makes things easier. 
 
I'd guess, based on the players and the characters they created, and without the close-proximity thing that the group would have broken up in to a couple of sub-groups based on character outlook if we'd hit the sandbox phase of things. The Magneto type (who also had super Int) was most likely to evolve in to a classic supervillain. I don't think the others were that ambitious. But they'd have made a good thug squad. 
 
 

I ran a short one. Went fine.
 
Had a method to keep the party together and at least semi-friendly (all their powers were from the same source and were only 'stable' when all of them were in fairly close proximity).
Didn't get deep enough in to it to get to the sandbox type stage.
Still in the "on the run" and dealing with various other factors (hunted due to escape from prison, other 'villain' group, FedGov stuff).
 
I liked running it and would run one again.

Not once did I intentionally target anything rude or insulting at you or your group.  And yes, I absolutely gave as good as I felt I got with downvotes.  As previously noted, if those who initiated the downvotes will retract them, I will, as well.  (I didn't start the downvoting … so I also won't start the retractions.  I like to be consistent.)

No, I downvoted your rude and insulting posts. You then just went and downvoted everywhere I disagreed with you, because unlike you, I've not made snide remarks or personal insinuations. So, it's hardly tit-for-tat. You got downvoted for making rude remarks. But hey, you believe what you want to believe and just do you.

Gentlemen.  There is a LOT of downvoting going on in this thread, some of it probably provoked by earlier downvotes.  I cannot remember seeing so many especially not in one thread.
 
Obviously there are no forum rules about use of downvotes but they have mostly been used, in my experience to denote bad behaviour than disagreement.  I have not seen much intemperate language or behaviour so the downvoting, to me, seems OTT.
 
Could I ask you to go back and think again whether you do actually want to be downvoting posts rather than simply expressing disagreement.
 
Doc

Personally, I would be inclined to suggest everyone plays the game first.  Character creation is THE most complex part of the game ( though ultimately the most rewarding).  The system is pretty straightforward.
 
I suggest using the pregenerated characters in a very simple scenario (bank heist in your home town).  Get a handle on how things work.  Especially as a new GM with new players.
 
Once you are comfortable with how things work in-game,. THEN think about designing heroes etc.  Bring questions to the boards, you will get a variety of answers and you can begin to decide how you want to play the game.
 
Doc

Those divers are just plain superhuman! I'm a pretty fit guy for my age - whenever I go swimming (which most recently has been in the Balearic, Adriatic, and Aegean seas) I have found that in recent years, the increased salinity of the Med in general has meant that in order to dive maybe only 10-15 feet of water to the ocean floor (I swim close to the shore) is a herculean effort. What hurts the most is that in order to go lower, you have to exhale excessively in order to sink down (the buoyancy of the salt is staggering), almost to the point of emptying your lungs. This is self defeating as you then have no spare oxygen to be able to swim and explore whilst down there. In other words, holding your breath is one thing. Holding it whilst exerting yourself is ridiculously hard (and not recommended generally,  but I always like to think of those times when these sort of things might come in useful - and as a firefighter conservation of air is something I practice).
Back to the case in (game) point. Yeah, I agree with Doc that 2 minutes in a *cinematic* game is not unreasonable. There are a good number of films where normals get up to all sorts of shenanigans underwater (rescuing people from sunken vehicles etc), hell, even *seeing* underwater (without goggles), is pretty impossible, but that doesn't make for a good movie.  😉

Some other systems have tried to limit the influence of magic items on character power as well.
* D&D 5th edition has attunement slots (3) and only the most generic items do not require one.
* Pathfinder 2.0 has a Resonance system.
 
I'm trying to replicate the Pillars of Eternity 2 magic & skill tricks system for my Saturday HERO group.
 
It's a work in progress, but so far...
1.  Nearly all resources / abilities recover on a per encounter basis.
2.  Spellcasters rank up to 2 casts per spell level - per encounter.
3.  Skill trick types (rogues, warriors, monks, etc.) have a single pool to draw on for whichever abilities they use. 
     a.  These abilities have different costs.
     b.  A couple of the classes have a way to recover points during the encounter - such as monks gaining points when they lose BOD.
 
Compared to the last campaign where the abilities were largely at will - players are already being far more tactical with their limited resources.
 
 

Oh please tell me that Ator the Fighting Eagle is among your inspirations!

I think it's especially fitting for heavy plate armor.
 
Having watched the quite mediocre and entirely awesome Knight Fights I marveled at how little stun damage these guys took from repeated blows to the head.  The primary reason was they were wearing massive bucket helms and almost all of the impact energy was transferred to their armored shoulders.  Almost all of the KO's I saw were two-handed weapon strikes to the back or belly.
 
Some guys took blows across the helmet so heavy that their opponents weapon broke.  And it suddenly became clear why they favored metal shafts or metal reinforced shafts.  A battered sword may get all bendy and warped, but the hammers & maces & axes frequently broke.

