Gnome BODY (important!)

This is not the case for me. I assume you have your web browser autofilling your password. [insert standard-issue security-guy autofill rant here]

Recoverable Charges.

You could always make the rule "Round in favor of whoever is being more heroic right now".

So, when you say "group of attacks" all I can hear that as is "Multipower". We have to pay for flexibility in attacks, Multipower slots cost points. I don't see why "floating" damage should get around that surcharge. I don't see why "floating" damage shouldn't just be built by listing the forms of damage boost available and MPing them. We can buy the appropriate forms of damage via a(nother) Multipower and apply the appropriate slot. If we somehow don't know what Advantages the damage will have, we have Variable Advantage (which can certainly be given a cost break for having to duplicate another set of Advantages). If we somehow don't know what types of damage the character will be outputting, we can make a VPP. I really don't see why having two competing cost structures derived in totally different ways is a good idea.

Question for the historians around here: I seem to only see this argument come up in the context of HKAs. Is there a particular reason it doesn't come up in the context of Hand Attack? I have my guesses, but I'd much prefer first-hand answers.

I absolutely agree with you here, which dovetails into my disagreement regarding using Limited CSLs to get damage. Why not just buy damage to get damage?

Assign the same Limitation value worth of Charges to each item, then normalize charges/use to the largest charge count. Takes a few minutes during chargen and less time in play than END.

10 points of MA maneuvers is a good investment for everyone because MA scaling is screwed up beyond belief, so that's not really a hindrance. The GM can veto anything, and should veto abusive constructs. But that doesn't make those constructs any less abusive, the GM being able to fix the problem just means there is a problem.

Justify "Only with MA" as -1/4. It's not worth that much. And you're ignoring them being floating DCs that can apply to, for example, Energy Blast. If you've got a way to pull 1d6 EB 0END down to 4 real I'd love to hear it.

A MADC is a DC, 0END. Normally that costs 7. You pay 4. So "Only with MA" is a pretty big Limitation! But a Weapon Element is 1. So you buy whatever-fu, buy Weapon Element: My Attack, and buy MADCs to get cheaper damage that costs less END. It's both cheaper and better than buying normal damage normally. Because as it turns out, "Only with MA" isn't limiting at all. And that's not even getting into how MADCs apply to anything, so you can take them outside a MP and cut the slot prices while retaining flexibility.

Doesn't every second poster have their own rant on that subject?

I'm in complete agreement with Doc here. First you make the mages pay points for the basics like DCs that everyone else gets for free. Then you make the mages pay END for the DCs that everyone else doesn't. Then you make the mages pay for the END that you're making them pay for the DCs that everyone else doesn't. You're taxing the concept thrice. You've given the reasons that A: Other systems do it. But you're not playing other systems, you're playing HERO. B: You don't like mages throwing around spells non-stop. But there's other options for this that don't require double-standards, like the Charges Limitation.

Yes, being blind in 6E nets you 35 points. It's not a PhysLim anymore though, it's selling back your Normal Sight.

[CITATION NEEDED], because that ain't how it be in my books. In fact, my books explicitly state the opposite, that CE can't make light (FRED p135, 6E1p175).

Unbelievably enough, this was a published PC-facing example power in the Mutants and Masterminds 3e Power Profiles book.

It does not have such functionality. There's the ability to attach an image file from an external source, but that's it.

A fancy dice mechanic isn't going to solve the underlying issue of HERO's social system. Namely, that it doesn't have a social system. Also what I said upthread RE BODY/STUN correlation.

Why even bother rolling if the character can try again and again for an entire hour? If the only consequence of a failed roll is that you have to roll again, then what's the point of rolling in the first place? Digression aside, I feel that the problem of Extra Time being worthless compared to adding a second roll would be best solved by making a "retry" be a choice of replacing the first roll or spending enough time to have retroactively spent Extra Time and thus rolling that additional die.

At some point, it just becomes necessary to say "OK, 1/2 DCV now means -[something], 0 DCV now means -[something larger]" because CV fractions do not scale.

It will completely and utterly destroy any chance of accomplishing a difficult task, because an Nd6 pool scales very differently from a 3d6 roll under. https://anydice.com/program/1958f. I can't see any way of making difficulty not a "Do you have at least 45 in your characteristic? Oh, don't bother trying then." in the same way everyone knows a 6d6 Blast is useless in a 12d6 game. Right now if 12- Tim, 14- Frank, and 17- Sam walk into a difficulty -6 roll, Tim and Frank get to try with a low but meaningful chance of success, but under a dice pool model if Sam has a credible chance of failure then Tim and Frank have no credible chance of success. Also, using both STUN and BODY to generate results will not be particularly interesting, since STUN correlates so heavily with BODY. Low BODY high STUN and vice versa are very uncommon rolls.

Huh. Those seem like pretty reasonable Limitations to apply to powers, what was it that pushed them into cheeseville?

I've never had any problems with players being distracted by rotary dial landlines during play.

I've always felt that HERO should have used -1 steps for range instead of -2 steps. Right now, being even one range bracket out is so punishing that "ranged" characters feel like they're not really capable of any actual ranged combat. Making it -1 steps gives you a 128m distance for a -4 penalty, which seems a lot more reasonable. From my experience blundering around in dark rooms and going on hikes, seeing something man-sized and hidden in the dark is about as hard as seeing it a football field away. Or at least they feel like they take similar amounts of time spent going "Wait, where is it? No really, where?".

When the GM allows you to break the rules, you can get cheesetacular indeed. Had one guy in my group (character thankfully retired) who put all his powers into a "this is how my body works" Element Control then made everything Innate, even buying Costs END and Cost 0 END just to get powers that normally don't cost END in and Innate.

I've always thought this was self-defeating. You only get so many Disadvantage points and buying a power just to mitigate a Disadvantage means you're out points compared to taking a Disadvantage that doesn't need mitigation (Code Versus Something-Genre-Inappropriate is always a good pick). The sole exception was when the mitigation was inherently useful, like taking Spatial Awareness with all the bells and whistles to mitigate being blind. And then it's less buying a power to soften a Disadvantage and more buying a Disadvantage that's less relevant because of your powers. If I've heard correctly, weren't earlier edition characters built with unlimited Disadvantage points with diminishing returns? Was the "Buy a Disadvantage, buy it off" approach point-efficient back then?