Gnome BODY (important!)

That's not a problem, that's just setting everyone else up for success! 

That's not a problem, that's just setting everyone else up for success! 

A Disadvantage should logically be the inverse of an Advantage.  It wasn't, so that terminology change made sense.  The ones you talk about feel like change for change's sake. 

Good work!  Nice to see people focusing on the new folks. 
 
>General Advice When Creating Champions/Hero System Characters
No criticism, seems solid. 
 
>How much, how big
You are using numbers here, and if the reader is in a game with different benchmarks following your advice will cause them problems.  I strongly recommend removing the numbers. 
For that matter, you haven't even talked about campaign benchmarks here. 
I can't speak for all campaigns, but ED tends to be equal to PD at my table. 
I'd mention that because defenses are subtraction and tend to be a significant % of a capped attack, losing even a couple dice really hurts your damage output. 
 
>How to Win
More numbers here.  I'd recommend switching to formulas. 
You're missing a conversation on the topic of NNDs and how high your CON should be to not get Stunned by NNDs.  Also how to not chump to Coordinated Attacks. 
If you're suggesting ranged characters hang back in range-penalty-land, you should also suggest range PSLs.
 
>Reducing Costs
I'd recommend waving newbies away from Activation Roll, RSR, and well anything that involves more dicing. 
I'd also recommend recommending they keep the Limitations off their main attack and defense so they don't have to worry about sudden inability to function on the battlefield. 
 
What I'd Like To See Added
A section on Skills: Numbers, what everyone should have compared to what specialists should have, using Powers as super-Skills. 
Talk about effect-first and how to go from description to effect to write-up. 

Good work!  Nice to see people focusing on the new folks. 
 
>General Advice When Creating Champions/Hero System Characters
No criticism, seems solid. 
 
>How much, how big
You are using numbers here, and if the reader is in a game with different benchmarks following your advice will cause them problems.  I strongly recommend removing the numbers. 
For that matter, you haven't even talked about campaign benchmarks here. 
I can't speak for all campaigns, but ED tends to be equal to PD at my table. 
I'd mention that because defenses are subtraction and tend to be a significant % of a capped attack, losing even a couple dice really hurts your damage output. 
 
>How to Win
More numbers here.  I'd recommend switching to formulas. 
You're missing a conversation on the topic of NNDs and how high your CON should be to not get Stunned by NNDs.  Also how to not chump to Coordinated Attacks. 
If you're suggesting ranged characters hang back in range-penalty-land, you should also suggest range PSLs.
 
>Reducing Costs
I'd recommend waving newbies away from Activation Roll, RSR, and well anything that involves more dicing. 
I'd also recommend recommending they keep the Limitations off their main attack and defense so they don't have to worry about sudden inability to function on the battlefield. 
 
What I'd Like To See Added
A section on Skills: Numbers, what everyone should have compared to what specialists should have, using Powers as super-Skills. 
Talk about effect-first and how to go from description to effect to write-up. 

Good work!  Nice to see people focusing on the new folks. 
 
>General Advice When Creating Champions/Hero System Characters
No criticism, seems solid. 
 
>How much, how big
You are using numbers here, and if the reader is in a game with different benchmarks following your advice will cause them problems.  I strongly recommend removing the numbers. 
For that matter, you haven't even talked about campaign benchmarks here. 
I can't speak for all campaigns, but ED tends to be equal to PD at my table. 
I'd mention that because defenses are subtraction and tend to be a significant % of a capped attack, losing even a couple dice really hurts your damage output. 
 
>How to Win
More numbers here.  I'd recommend switching to formulas. 
You're missing a conversation on the topic of NNDs and how high your CON should be to not get Stunned by NNDs.  Also how to not chump to Coordinated Attacks. 
If you're suggesting ranged characters hang back in range-penalty-land, you should also suggest range PSLs.
 
>Reducing Costs
I'd recommend waving newbies away from Activation Roll, RSR, and well anything that involves more dicing. 
I'd also recommend recommending they keep the Limitations off their main attack and defense so they don't have to worry about sudden inability to function on the battlefield. 
 
What I'd Like To See Added
A section on Skills: Numbers, what everyone should have compared to what specialists should have, using Powers as super-Skills. 
Talk about effect-first and how to go from description to effect to write-up. 

