GreaterThanOne

Doing a bit of research for something else and I stumbled across this:
 
http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/coach_draw.htm
 
Good stuff for the pulp era all the way up to WW2, should you ever need pictures or just a solid idea for a period-accurate map of assorted train cars.
 

So long as you are up-front with your players during the planning and introduction, you can minimize push back and complaints.  Tell them straight away that this is the idea you are planning on exploring -- not "I intend to be heavy-handed" bit; more the "your powers are deadly and narrow in scope.  As you progress, you may learn to widen that scope, but they will still tend to carry a certain focus.  If you shoot energy beams, you may learn to create varied effects with them, but you will likely never be able to turn them into Force Fields."  That sort of thing.  Let them know up-front that you will be pretty strict about enforcing this, at least until you feel the players have a solid grasp of what you're tying to create.
 
But make sure you tell them this _up front_.  Nothing gets push back faster than a group of people who have an entirely different "grasp" of superheroes.
 
As an example of push-back:  Until recently, I ran a sic-fi Space Opera type game that started back in '86 or '87.  Periodically, a player would leave or a player would come in.  Some time in the mid nineties, we had a player introduce a new guy-- who eventually became a good fit, and played for nearly six years (he moved after he finished his degree).  But _I_ had thought his friend-- the player that brought him along initially-- had given him a rundown on the game we were playing.  His friend thought _I_ was going to take him aside and give him a rundown.  So here we are, playing high Space Opera in the tradition of the Atari Force and Alience Legion (without the "you are in the military, period) comic books of the time (sorry; they are the only comic book examples I know for the type of "life is everywhere and there are a bajillion aliens" type setting.  Most importantly:  not Star Wars.  
 
At any rate, there were four sessions before we figured out neither of us had been working with this guy:  every damned time there was a sensor probing, or a missile, or pretty much _anything_ that could be bad, this guy wanted to "modify the shields."  You know: turn them into radiation screens, UV filters, rubberized projectile repellant, good food, and beautiful women.
 
We didn't have shields.
 
Not a one.
 
The closest thing we had was a rift caster, which opened small multiversal tears (at an extreme power expense):  if you were fast enough, and lucky enough, you could open a brief tear in the universe between you and the missile coming your way.  If you timed it just right, no more missile.  (but don't go to the universe to which you sent it; they might be mad.)  This was my concession years prior to players wanting an energy-screen type defense, which was a technology I just didn't want in my universe.  Force Fields and globes existed, but didn't work well beyond "covers about ten people" size; sand casters and the like: no problem!   But _not_ Star Trek shields.
 
Obviously, this kid was a big STNG fan (gag), and just assumed that "science fiction means Star Trek."  His friend and I held him a bit after a session, and we went into great detail about what the game universe was and was not.  He confesses that he had totally misunderstood, asked if he could re-do his character, to which I replied "we don't have Jedis, either," to which he got downright pissed.  "Why the Hell not?!"  Well, for one, everyone at this table except Marcus thinks they're pretty damned stupid as a sci-fi concept. (Midochlorians hadn't happened yet, and the only person whose mind was changed was Marcus: he decided that they were, in fact, pretty damned stupid.)
 
So he left, and we didn't see him for about three sessions; figured he was not interested in playing something that he hadn't seen on video or something.  Then one night he showed up and started asking some questions (before the game, obviously) and pitching a third character concept.  As I said, he played with us for about six years and a bit; no more problems.
 
 
 
Short version?
 
Get everyone on the same level of understanding before the game starts.  It's just easier that way: if there is something that the majority is unhappy about, then you can work out something that works for all of you _before_ the game starts.
 
 
 

I think the players do not really care about the heavy hand of the referee on the rules as long as they get some freedom in the use.  Most resentment comes when you have a stick that grants light but the referee does not allow them to use the stick as a mast “ because that is not how it was built”.  
 
The players will only feel the GM controls the powers if you artificially constrain their narrative, allowing mechanics to define the powers rather than the narrative.

It seems like what you’re going for is a little like the TV show Heroes.  Why that show had such a following where others like Powers or No Ordinary family fell by the wayside was because of the writing and characterization rather than the special effects.
   In that vein, I believe much of your game is going to rest on the personalities of the PC’s your players create.  Start by having them ask themselves questions like “what did this person want out of life before the accident.”  Remember, there were a lot of insect based superheroes in comics before Spider-Man.  What made him special was Peter Parker.