I am somewhat okay with the concept of these two powers, just not as officially written up talents.  When its a "pick from" list, it becomes a matter of people grabbing them just because "dude, this is powerful!" rather than "I have an idea for my character..."  When they have to come up with the build or work with the GM to make it, its going to usually be more character and concept- based rather than going down a list and getting the broken parts to make your l337 Goblin Pwner

To me, it was intended to simulate the Rogue's sneak attack.  Many gamers do want that in their game, so a means of simulating it is, in my view, appropriate to the game.  If every player takes an ability, then maybe we have a problem with either the players or the game.  Perhaps that crippled mentalist does not belong in this game if the only way he can survive is with a "lame justification" rather than a simulation of what happens in the source material.
 
However, as I recall the source material, that crippled mentalist does not die in Issue 2 because an attack solidly connects, killing him instantly.
 
 
This, to me, is the bigger issue.  Most games have DC and defense ranges, and DC and defense caps.  So no, you don't get to exceed the campaign DC cap because you took Deadly Blow (or Combat Luck, or Martial Arts, or high STR, or anything else).  Deadly Blow is simply limited CSLs, so if you're more skilled overall, rather than focusing your training exclusively on delivering more hurt, you take CSLs instead.
 
It always feels like the fight on this breaks down into "a dagger should only be able to do so much damage", "I want players to be able to use a wider variety of weapons and still be effective" and/or "the source material features skilled characters who inflict huge damage with light weapons - and I can imagine that, so Hero's tag line says I should be able to build it".
 
This, to me, is the most significant issue.  If the only characters (or even the only warriors) who can actually be effective are those who carry huge 2 handed weapons and wear heavy armor, then those are the only characters the players will want to play.  Players who want to play ineffectual characters only suitable for comedy relief are, in my experience, pretty rare. 
 
Just as being 3 DCs above the campaign norm is huge, being 3 DCs below campaign norm is "my character sucks - he cannot meaningfully contribute".
 
Armor + Combat Luck is pushing characters over campaign limits?  Then their total defenses need to be reined in.  Maybe that is achieved by adding a limitation to Combat Luck that "every 2 points of rDEF from another source reduces Combat Luck by 1 point".  But I will have a similar issue when Percy Platemail has a Shield of the Gods spell cast on him by Charlie Cleric, followed by a Skin of Stone spell cast by Marvin Mage.  Exceeding campaign limits is the problem, not the mechanics used to exceed those limits.
 
"Wow, every PC was Blessed by the Druids as a child and now has 6rPD/6rED.  What a coinkydink"

One idea that can make spellcasting limitations fun is allowing a low base active points cap and let that be multiplied upwards by limitations.
 
Ex:  The RAW magic cap for the campaign is 15 AP x (1+limitations).  Now the mage can do something like OAF-Wand + Incantations + gestures + full phase to cast to get a deadly 45 AP / 3d6 RKA.

Aha!
 
Now I remember. 
 
In order to do a 30d6 Move Through using 0 strength the Earth must move 180m on its phase.
 
Since terminal falling velocity is 60m/s this means the phase of the Earth lasts 3 seconds.
 
Thus, the Earth is speed 4.
 
The glorious wasted mental energy of college. 
 
 

It is a problem in every game.  It is important for the GM to find ways to keep players involved, even if characters are not.  I have found that handing one of the players, whose PC is hors de combat, a villain to run for the duration of the combat keeps the player very much engaged.  I am content for those players to see the powers and skills of my villains (though I keep some of the the complications hidden) and I find that those players play that villain far more effectively than I would have.  There is obviously nothing more satisfying than driving your friend's hero through 6" of battleship plate armour...  🙂

Those are great things to say, but they're not backed up by gameplay. 
 
Even a piddly 6d6 Blast rolling average will put a bystander in the hospital for a month.  A 12d6 will slam them straight down to Dying. 
And when's the last time you saw a villain carting around less than 15 RDEF?  I skimmed a villains book just now and it went 20 35 20 15 Whatever the PCs have 20 Regeneration yadda yadda.  A 4d6 is going to put a bit of BODY through but not accidentally kill a villain. 
KAs are less nonlethal but they're not big scary murderattacks unless the GM decides to throw a guy in just to **** the players.  And we all know how Gilt Complex went over. 

I'm not sure that's true....
 
Certainly people don't buy an RPG *just* for the art but I have also certainly bought any number of RPGs over the years sheerly based on cover and interior art. 
 
I think any pile of words can be a functional game system. I don't think people buy RPGs because of the words.
 
I think the book has to spark something in the person. Blue and yellow don't spark nuthin' for me.
 
Dr. D vs Seeker made me want to play that game without ever reading it.
 
I remember loads of Classic Enemies based on their art.
I remember buying Champions in 3d based almost solely on the cover art.
 
Since we're a bunch of Hero nerds here I know we all love our system of choice but I don't really think a system has ever sold a game.
I think art sells games.
 
Art invokes creativity.
Art informs potential buyers\players about all kinds of things about the game without them having to read a proverbial thousand words.
Art actually gets potential players to read those thousand or more words of the rules to actually play the game.
 