Sure it applies.  Execute a "Target Falls" maneuver with the Leaping UAA.  The maneuver knocks the target prone, the Leaping hurls the target into the distance.  The end result is that the target has been thrown a distance and lands prone. 

Wasn't aware that Shove, Trip, and Throw were added to 6e's core maneuver set!  Thank you for pointing that out.  I feel at that point there's not much value in retaining MA. 
There's some things that can't be replicated like Flying Dodge, Grappling Block, and Defensive Throw, but I'm vaguely expecting that they're all things that shouldn't be retained or aren't interesting enough to retain. 

Well, let's assume you did get a free recovery. It wouldn't matter because there are no Phases or initiative.

I recall in the SETAC days suggesting that Martial maneuvers should be variations from standard maneuvers, but should not do things standard maneuvers can't.  I believe 6e was the one that added a Shove and a Trip maneuver.  It also has the optional Choke maneuver.
 
To me, full move maneuvers are "martial moveby/move through"
 
Is anything still missing, GB?
 

Chalk this up to different experiences then. My players would build a Martial Arts school( from the lists of moves not from scratch) and attach names to the moves. They' then used those names in play. Taking away all the moves made things too generic for them, the one time another GM rotated in. So I'm used to " I evade your Cobra Fang using the Leap of the Mongoose" So maybe we reach the same point, we different starting places.

Duke's objections to MA seem to mirror my objections and I entered with 5th. 
 
I feel that most MA maneuvers are CV/CSLs pretending they're something fancier. 
There's a few things MA does that CV/CSLs don't but I feel those should be killed (such as FMove) or moved to distinct universally-available maneuvers (such as Target Falls). 

What?
FRED has a section on being an ***hole to players you didn't get involved by awarding XP differently, but the only advice on spending XP is "Not during an adventure, and look XP expenditure over the same way you would character creation because it's the same thing really". 

How, practically speaking, do we do that?

Are you suggesting spell selection isn't the purview of the GM during character creation?

It's no different.  I hate them both. 

I'd be worried about some of the parts, things I feel to be abusive in a vacuum and would request the player change regardless of the rest of the sheet. 
I'd be worried about how the parts were put together, aspects of the design process that indicate to me a focus on degenerate WAAC munchkinery. 
I wouldn't be worried at all about the sum of the parts.  Any idiot GM can beat a character.  I did your analysis and more in the time it took to skim the sheet. 
I'd be worried about what the sum of the parts said about the player who brought it to a game. 

Anyone can make a list of abusive abilities.  That doesn't prove anything about what might happen in an actual game.  

You piled together a bunch of abusive constructs with zero thematic unity beyond "WIZARD".  The Multipower would be the least of my concerns if you submitted that abomination to my game. 

Well I wasn't going to start the derail but I'm totally onboard with it.  Me too, but I think I take it a bit further.  I feel there's only room for one way to buy more CV. 
Buying OCV and DCV directly or through DEX?  Sure, just don't have CSLs or MA (and add a OCV/DCV Multipower Talent so flexible CV still exists).  Buying CSLs?  Sure, just don't have MA or direct purchase of CV. 
"Here's your CV, if you don't like it do Martial Arts" is great and would be highly thematic for a Kung Fu HERO game where martial arts are just better than other forms of fighting (because Martial Arts are better than basic maneuvers).  Just don't put it side by side with other, often better, ways to buy CV. 
Right now MA is in a really nasty spot where MADCs and the first 10-15 points are way too good, especially if you take the FMove maneuvers, but it very quickly becomes inefficient to buy more maneuvers.  The old master with 50 points of Martial Arts maneuvers would be better off ditching 30 points of them for +3 CV.  And that's just wrong. 

This is probably going to come off as negative, and I apologize in advance.  I'm not fond of metacurrency, and it shows when I talk about it. 