This is how I created the first player's character along with them. I then added in things like Extra Time, Concentration, RAR, No Conscious Control, X4 END etc. I want them to expand from these Powers by buying off the limitations or adding new Advantages. 
 
Exactly one of the issues I want to address. With high power games it often feels like a war of attrition against enemies.  The Powers become the fastest and easiest way for Players to "Advance" at they become crutches that detract from the more mundane stories that often make TTRPG's so much more interesting when you can't simply "Hulk Smash" every problem. 

Essentially I want to have an outline of rules that delineate why you can't just "Get Some More Mental Defense" because they are being jacked around by mentalists. I would instead guide them to perhaps make a deal with a mad scientists in exchange for a mental defense helmet for some dubious mission or learn Ancient Mindfulness from an Old Taoist Priest to help protect from the effects. 
 
Do you feel that as the campaign advances player's resent/ed the GM control over their Powers? I am leaning strongly towards this "Heavy Hand" approach as I believe it will allow them the most focus on their person. Especially if they don't actually know the Powers only the "effect". 

Good stuff, as usual from Duke.  I am going to talk game set-up.  I think it is the missing bit from the rules.  Despite there being a raft of design advice on genres etc, there is absolutely nothing about actually putting a game together.
 
You, as GM, need to sit down and think hard about how you want to constrain the system to get the game you want.
 
I had a similar game, normal people with "one" superpower.  So, the bank teller got superspeed and the priest became invulnerable and the teacher got a death glare.  None of the players knew how I built the powers but we sat down and did a 20 questions before I built them where I asked some questions about what the power meant and what its limits might be.  In effect, we got on the same page narratively.  The mechanics that came later allowed me to manage use in game as to how it affected those around them. 
 
I said "one" power because that was what I asked them for in a narrative sense.  In reality, most of the powers were an amalgam of game powers.  The priest did not mean for invulnerability to mean walking unscathed from a nuclear bomb or to be completely  unaffected by a rocket, he might be knocked out but nothing broke the skin.  The teacher did not want to instantly kill people with her death glare, she wanted to be able to make people fear death, feel death and THEN experience death.  The superspeed needed so much more than lots of running. 🙂 The mechanical details meant MUCH more to the players in game than the mechanical ones.
 
If you want blessing and curse, you need to think of the downsides.  Why do the players not use the powers at every opportunity?  I say players deliberately because the narrative reasons why the characters would not use them often go out the window when players encounter problems in-game.  Are they painful to use?  I know that would make me (real person) loath to use them, a player is likely to consider a few STUN a minor consequence for the character.  So you need to make consequences real for the player. If it hurts to use, make the player roll a PRE roll to activate the power modified by how often it has been used recently and how heroic they are trying to be (truly heroic acts should not be prevented by a dice roll). 
 
Again, explain to the players what you are trying to achieve and work through the narrative implications before building stuff.
 
This kind of game can be deadly.  If one character has a death glare and most heroes and villains have no enhanced defences, many people will die.  After all that narrative work, players will be heavily invested in their character and will not want them to just up and die at random, you need to think of how you will provide some narrative defences for the player characters that does not break the internal reality.  In my game there were incredibly few killing attacks, like A Team style stuff where 10 guys with machine guns and an exploding truck did not result in multiple casualties.  A machine gun forced people to take cover and required rolls to advance on, even though the players knew the machine guns were not deadly, the characters did not.  In another game, I had a card that indicated to the players when we were in four colour scenes and when we were in graphic novel scenes.  In graphic novel scenes, killing attacks would kill, in four colour negative BODY simply meant a visit to the hospital and missing the rest of that scene.
 
You, with your players can set the game to deliver the experience you want, you just all need to be on the same page before you start.
 
Doc

Well-Rounded?

I wouldn't go out of my way to get Dark Champions unless you are really into the finer details of guns. Otherwise you might as well not bother with the superpowers.

I like the ideas you have; this is shaping up to be quite interesting.
 
First, I have a question of my own.  I _think_ I know what you're trying to say here (something to the effect of they don't shrug off attack after attack; getting fired on has a high likelihood of mortal injury?), but to be certain we're all on the same page, can you clarify this:
 
 
 
 
 
The easiest (and generally least-exciting for the players) way to do this is to build the powers yourself.  Make them sharp and pointy and undeniably dangerous.  Certainly you can have the players make them, if they are familiar enough with the rules and are willing to make powers that are actually scary to use.  Essentially, make sure that powers-- particularly the higher-point powers, _are_ dangerous to use: Killing Attacks, Penetrating, Piercing, etc-- things that really either ramp up the damage or that cut the defenses.  Establish "minimum blocks" of power: must be used at a minimum of X AP, for example, or require Limitations like "Full power only." 
 
