pawsplay

In my opinion, the Champions Now way is that if you can do just do lots of wild, varied stuff, you should do Variable. Plastic-Man? VPP. Hawkeye? VPP. Green Lantern? VPP.

Do you think Sith lightning is a cone AoE?

I will accept this description if you consider MS Office to be a below-medium app.

I think a simple punch would be an eligible choice, I'm just not coming up with reasons to apply Find Weakness to that. It seems like any kind of mystical or scientific or whatever punch would probably be a Martial Strike already.

In Champions Now, Endurance cost is by power points. There is nothing in the Modifiers suggestion that suggests they affect END, except for special cases. This is different from most Hero System games.

My suggestion is to do this as a fan project, then use your Internet fame to boost other projects you want to do with more commercial potential.

Pregens are cool, but generally I just expect players to submit their characters a week before the game starts.

i think it robs something of the experience for players not to at least try to come up with spells, Psychs, etc.

That sounds like a lot of work. It also means the players don't have to think about tradeoffs, and don't get to. Okay for newish players. I personally don't have that kind of time.

Dark Champions is arguably the genre of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (graphical lit, not the kiddie cartoons).

The other way to discourage everyone from playing a mage is having powers medium-costly both in terms of points and requirements. Which takes us back to the OP: Multipowers aren't generally used in FH because they are too "easy" and tend to be thematically weak, not because they are inherently more powerful.

Simple: "Victory" sign while gazing at your target. Complex: ASL interpretation for The Realm Slim Shady while twirling your Focus (burning censer)

If you have to do the Hokey Pokey, that's arguably Restrainable as well.

I can actually think of a lots of spellcasting protagonists, even part timers. Lythande, from Thieves World, swordsman-mage; Grey Mouser, thief-fighter-magic-user; Harry Potter, ace pilot and wizard; Luke Skywalker, ace pilot and wizard; Willow, farmer/rogue/wizard. A lot of this goes back to the Combat Luck controversy. Sometimes, it is inappropriate. But in high action games, when your dodgy characters get hit, they don't usually go down in one hit, and that's what Combat Luck does for you. Different options make sense for different campaigns. Some campaigns might ban Variable Power Pool. Others might require ALL spells to be Variable Power Pool. Some campaigns might ban Multipower. Others might require it for the standard set of magic spells.

I don't automatically take Vulnerability, but if it makes sense, it's an easy go to. Particularly if I'm already squeezing my brain trying to come up with another Psych. If you look at Champions 3e characters, a lot of them have Vulnerabilities. You might think, well, if I take that, I'm going to end up paste. That's likely to happen anyway. If you're a flying blaster, it's all fun and games until you are Flashed and Entangled. Vulnerability can actually be an asset, because if you have a Vulnerability to fire, and the GM brings out a fire enemy, you know, "Okay, this one is gunning for me." Someone mentioned Hunted as an easy option you can take instead. The inability to Presence Attack a Hunted, IMO, actually makes them potentially more dangerous. Presence is situational but can affect anybody. With a Hunted, there will be baddies you have no choice but to take head-on in some fashion.

Batman has Missile Deflection. Apart from that, he can move into the hazard's area, where it works like an Entangle, and start taking them out with his high SPD. As long as there isn't room for them to regroup and use their Blast, he doesn't have to worry about armor.