Distribution:
- Giving players the ability to control the pool so heavily is a very neat idea.  Most metacurrency systems are purely GM driven, and that's one of their big failings. 
- Rewards post-chargen for Disads is good and discourages throwaway "never gonna matter" Disads-in-name-only.  But:
- The lack of scale presents a problem.  Achilles Sr getting dropped to -12 BODY and STUN in the first action of combat because of his Vulnerability is "worth" one die.  But so is Achilles Jr taking an extra d6 STUN from his Susceptibility.  I suspect players will go for lots of small Disads instead of a few big Disads. 
- Relatedly, frequently recurring Disads pose a problem.  Defendo has PsyLim: Starts all fights with a Presence Attack "Fighting solves nothing, let's talk it out!" and an Abort to Block.  Does he generate a white die every fight?  What about Honesty's CvLying, does he get a white die every time he could lie but doesn't? 
 
Mechanics:
- This is a very simple and intuitive system.  But it has to interface with all of HERO System, which is less simple.  That simplicity difference causes some friction between the two systems. 
- Outright adding dice massively favors high-cost-per-d6 attacks.  12d6 Blast +3d6 is 75AP.  6d6 NND +3d6 is 90 AP.  4d6 RKA +3d6 is 105AP.  2d6 RKA AOE +3d6 is 150AP. 
- Only having offensive options (barring Block) for spending metacurrency is going to make combat a lot nastier.  A 4d6k3 to-hit roll is way more accurate and adding a couple d6 to an attack massively increases the chances of Stunned'ing the opponent.  This may be a feature, not a bug.  Not having non-combat options for spending white (as opposed to giving the GM black) is going to exacerbate this. 
- Relatedly, this favors bricks and stiffs martial artists / speedsters.  A low CV benefits more from skewing the to-hit roll and adding d6s to a big attack is more likely to push it above the Stunned threshold, while not really minding a skewed to-hit against them and being the best able to take a high DC attack.  A high CV low DC/DEF character faces the opposite. 
- Is the use of dice declared before or after the window to Abort?  If dice are declared before Abort, Block becomes absurdly useful since it doesn't care how many dice you spent on your to-hit and can benefit from spending dice.  If dice are declared only when it's too late to Abort, then there's no interactivity or counter-play. 
 
Table Dynamics: (Will very much depend on your table dynamics, of course)
- Shared-pool metacurrency systems easily suffer from distribution issues.  Lo-Tek puts a die in the pool when him having no cellphone comes up.  Swipeo spends that die.  Angros puts a die in the pool when he goes Enraged over improper table manners.  Swipeo spends that die too.  Bob complains that Jim's screwing everyone on Disad Dice. 
- On the flip side though, this can promote fun moments where SFXman thinks he can beat Vulnerability Villain next phase if he has just a couple more white dice, so everybody else tries to generate as many white dice as possible by invoking disadvantages. 

Point taken.

At the most basic level, you'll see a sharp divide between "combatants" who invested relatively heavily in fighting and "noncombatants" who invested relatively lightly.  The same will follow for other areas, but this is where it will stand out the most. 
Combat will either suck for the combatants as they steamroll everything, suck for the noncombatants as everything trivially defeats them, suck for you because you have to build elaborate multi-level encounters, or some combination of the above.  The same will follow for other areas, but this is again where it will stand out the most. 
 
No, because a significant balance problem can result from rational actors with differing investment priorities.  Other significant problems arise due to differing investment efficiencies, player execution skill, or ability to predict the obstacles presented by the GM. 
Additionally, "rational and balanced" characters require useful information as input to the character design process.  Being just a couple DCs or CV off from the rest of the party can cause serious problems.  Caps and baselines provide that needed information while also communicating the expectation of "these numbers shall be adhered to". 

Why not Foxbat? 

So let's run the math.
 
Normal gets hit with a 10d6 Normal attack, and takes an average of 8 BOD and 33 STUN after defenses.  If it's a KA, they take 10 BOD and 17.5 stun.
 
Another Super gets hit with a 10d6 Normal attack, and takes an average of 0 BOD and 14 STUN after defenses.  If it's a KA, they take 5 BOD and 15 stun.  I am thinking KAs wil be pretty deadly to average Supers, and they are clearly superior at that defense level.
 
A high rDEF super, with 10 rDEF, takes 0 BOD or 14 STUN from a Normal attack, but 0 BOD and 12.5 STUN from the KA.
 
So the KA choice means I kill off most opponents, and do more STUN, at a slight cost if my target has exception rDEF.
 
I suggest the math fails.