Gnome BODY (important!)

For clarification: Are you asking "I know how to handle Luck on PCs, but how do I make it work for NPCs?", or are you asking "How do I handle Luck in general?".

A, things being available to everyone doesn't mean they're not balanced. If there were a Thought Blast power that functioned like Mental Blast in every way but cost 1 AP per 2d6, that would clearly be unbalanced. And it'd cause issues, because it being available to "everybody" would mean that players would have to choose "Do I want to pay significantly more for my damage or do I want to play another mentalist?" every time they made a character. B, MA isn't available to everybody. There are no provisions for "gun fu" in 6E core. There are no allowances for "mind kung fu" anywhere I know of. You could try to work something out with your GM, but that requires he be willing to disregard the holy truth of What Is Written. Benefiting from martial arts requires your character be a hand to hand combatant. I also question the validity of your setup. First, I as GM wouldn't permit the limitation you propose: What else are you going to do with OCV or hand attack? And how will you use the HKA when there's no standard HTH maneuver that does killing damage? It's also far larger than an "average Martial Arts package" as you yourself said. I find that MA's balance issues tend to come up with small MA sets. For example, how would you replicate the MA set of Flying Dodge, Fast Strike, Weapon Element? That's 10 points for a truckload of benefit. The issues with MA are that it's too efficient in small packages and it has a tendency to play outside the rules such as with Legsweep's auto-tripping and Flying Dodge's aborting to movement.

HERO's system of STUN and BODY does help to mitigate the "HP makes no sense" issue, but it still rears its head from time to time. It's SFX dependent, but a mental attack that Does BODY (for example) can start getting really strange when it interacts with Paramedics or a healing power. There's also the issue that if your opponent has decent resistant defenses the fastest way to kill them is to slam them with STUN damage until they keel over, then finish them off. It's very hard to tell if somebody's trying to knock you out to capture you or knock you out to murder you. I fully disagree that it takes the need to discuss campaign setting away, though. Even if you're using a genre book, those genres are so broad that you can have The Gunisher submitted next to General Greece, Nocturnal Mammal Person, and Angst Storm. That won't go well. There's also a number of things HERO doesn't do as well as I'd like, mainly in the area of balance and accessibility. The one-cost-fits-all scheme leads to situations where a power (Regeneration in Superheroic play, for example) is massively overcosted but a new GM isn't likely to be comfortable adjusting price from What Is Written. Getting players to remember the rules of even something as simple as M&M ("Which dice do I roll to attack", they ask in the third session playing the system that only uses one dice, just before asking what their attack bonus is) has given me headaches, I'm one of only two people in my current 5-7 person group who's really put learning time down on HERO and I can't really say I don't understand why everyone else is shying away from the giant books. Big scary book makes peoples eyes glaze over. The fact that you really do have to read the entire combat chapter and all your powers and skills doesn't help. And while HERO does work as a universal system, there's something better out there for most purposes other than build-your-own-super. The only question is if the time it takes to find and learn that other thing is worth it.

How do we distinguish that from a speedster? They tend to meet all those qualifications too.

Correction: A close reading of the rules in Ultimate Martial Artist for the FMove tag indicates that you cannot abort to a Flying Dodge to gain a FMove. FMove indicates that the maneuver can be taken during or after a Full Move, not that the maneuver includes a Full Move. Since you already can't abort to a Full Move, aborting to a Flying Dodge thus does not provide movement. My objections to the maneuver are now gone. Further correction: Writeup for Flying Dodge says you can abort to movement, but this doesn't prevent the attack, but does change range modifiers for ranged attacks. I don't feel any of this follows from the maneuver's specifications, but this is vaguely balanced so w/e.

Flying Dodge is broken not because it allows a character to move with high DCV. That's fine, since it precludes attacking. What makes Flying Dodge broken is the ability to abort to movement without playing by the rules of Dive For Cover. As long as the PC isn't using Flying Dodge for that, it's fine.

How about: Teleport 4m, activation roll, trigger, NCC results only, Side Effect (can happen during own attacks), Side Effect (teleporting into walls is bad OK?). Whenever the wizard is attacked, he has a chance to be teleporting right now sorry bye! If this takes him to safety, great! If this drops him back in danger, oops! If this happens when he's doing an important thing, whoops!

I'd personally go with "1 pip and 1d3 count in all ways as if they were results from 1d6". A 1 is no NDB however you come about it, a 2 or 3 is one NDB no matter how you come across it. Consistency makes everything easier on newcomers. If this means 1 pip penetrating isn't penetrating, fine. A minimum cost threshold isn't a bad thing.