I have the concept down, I think. What I'm a little iffy on is the "typical" numbers. Gang of Tommy Gun toting thematic thugs spraying down bullets Defense: Missile Deflection Effect: 4d6 Piercing Blast in a cone / 6d6 Entangle if you get up in their faces Let's imagine there's ten of them, sort of clustered together. Each "hex" is an ordinary person with DCV 6, Defense 0, and Body 10, with SPD of 2 and a move of 6 hexes. They also have a 2d6 Presence against presence attacks. So on their turn, everyone in their general area takes a bunch of damage unless they can make a Missile Deflection check, and things like Force Wall mitigate the effect. If you are punching or grabbing them, you instead get hit with an Entangle. On your turn, you can try to take out one or more hexes. So lets say you have 6d6 Blast and shoot at one. On a hit, you do 6 or so damage, so without extra effort you can probably take out one every other round pretty easily. If you have Mind Control, you can target each one individually with their Ego 11 and if you win, remove that "hex" from the hazard. Once all the hexes have been cleared, they are no longer a hazard. If they are conscious, they are defeated, or at least they can't do anything to attack. Maybe a thug starts pointing his gun and the hero just grabs it out of his hand and slaps the thug upside the head with it. Given the nature of suppression fire, heroes behind large objects aren't necessarily targeted. So against this hazard, squishier heroes without Missile Deflection probably hang back until they can move in and take out a smaller number of foes. The bad guys, in turn, can't do anything threatening unless they are staying more or less together as a hazard. One nameless thug can't duck behind a pillar and snipe someone.

Yeah. The book outright states movement speeds are combat speeds, not traveling speeds. EDIT: See Space and Time, starting on page 22.

You're preaching to the choir. I was just noting that if wizards have more options, expect that most characters will be wizards, even if only part-time.

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

On the other hand, buying SPD 4 and enough OCV and CSLs to hit has never been more straightforward.

Sure! Post your ideas.

"Guns should be a free-for-all" is not my position, and I have already stated above that I am in favor of regulation. Also, guns have plenty of uses not related to murder. The notorious AR-15 is essentially a semi-automatic deer hunting rifle. Any handgun might be used for sport-shooting. Guns of all types have historical and personal interest. I think it's useful for a sense of perspective to ask why Jane shouldn't fire a WWII era machine gun on her property because it interests her, yet I could go buy a used Ford F-150 and fill it with sacks of flour, a couple of box fans, and some gasoline. One of those scenarios definitely sounds more threatening to me than the other.

"Regulated" in the 18th century was often synonymous with "trained" or "functioning according to its purpose." Like a well-regulated clock. Something that is regular, in the positive sense. Here is a link to Wikipedia which discusses this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Meaning_of_"well_regulated_militia" The Second Amendment could be rendered: "Because of the need to be able to muster an effective, disciplined force of lawful civilians into a defensive force to protect the community in times of civil disorder or external threat, the government shall not unduly restrict the natural right of the citizens to have and use personal weapons suitable for that purpose." Which is why I believe the Second Amendment probably means the government cannot simply ban semiautomatic rifles, because those are the basic, modern type of personal firearm one would use for defense and order. However, I believe the second amendment allows, and perhaps demands, that someone exercising that right not be someone who would be excluded from being deputized or drafted, whether due to serious felonies or inability due to serious psychological or mental inability. I think the question can be posed, "Do you need a 30 round magazine to use on a regular basis, in order to meaningfully exercise that right?" And I think the answer is probably not, you can probably participate in suppressing a riot five rounds at a time. I think it's reasonable the government insist on some limits on items that are more likely to be used for mass murder than a reasonable, lawful act. So, for instance, high capacity magazines might require a special license. Because your use and training in a semiautomatic rifle could be of use in a "militia," said if you were deputized, or joined a service branch, I think a case could be made for "will-issue" licenses to people without a criminal history. That is, if you pay the license and fulfill the other requirements, the government probably can't restrict you from owning such a weapon and practicing with it on a firing range. Arguably, your Second Amendment rights could be modeled after European models, where rifles are assigned to people and the keeper practices regularly at a training center. But that does cut against a substantial amount of precedent. Notably the Second Amendment concerns the natural right of self-defense and community defense, not some abstract need to at a later date possibly dismantle the government itself.

"Well regulated" probably means something close to "competent." So it's possible to disqualify someone. You can't infringe a right someone doesn't have. Nothing about the 2nd Amendment suggests it allows lawless behavior.