dsatow

I was just thinking of secret/public ids.  Here's a few more tidbits I'd thought I'd interject.
 
I remember the Lex Luther/Flash scene and also Lex Luther and Superman, where Lex uses a massive computer program to determine Superman's real identity and surmises the computer is wrong as Superman would never stoop to being the common reporter, Clark Kent.
 
People like Doctor Doom have a Secret ID even though everyone know who Doctor Doom is.  Without his mask on, no one knows what Doom looks like now except for a very few people.
 
There are a lot of people who look like each other but are unrelated.  In Doctor Who, the Doctor says that it just coincidence and that after living 10+ lifetimes he believes that there are just so many major templates out there in genetics for the way people look.  In reality, facial recognition is probably about 90-99% accurate which may sound like a lot, but given a 1000 people that means somewhere from 10-100 people will be wrongly classified.  In a small town of 10,000 people that 100-1000 suspects.  In a city with a 500,000 people, thats 5000-50000 people.
 
A lot of TV shows and movies show people enhancing video images to get fairly clear pictures of the target.  Unfortunately, that usually doesn't work.  Most security cameras record to either tape (and the tape gets reused over and over resulting in grainy images) or are digital.  Digital images are usually from cameras that while they can possibly record at high images, for the sake of space, record at a lower image (1024x768 to 640x480).  Some security cameras also will only take one picture every second or two, and while the resolution is higher, they are not like your dSLR and the image is still fairly low.  Advancements have been made to programmablely extrapolate images based on existing data but the less data there is, the worse the extrapolation.  This kind of image extrapolation is cutting edge, university grant level work being done.
 
While any single vector of classification is not perfect for identifying people (except if your a minority in certain parts of the country - take a knee), most courts attempt use multiple vectors to validate your presence at a crime scene.  If each is 95% and there are 5 different things to identify you were there, then out of 4 million people, there is only 1 person it could be. (4000000 * 0.05 * 0.05 * 0.05 * 0.05 * 0.05 = 1.25)
 
 
 
 
 

The convention has several grades of game content akin to the movie rating system.  There's family, mainstream, mature, and very complex.  Family is like the G rated movie.  Mainstream is like the PG/PG-13 standard and is similar to what you see most games as being designed for.  Mature usually corresponds to R content with more adult themes and language.  Very complex doesn't apply to RPGs and is not content related but rather related to how complex the rules are for board games, card games, miniatures, etc.

I agree that 6th shouldn't be discounted as one of the best but there are a number of broken items.
Changing Force Wall to Barrier created an effectiveness problem in that you can easily entrap people in circular wars with high amounts of BODY and no defenses.  While tunneling does get around the issue, not every superhero or character should have some form of tunneling. Growth uses almost the same level of disadvantage for size as Density Increase uses but the disadvantage of Growth increase as you get bigger and bigger but the complication cost calculated into the power remains the same.  A -2 DCV isn't the same as a -4 DCV nor a -6 DCV.  In older versions of growth, the cost was linear but the current version after the second level of growth, the change in cost leaps due to the cost of AoE Strength. The merger of multiple attack with multiple move by has broken many speedster builds.  Now, doing a multiple move by drops your DCV by 1/2 regardless of the number of targets.   Some other problems that have existed prior to 6th:
Flying Dodge is the ultimate dive for cover/defense move.  It better than a normal dodge, you can abort to it, you get a full movement while doing it and you are considered to be standing at the end of it (no longer prone). Because martial arts are so cheap, many move by artists will buy a passing strike, charge, et al. rather than use move by or move through  The maneuvers do not have the take 1/2 or 1/3 damage rules to them and better CVs. Change environment ability to enforce an ability roll can be problematic.  The classic example is an oil slick.  Its fairly easy to create a large slippery area with a -6 to a Dex roll or fall for fairly cheap. Finally, there are items in 6th which people don't like which seems, at least to me, to be personal taste:
No more find weakness/lack of weakness. No more figured stats. Penetrating requiring a impenetrable as a defense instead of hardened. Damage Negation.

Figured Characteristics vs. Non Figured Characteristics
I was originally in the figured characteristics camp until I used the non-figured characteristics for a few games and found it wasn't bad.  The best thing about it now, was the ability to aid OCV or DCV without affecting one's position in the tripsheet.  Another advantage I've found is that many times when instructing new players to the game, the question would come up "Why is my Dex/Str/Con so high?"  The answer would be, "Because its more efficient".  By uncoupling that, the Hulk doesn't need levels or a high Dex to get the great OCV, he just buys a great OCV.
 