This will require the players to really think about how they are going to use these powers if they are the CVK type heroes.  (you may accidentally discover some of your players are not CVK   )
 
That's where I'd at least start looking.  Other things that can make offensive powers more dangerous than some players realize are Advantages like Area of Effect and Explosion.  NND is a no-brainer, but you'd need to add something to give it some Body damage if you're looking for genuinely dangerous powers.
 
 
 
Guess I jumped the gun with the Advantages and Limitations.  Sorry about that.   Consider weird side-effects, too:  using Power X causes an Area of Effect Drain: CON or something like that to anyone near you.  Honestly, powers that are fueled by Drains should always make a player hesitant to use them, particularly if there is no guarantee that the Drain is only going to affect the bad guy.
 
Depending on how much complexity you want to add, the Hit Location Chart can turn pretty much any sort of KA into a one-hit kill against a normal, and even against a _lot_ of low-level supers.  Your call, of course, as it is an optional set of rules; I don't care for it too much myself.
 
Power Limitations like Uncontrolled or-- better, No Conscious Control or even Trigger (something that will go off under certain conditions whether the player wants it to or not-- and in this case, I'd treat Trigger as a Limitation instead of an Advantage) puts pressure on him to avoid those circumstances lest lots of people get hurt or worse.
 
Mental powers can be nasty with their Line of Sight range and the fact that, if I understand you correctly, people are not typically going to have over-the-top EGO scores.
 
Some of the nastiest "Grimdark" campaign rules I've seen set limits on Defenses that are two-thirds, half or even less the limits on damage.  That gets ugly _fast_.  (Again, not something I care for, but I'm not the biggest fan that Grimdark ever had)
 
 
 
Well, replace "Powers" with "equipment" and you've got the basics of most high-level HEROIC games  from High Fantasy to MHI (Urban Fantasy) to Space Opera, so yes; I'd say you're in familiar territory.
 
The one thing I would like to suggest is that you give serious consideration to END, and _some_ consideration to REC.  If you want powerful, extremely dangerous abilities, they're going to need more END than just swinging a sword.  Either let these characteristics exceed normal limits as a matter of course for super-powered people in general, or expect to lose a few dice of effect in favor of Reduced Endurance advantages.  Endurance Reserves (are they pools now?  Eh.  Much like HGTV ruined the word "space" for me, White Wolf and various CCG have caused me to shudder a bit at the word "pool." ) are a good work-around, as are Charges, and they can even be used to set a hard limit on the number of times a player can use a power before he recharges, adding a bit more need for strategy to his games.
 
 
 
I proudly do not own it either, but that's mostly from distaste at the original (murderous "heroes") that has become so ingrained to the title that I just can't separate it from title even after a couple of decades.  I'm in that small camp that would have considered picking it up if it had been titled "Action HERO" or pretty much _anything_ that wasn't "Dark Champions."  Today, I am told, Dark Champions is the quintessential reference for "modern" (used  loosely) adventuring in the "real" (also used loosely) world.  It might still have a focus on vigilantism and beating faces with bullets; I don't know, but certainly it's going to be a solid reference for playing Heroic level characters, and be full of ideas on build tricks, etc.  Though honestly, both Pulp Hero and Post Apocalyptic HERO may serve just as well, if you have those.  Each of those is going to have a lot of genre info that may or may not be of any use to you, but still: they are (mostly) Heroic level stuff.

I don't know.
 
I'm having a barrel of laughs with it.    I'm also really enjoying the writing style and character flaws of your "author."  
 
 

You have no idea how much that comment means to me. My wife said it the other day and I almost cried. 

It's like reading a new edition of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Humm...question: is being addicted a physical effect or a mental effect of the pheromones? If it is a mental effect, then it should be "based on OMCV" and go against EGO ("this smell is so pleasing to me...I want to smell it again"). If not, then not ("i must smell it again or I get them shakes doctor. Where can I find that smell? Where?!").

To be specific, it would be a Minor Transform if the Dependence (Addiction) Complication being added is 10 points or less, and a Major Transform if the Dependence (Addiction) is 15-20 points.
 