The math works out nicely for the numbers I chose, but the numbers I chose were pretty deliberate to illustrate an "edition tipping point": In 6e characteristics come up the winning option while in 5e DRed is the cheaper path. You can tweak the starting characteristics up and get a result of "DRed cheaper" for both or tweak them down and get a result of "characteristics cheaper" for both. The core takeaway I was going for is that at a certain threshold of characteristics, buying DRed becomes cheaper than increasing those characteristics for the same effect and that threshold is when DRed becomes point-efficient to buy. That threshold is higher in 6e due to the lower prices of characteristics, meaning fewer characters will have point-efficient DRed. I do agree that 6e's cost reductions for characteristics were necessary. I just feel that DRed should have had some points shaved off too. I've toyed with the idea of building a NPC Brick as high DCV but modest defenses, with the SFX of being totally invulnerable everywhere save for a small, obvious, and tricky to hit weak point.

It's not efficient against people, you're better off with a AVAD RKA that Does Body if you just want massive BODY counts. What your construct does do cheesetastically well is shred focuses. Each hit that deals BODY removes a power from the focus, so a decent roll will outright obliterate any breakable focus without Hardened defenses.

It was nerfed indirectly. DRed can be emulated with characteristics and limitations. It's actually quite simple to get the same effective benefit, and changes were made to the equivalent alternative. (Equivalent barring Aids and Healing, beneficial Adjustment powers throw things off) The effective benefit that DRed provides is increased effective STUN, BODY, REC, and CON. With 50% DRed for example, you take as many hits to down as somebody with twice your STUN and BODY, the part of your REC that recovers STUN+BODY works twice as well, and the part of your CON that resists being Stunned works twice as well. For comparison: A hero with 40 STUN, 15 BODY, 15 CON, 12 REC, 50% DRed and a hero with 80 STUN, 30 BODY, 15 CON + 15 CON only to resist Stunning, 12 REC + 12 REC not to recover END? Functionally identical aside from rounding. Both will take the same number of hits with the same timing to put down, and recover from those hits equally quickly. The only real difference is price. And 6e made the latter much cheaper by cutting the prices of STUN and REC in half. There's still a tipping point where buying DRed is more efficient than heaping on characteristics, but that tipping point is a lot higher now.

It really is a shame to me that Damage Reduction got nerfed so hard in the transition from 5th to 6th. It's become very hard to get your points worth out of it now, which is a pity since it feels so good to use.

Ten seconds on google suggests it's a reference to a Japanese cartoon about a bunch of zombie pop-stars.

To play double's advocate, you also introduce the frustration of "I want to play Donut Steel, my original superhero! No, I didn't really want to play Colossus. No, I didn't really want to make ThunderHammer (no relation to Thor). Just lemme play Donut Steel already!"

Except it isn't covered by the basic power. First, teleporting an object without teleporting yourself explicitly requires the Usable As Attack Advantage, which the basic power lacks. Second, using a power "creatively" to generate a different game-effect is covered by the Power skill, which the character currently lacks. Third, the Power skill explicitly states it is not to be used to overcome Limitations on existing powers, such as the Focus limitation on the RKA. I'd also comment that the Nail Pin strains my credibility past the breaking point. A 7d6 Entangle based on little pins and the strength of somebody's clothes? What are clothes made of in this setting, titanium fibers stitched with carbon nanotubes? I mean, the idea makes sense but the numbers are way too high for me to suspend disbelief.

Looks solid. I'd personally also mention that a Champions character starts strong and gets minor improvements whereas as D&D character generally starts weak and gets significant improvements. What you start with matters, since you'll be using it for the character's lifespan. This is also a significant part of why a Champions character takes longer to make: It's like starting at high level. I'd also suggest setting up your tone. If you're going Silver Age, things like "Fights aren't to the death. Killing people is bad and wrong and not heroic. Heroes knock the villain out and arrest them, not shoot them and dump their body at the police office." in the introductory document can go a long way towards establishing the tone you want. There's a bunch of takes on superhero out there, the last thing you want is somebody bringing The Gunisher to your idealistic Justice League-esq game.