Transfer
I do feel that transfer should have stayed in but maybe with a higher cost much in the same vein as why Regen was brought back; it's annoying to buy two powers and then have to laden them with limitations to link them when the original implementation worked and no one really complained.  Is it a deal breaker?  Not for me, but it is annoying and I understand why it was done, I just don't think it really needed to be done.

Just a side note
 
Before 4th edition came out, I got to see 'test copies' in 86.  The test copies went to a lot of people and their feedback was used in the development of the game.  However, the final say in what the change should be is by the author or authors as 4th was written by three authors (George MacDonald, Steve Peterson, and Rob Bell).  5th and 6th had more of a single author in Steve Long.  By 5th/6th forums were more popular and Steve Long was on the forums, but it is incorrect to say that 4th didn't have input from a lot of people.
 
 

Just a side note
 
Before 4th edition came out, I got to see 'test copies' in 86.  The test copies went to a lot of people and their feedback was used in the development of the game.  However, the final say in what the change should be is by the author or authors as 4th was written by three authors (George MacDonald, Steve Peterson, and Rob Bell).  5th and 6th had more of a single author in Steve Long.  By 5th/6th forums were more popular and Steve Long was on the forums, but it is incorrect to say that 4th didn't have input from a lot of people.
 
 

Just a side note
 
Before 4th edition came out, I got to see 'test copies' in 86.  The test copies went to a lot of people and their feedback was used in the development of the game.  However, the final say in what the change should be is by the author or authors as 4th was written by three authors (George MacDonald, Steve Peterson, and Rob Bell).  5th and 6th had more of a single author in Steve Long.  By 5th/6th forums were more popular and Steve Long was on the forums, but it is incorrect to say that 4th didn't have input from a lot of people.
 
 

Just a side note
 
Before 4th edition came out, I got to see 'test copies' in 86.  The test copies went to a lot of people and their feedback was used in the development of the game.  However, the final say in what the change should be is by the author or authors as 4th was written by three authors (George MacDonald, Steve Peterson, and Rob Bell).  5th and 6th had more of a single author in Steve Long.  By 5th/6th forums were more popular and Steve Long was on the forums, but it is incorrect to say that 4th didn't have input from a lot of people.
 
 

Figured Characteristics vs. Non Figured Characteristics
I was originally in the figured characteristics camp until I used the non-figured characteristics for a few games and found it wasn't bad.  The best thing about it now, was the ability to aid OCV or DCV without affecting one's position in the tripsheet.  Another advantage I've found is that many times when instructing new players to the game, the question would come up "Why is my Dex/Str/Con so high?"  The answer would be, "Because its more efficient".  By uncoupling that, the Hulk doesn't need levels or a high Dex to get the great OCV, he just buys a great OCV.
 
Transfer
I do feel that transfer should have stayed in but maybe with a higher cost much in the same vein as why Regen was brought back; it's annoying to buy two powers and then have to laden them with limitations to link them when the original implementation worked and no one really complained.  Is it a deal breaker?  Not for me, but it is annoying and I understand why it was done, I just don't think it really needed to be done.

You seem of the opinion that using Figured Characteristics is "simple" and not using them is "complex." I note that this is not a universal opinion.
 
Lucius Alexander
 
I am of the opinion that every tagline of mine should include at least one palindromedary. This is probably not a universal opinion but I happen not to care.

I agree that 6th shouldn't be discounted as one of the best but there are a number of broken items.
Changing Force Wall to Barrier created an effectiveness problem in that you can easily entrap people in circular wars with high amounts of BODY and no defenses.  While tunneling does get around the issue, not every superhero or character should have some form of tunneling. Growth uses almost the same level of disadvantage for size as Density Increase uses but the disadvantage of Growth increase as you get bigger and bigger but the complication cost calculated into the power remains the same.  A -2 DCV isn't the same as a -4 DCV nor a -6 DCV.  In older versions of growth, the cost was linear but the current version after the second level of growth, the change in cost leaps due to the cost of AoE Strength. The merger of multiple attack with multiple move by has broken many speedster builds.  Now, doing a multiple move by drops your DCV by 1/2 regardless of the number of targets.   Some other problems that have existed prior to 6th:
Flying Dodge is the ultimate dive for cover/defense move.  It better than a normal dodge, you can abort to it, you get a full movement while doing it and you are considered to be standing at the end of it (no longer prone). Because martial arts are so cheap, many move by artists will buy a passing strike, charge, et al. rather than use move by or move through  The maneuvers do not have the take 1/2 or 1/3 damage rules to them and better CVs. Change environment ability to enforce an ability roll can be problematic.  The classic example is an oil slick.  Its fairly easy to create a large slippery area with a -6 to a Dex roll or fall for fairly cheap. Finally, there are items in 6th which people don't like which seems, at least to me, to be personal taste:
No more find weakness/lack of weakness. No more figured stats. Penetrating requiring a impenetrable as a defense instead of hardened. Damage Negation.