If her AoE Mind Control is Cumulative, I'd just link a smaller Transform to it (Transform is inherently cumulative unless bought as All or Nothing), with the Limitation that it doesn't take effect until EGO+30 is achieved from the Mind Control, even if > 2x BODY is rolled.
 

I agree with Grailknight.
 
This would be along the lines of a Major Transform.
 
Players often think along the lines of "turn them to stone!" with Transform, but there are many more subtle effects that work best with this power.

This would be a classic example of a Transform.
 
It would be a  Limited Power only to targets she had achieved the EGO+30 against and either Constant or Damage Over Time, shutting off whenever the target makes a breakout roll for the Mental Power.

Archer said, "Don't let the players trap you into logical corners. They can use their character's science skills to figure out how their world works. They shouldn't be allowed to change how the world works because their player argues with you about how they don't like the physical laws of your game universe."
 
As GM, discuss your world with the players first. Find out what they like and don't like, and hear them out. As someone said a long time ago, "Listen to your players because they often come up with better ideas than you did." (paraphrased). I've been in one campaign where the GM was unbending and it fell apart in 2 episodes. They may not be able to change how the world works, but I hope they can make it a better place.

Someone posted this picture (along with an offer to sell one to anyone interested) on the Book of Face.
 
I immediately saved a copy for use in my discussion on why the rest of the world uses the metric system.

I was thinking about this last night (I don't know why) and the more I did, the more I thought that I would just add UBO on the Senses or Sense Groups you want others to use. It will give you the broadest options in regards to "how it works" you can make the targeting Mental (so it's targeting is LOS), Usable Only Through Mind Link (-0 ) or keep the ranged targeting rules for UOO as is (see UOO Table Champions Complete p. 119.
 
See Champions Complete Pg 80. Mind Link- No LOS  for a great way to do this without range or LOS.
 
And finally the UOO rules provide a way to make differing Ad/Disads for the Recipient and Grantor for example the Grantor may need to uses Gestures or Incantation (Say if its a Spell) whereas the Recipient may not. Telepathy would get a bit twisty to get adjust correctly IMO. 
 
Additionally, Telepathy also includes the ability to "read" minds, on a moral or "Feeling of the Power" sense, allowing someone to access your senses as opposed to transmitting your sensations definitely have a different feeling to them though you can Ad/Disad it any way you want so it ends up working.
 
Either way, good luck and enjoy!
 
  

The Witiko--also known as the Wendigo--is written up on page 100 of "Ghosts, Ghouls, & Golems" by Michael Surbrook.
 
Scott Bennie's "Champions of the North" for 5th edition has Wen-Di-Go on page 64.  It's a stat block, list of abilities, disads, some notes about the legends of the Algonquin people, and suggestions on adapting the character to Champions games.

my favorite part about this is that hulk and she hulk are cousins

For what it's worth, you can, from time to time, pick up an old print copy for about the same price--I got my back-up copy for about five bucks and 3 dollars shipping.  It even still had the arena maps (though the Car Wars counters were missing).
 
Its just me.  Eventually, I want PDFs of _everything (that's how the Western and Horror HERO books came to be here) - and I've got a huge selection of them already, to be sure! -  but I will always prefer to hold, smell, hear, and read a book.  To _that_ end, I've been slowly working on getting a minimum of ywo copies of everything 4e and older, and two copies of 5e Revised and Sidekick revised rules books. 
 
I also intend to get one copy of each of the blue books for 6e (and _possibly_ a second copy of 6e Sidekick (sorry, "Basic") but I kind of doubt I'll bother). 
 
Not _exactly_ sure why, but let's remember I'm the guy with 13 copies of the 2e rules book, so.....   
 
 
Hey:
 
On that subject, is there anyone who needs and _will use_ the 6e blue book HERO System Skills?  I ordered Skills and Grimoire on a single order (used, excellent condition) from a book finder service, and ended up getting two copies of Skills. 
 
Caveat: if you have 5e "Ultimate Skill," then you do not need this book.  It is a word-for word reprint of that book.  You will find that references to a page number in one of them is equally valid for a page number in the other. 
 
Worse still, the splash page is a black-and-white version of the cover of Ultimate Skill.  I seriously dislike that cover.  Absolutely nothing wrong the art; nothing at all.  I just think it would be more suited for "Ultimate Gadgeteer" or something, given that the guy on the cover is running and cobbling some tech, and looking far to frantic to be someone in possession of "ultimate skill.". ;). I don't know: as much as I don't like him, the phrase "ultimate skill" conjures immediately images of Batman or Terminator (is that right?  Black and orange one-eyed mask with scale mail sleeves and legs?), who have unflappable faith in their skills, and not some guy running through a cluttered apartment in a near-panic.  Great art; bad match. 
 