Shadowrun? Battletech? Bought 'em for the art.
Warhammer\40k? Art. In fact Warhammer and it's family are probably the best case for art being the only thing that really matters. IMO.
All those terrible Palladium games I used to play? It was the art that did it for sure.
Talislanta? Barely remember the system. Loooooove the art and the world and still wanna play that game solely based on the art.
 
Rules are bullshit (to an extent)\no plan survives contact with the enemy.
 
But pretty pictures are always pretty.
 
Art sells product.
 
IMO at least.
 
Gets pricey tho!
 
 

To start out the campaign, I'd give the players a rough idea of power level and setting, and then build the rest of the world through the choices they make with their characters.  The Marvel movies did that.
 
For instance, in the first Iron Man movie, they introduce the "arc reactor" technology.  This is really what sets the Marvel world apart from our world.  Tony Stark invents some really awesome stuff, and the "super" tech that we see all comes from him.  Of course his dad was brilliant too, and so if we need to have some existing supertech that Tony didn't invent, it probably came from his dad.  Then we get the Incredible Hulk, and we know that there's this serum the government has been messing with for decades, and if you do it wrong it produces monsters.  Then we get Thor, and we learn there are aliens who have been messing around on Earth for eons, and a lot of our old myths probably come from their exploits.  They've got advanced technology that looks like magic to us, and they aren't big on explaining themselves to humans.  Finally we get Captain America, and we not only see what the super-soldier serum does when it works right, but we also see the glowing cube thingy that (among other things) gives Nazis supertech.  This all comes together with the Avengers movie, where we get glowing cube thingy, brainwashing staff, alien armies, super-agents, and a flying helicarrier.
 
Everything we see in the early Marvel movies has its origins in something tied in with the "PCs" of that world.  Look at the origins of the main characters, and that gives you your villains.
 
So say you've got 5 players.  Bob wants to be a ninja.  Dave insists on playing a chain-smoking Scottish wizard who wears a trench coat and fights demonic creatures.  Ricky has designed a power armor character who spent all his points on the cool armor, and doesn't have any skills or wealth.  When forced to come up with an explanation, he says he's a military pilot and was given the armor for this special assignment.  Frank plays an alien from another world who gets his powers from Earth's reflected moonlight or something.  And Sarah wants to play an anime character she really likes.  She's got a teenage girl who changes into a super teenage girl and shoots rainbow beams of power.  She does this to fight off the evil queen from Planet X.
 
What do you do?  Well, you've got two characters with asian themes, so that'll probably feature heavily.  We know that ninjas are real.  You've also got two different alien races (Planet X people and also Frank's character, though you might tie them together somehow).  The government has advanced enough tech to hand out a power suit to Corporal Moron.  And we've got shadowy demon creatures running around in the background thanks to our cynical mage, Harry Trainspotter.  That gives you a lot of possible enemies for these guys.  Then you can gradually build out the world based on what happens with these characters.  Just go with the logical conclusions of their actions and how they describe their backgrounds.  It sounds to me like evil cults should be a thing, maybe they hire ninja clans to guard their meeting places?  And if the governments of the world know that aliens are real, perhaps they are trying to use their super-suits to prevent possible invasion.  That sounds like a good reason for them to build a lot of different experimental units, many of which can get stolen.  And then sometimes Planet X could send some advanced scouts to Earth, and maybe they get captured or they drop an important alien tech thingy  (and somebody else finds it).
 
Anyway, when you introduce a new villain, it can help to tie it to one of the characters.  Sorry Bob, but the cyber-ninja that tried to kill the mayor seems very familiar to you -- he reminds you of a dead man, someone you once killed.  You're honor bound to investigate.  And Ricky, that laser sword he used looks like something you saw in the testing center when they gave you your armor.  You're almost afraid to ask your superiors where it came from.  Something is definitely up.  You don't have to resolve the problem immediately, in fact it may be better if you just let it linger for a while.  Bob can get revenge and knock the villain off a building into the river (where he disappears), but Ricky is still left wondering who he can trust within his own organization.  Each game session, you might have a villain that is related to a different hero, or maybe multiple heroes at once.  The players end up being tied together by circumstances, because all the villains link back to their own backgrounds.

Well said. 
Hero needs exposure to the general gaming community.  And while I know that things like Roll20 and such are the current fad and I can only speak for my personnel experience.  But while I have met many gamers that say they have tried it,  I only know a very very few, three actually, that actively game that way. 
So by exposure I mean the game being played in game shops. 
If a game is played the the shop the store will stock it.  Demand for a product will mean orders.
Now I do not have an answer that will do that.  But I do believe wholeheartedly that the Hall of Champions is a major step forward in the process. 
To me Hero is a classic example of a "chicken or the egg" vicious circle.  Building stuff in Hero and Playing Hero.  You need to play in order to really understand the build part.  But without someone that already knows the game as a guide, many (maybe most) of the new players will not invest the time needed to understand the system when they can play any number of RPG's that are far more easier to start. 
 
I believe that the HoC will provide a much needed assistance for players and GM's that may need a little help getting started.