I agree that 6th shouldn't be discounted as one of the best but there are a number of broken items.
Changing Force Wall to Barrier created an effectiveness problem in that you can easily entrap people in circular wars with high amounts of BODY and no defenses.  While tunneling does get around the issue, not every superhero or character should have some form of tunneling. Growth uses almost the same level of disadvantage for size as Density Increase uses but the disadvantage of Growth increase as you get bigger and bigger but the complication cost calculated into the power remains the same.  A -2 DCV isn't the same as a -4 DCV nor a -6 DCV.  In older versions of growth, the cost was linear but the current version after the second level of growth, the change in cost leaps due to the cost of AoE Strength. The merger of multiple attack with multiple move by has broken many speedster builds.  Now, doing a multiple move by drops your DCV by 1/2 regardless of the number of targets.   Some other problems that have existed prior to 6th:
Flying Dodge is the ultimate dive for cover/defense move.  It better than a normal dodge, you can abort to it, you get a full movement while doing it and you are considered to be standing at the end of it (no longer prone). Because martial arts are so cheap, many move by artists will buy a passing strike, charge, et al. rather than use move by or move through  The maneuvers do not have the take 1/2 or 1/3 damage rules to them and better CVs. Change environment ability to enforce an ability roll can be problematic.  The classic example is an oil slick.  Its fairly easy to create a large slippery area with a -6 to a Dex roll or fall for fairly cheap. Finally, there are items in 6th which people don't like which seems, at least to me, to be personal taste:
No more find weakness/lack of weakness. No more figured stats. Penetrating requiring a impenetrable as a defense instead of hardened. Damage Negation.

Since the expectation is the character will last years, I'd handwave it.

Since the expectation is the character will last years, I'd handwave it.

I think we are pretty much in agreement, but I still think licensing isn't a problem if the people who own the property do not produce widely available commercial products.  The Kickstarters are nice (though overly written) but they do not have as much impact as a store placed product.

The value of a limitation is subjective to the GM, players and campaign.  A -1 limitation is just a general starting point for an estimated 1/2 effective use case and one can argue that "offensively", Presence only for attacking can be used in skills more easily like in Oratory.  Depending on the GM and playstyle of the players, I can see the limitation being -1/2 to -1 1/2, so a general -1 seems fine to me.

Probably a PS: Detective roll or something like it

I would also put in, "Except for damage, roll low, not high."

I find it generally less annoying and requiring less problems when I tell players that "any abort to movement requires a successful dex roll a la dive for cover" as a house rule.

GURPS.....

I started a campaign once where I asked the players to come up with some common origin for their characters. What they ultimately came up with was this: They were all VIPER agents that the organization considered troublesome and/or expendable and left to die in a major multi-Nest operation, only they all got super powers instead.
 
The first adventure involved them deciding to rob a bank, only when they got there, another super villain group was already robbing it. So they beat down the other villains, and everybody assumed that they were heroes. So they decided to try being heroes.
 
It was a fun dynamic.

Champions: New Millennium
 
...I'll show myself out.

I'd use Summon to do this … specifically with a limitation that requires a nearby adult (akin to a MacGyver-like gadgeteer who can use any OAF for his/her gadgetry) … in addition to the 'arrives under own power' limitation … and a limited form (meaning -1 instead of -2) of 'no conscious control' impacting only the effects of the Summon such that the GM, not the kid, would control the super hero.  The Summon SFX would, of course, be that the nearby adult becomes a super hero (perhaps even doing the Superman thing to run and rip off the Clark Kent costume).
 
For Advantages, I think Amicable would probably make sense, as well as IPE.  
 
This approach would entail the super hero always being the same in terms of powers and the like … at least as I'd build it.  You could certainly go for a class of beings, but I think that gets unnecessarily hard in terms of GM work required to execute it.  I also tend to think it'd be more interesting for the same super to always show up when the kid's around, just because it makes for an interesting plot hook once someone picks up on it.  (And, of course, the kid probably has his/her favourite hero and that's who s/he's likely steadily wishing to be present, cheering on, etc.)

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. 

Likewise. I usually use d6-1 to differentiate between weapons or ammo type as it adds a little more granularity in low power games and the equipment isn't bought with points.