 
Anyway, if you need and will use it, it's free to a good home. 
 
A few weeks ago I found myself with a second copy of CC and gave it to Ruggles; some time before that I had too many 3e bestiaries, and gave one to Goodwin.  Either can attest that the packing will be postal-worker proof.    You'd have to go straight to UPS to get them damaged.   

Its things like this that are why I posted.  Didn't know that existed.
 
I was going to post more of my thoughts on those subjects, but pesky eyelids kept blocking my vision.
 
I think I'm gonna follow through on my thoughts before reading Autoduel Champions.
 
Chris.

And if you really want to avoid Claisentience and have a reasonably inexpensive build, go with Telepathy. 
 
Moreover, Telepathy may be more appropriate because of a built-in limitation that Claisentience does not have. 
 
A Claisentience-based build is essentially "here; use my eyes!"  (or ears or tongue or what-have-you).  There is no inherent limit to what the recipient will perceive, so long as it is in the range of the borrowed perceiving neurons.
 
So if you want to build "take another look" or "am I missing anything?" (both wonderful ideas that I am now in love with, by the way, and will have to work into Danica.  Thanks!  ), then I suggest Clairsentience is ideal: the borrower gets his own perception roll to notice whatever might be in the lender's field of perception.
 
But there's a drawback as well:  if you're building "Let me show you something," well, they might not see it.  They might, using the same eyes you saw it through, not actually see it because of a flubbed perception roll. 
 
With Telepathy-
 
Well, Telepathy is a communication medium.  You can use it to describe, in as exacting a detail as you wish, everything that you are perceiving.  Owing to the odd "monologuing takes no time" rule, it's barely even a hand wave to turn that into "describing what I see in absolute minutiae takes no time," which actually makes _more_ sense when you apply the SFX of this power as "you can see what I can see." mostly because you don't _actually_ have to describe every little thing:  the borrower is seeing it with you. 
 
Now how are these builds functionally different? 
 
As noted, with Clairsentience, the borrower is borrowing your senses to make his own perception roll.  He is seeing what _he_ sees with your eyes, and not necessarily what _you_ see, with all the pros and cons inherent to that concept. 
 
With Telepathy, he needs no perception roll, as he sees exactly what you see (because that is all you would ever be able to describe to him, after all) making it a certainty that, if you are trying to show him a specific thing, he _will_ see it.  Of course, he will never be able to perceive what you do not perceive, even if it is in plain sight: he is getting the exact image that your brain is recording, so to speak. 
 
At first blush, the differences don't seem significant, as they both do _generally_ the same thing.   The most critical difference is if the two characters are seeing _from the same vantage point_, or if they are seeing _the same thing_. 
 
If you will bear with me for an anecdotal example, some years ago my wife and I attended a rally in north Georgia.  Short version:
 
The entire group ended up at an observational pull-off in Tennessee and we pulled off for chatting, clothes changing (those wanted to) and rest (for those with tender backsides).  A lot of us wandered over to a line of post-mounted binoculars to peer into the valley or the hills the other side of it. 
 
My wife was quite impressed with what she saw, and begged me to take look. 
 
I saw a _sweet_ looking Suzuki Samurai, silver with red stripes and a beige soft top; it was an exact copy of the one I owned before Dan "the Fraud" Rather faked his investigative report into the dangers of the Sammy (I think you Aussies call it the Jutney or something like that?), prompting no end of hell from the woman I was with at the time until I sold it just to keep the peace.  (I loved that stupid thing: best camping and fishing car _ever_!) 
 
I giggled, commented to my wife that it brought back memories, and I thanked her. 
 
And she asked me what the hell I was talking about. 
 
Apparently, I was _supposed_ to notice the home with the creek running behind it and the for-sale sign in front.  I missed that completely. 
 
And that's how the Clairsentience build will work without handwaving it otherwise. 
 
 

Don’t forget the Bride in Kill Bill did the same thing with ordinary Str and some Martial Arts.

So he's just putting an unconscious person in a box and burying it, via purely mundane methods?  I wouldn't represent that as a power.  Not everything should be a power, this is just an application of a box and the environment.