The problem, to me, isn't about TPKs. It's about systems and paradigms that enforce PC fatalities as the only failure states and consequences. People want their story to continue. The GM wants the PCs to stay alive. But if defeat means death, that can take defeat off the table. If every fight is to the death, then losing a fight means TPK. If withdrawing is difficult or impossible, then every fight is win hard or lose hard. If the only method of removing an enemy from combat is lethal, then all fights are lethal. Every scene with important decisions in a TTRPG should have consequences for those decisions. Combat is a dense cluster of important decisions, so absolutely requires consequences for bad decisions. Otherwise why bother including such a robust conflict-resolution method for it? If the only question is "how do the PCs win", then abstract the actual combat and skip to what matters. Champions et al are great for this sort of thing. A hero defeated by a villain might be left behind to stew in their defeat, might be kidnapped for experimentation, might be placed in a sadistic deathtrap, might be unmasked publicly, might have their mcguffin stolen, might fall from the public's graces, or might just be shot and left for dead (possibly to come back). Plenty of fun and exciting ways to have a defeat matter without ending a story. A PC who goes down in D&D enters the countdown to stability or death, and if everyone drops generally somebody bites it. And because healing magic is so capable of popping a defeated character back up to fighting status, it becomes a smart move to finish somebody while they're down. Defeat means the end of a story, which means defeat becomes impermissible.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if you're referring to "her powers" as in the capabilities of the fictional character, or "her powers" as in the character writeup posted by ScrewySquirrel. Same thing with the comment about Damage Shield.

It needs the qualifiers "point of BODY past defense" and "if the focus only contains a single power/framework".

It technically requires a little more to get truly objective length measurements (thanks, relativity), but defnitions such as "The metre is the length equal to 1 650 763.73 wavelengths in vacuum of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the levels 2p10 and 5d5 of the krypton 86 atom" allow for unambiguous length measurements. If I give the aforementioned definition of a meter (and krypton 86, and the levels, etc) then I can say that the metal rod I'm holding is 1.234 meters in my reference frame and every single observer (with accurate information) will agree. Pinning down a "detect lie" power simply requires a bunch of definitions. Take the statement 2+2=5. Is it a lie if somebody honestly believes that 2+2=5? Is it a lie if they misspeak and intended to say 2+3=5? Is it a lie if they don't speak English and are just reciting words they don't know the meaning of? Is it a lie if they really quietly whisper the word "doesn't" before "equals"? Is it a lie if they meant to say 2+2=5 but accidentally said 2+2=4 instead? Is it a lie if they postfix it with "I think" and honestly do think such? The problem isn't that "lie" is impossible to make objective, the problem is that there's many competing definitions and methods of lying. There may be a lot of questions needed to properly define "lie", but once those are out of the way you can easily have an objective "detect lie" power. It's just very questionable as to if it's worth the time. And if your GM even wants you to have it.

You can use TK at point-blank without any issues. That said, unless you buy some form of Invisible Power Effect for that TK everybody will be able to tell that you TK-punched and not STR-punched.

Unless I've overlooked something, the d6-1 doesn't have a "minimum result 1" clause. 0-5 is a half-pip better on mean than 1-3, but that lower floor can drive people nuts. I know one guy in my playgroup who I'd be able to make switch to d3 just by pointing at 1s and saying "Yeah, that's a zero. Don'tcha love the d6-1?" Honestly though, I always go d6-1 because having to segregate the d3 is a pain. The QOL improvement outweighs the math. If I have overlooked something, then the d6-1 is a blatant winner. I know some book or another has a table for when to take the d3 and when to take the d6-1, but I can't remember which it is offhand. I want to say 5e's Ultimate Energy Projector and Ultimate Brick?

If the power armor is central to the character and they don't want it breaking, why didn't they buy it as Unbreakable? Even Durable is generally just as good. And both are free.

Sorry, I didn't explain that well. It's a 70pt reserve, even at 1d6 the flash is 15pt. That means that if the flash is manifesting uncontrollably, there's 55pt left in the reserve. That makes Ball Lightning, Railgun, and Taser all impossible to use because they won't fit in what's left available. Another d6 of flash and Iron out of Sand goes away, a third d6 and Iron Sand Sword drops out leaving only the Lightning Blast to fall back on. And by that point Lightning Blast has fallen under 8d6 so is going to be bouncing off most credible threats. And with a common psycomp that relates to said uncontrollable manifestations, that's a scenario I'd expect to be irritatingly frequent. If I were GMing, I'd shoot that particular limitation down just because it's too limiting. Orrrr I'm reading my own take into this and completely missing how you intended "this power will manifest uncontrollably as Mikasa's frustration rises" to work. Semi-related, but if the side effect on the multipower triggers only at 70 points of usage and there's only one power that does that, that suggests to me that it's really only a side effect on the last point of the reserve and/or that one power.

I'm guessing that people haven't seen that cartoon she's from. I haven't, so skimmed it and wandered off. Only fluff thing I could comment on would be personal nitpicks with the prose, and that's not really relevant to the character. I don't have much to say about the mechanics as presented either, it's a solid energy projector with few exotic design flourishes from what I can tell. Only thing I'd have a mechanical comment on is the limitation on the flash: Doesn't that pretty easily turn off all the big attacks by depriving them of points in the reserve?