pawsplay

"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.
 
 

"How and why did you learn that spell?" is equivalent to "How and why do you have a laser pistol?" No, you cannot just spend an experience point and learn any old spell. When your character was created, all their spells have a stated or implied origin in your character's magical training. That doesn't disappear just because you have an experience point. Further, if spells are supposed to be something that are hard to learn, you aren't necessarily entitled to spend those points willy-nilly. Learning a new spell every other month might be unreasonable. Just because you have points to spend on a Follower doesn't mean you can suddenly acquire a squire while traveling through the desert. You might be able to, but you have to justify it.

"How and why did you learn that spell?" is equivalent to "How and why do you have a laser pistol?" No, you cannot just spend an experience point and learn any old spell. When your character was created, all their spells have a stated or implied origin in your character's magical training. That doesn't disappear just because you have an experience point. Further, if spells are supposed to be something that are hard to learn, you aren't necessarily entitled to spend those points willy-nilly. Learning a new spell every other month might be unreasonable. Just because you have points to spend on a Follower doesn't mean you can suddenly acquire a squire while traveling through the desert. You might be able to, but you have to justify it.

I think we would solve a lot of problems simply by licensing firearms. There is nothing in the Second Amendment that would prevent the US government to simply require a basic license and background check, and taking away the gun-owning privileges of people who use them for illegal acts.

I'd say the same could apply to a magic item with multiple functions, or a special ability with multiple functions or a "path". 

Those are the same kinds of questions I'd ask a spellcaster at character creation, in Fantasy Hero.  I'd probably have a lot of the answers built into the magic systems.  
 
Part of "not D&D" means, no "level up" powers.  You don't get to freely spend XP willy nilly.  In fact that also goes for most of the Champions games I've ever played.
 
Fantasy Hero is GM driven in a way that Champions really isn't.

Also, all of this is true with or without magic (or not magic) Multipowers.

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

So what I hear is, I can play a character who has a laser pistol.

It isn't any different. The point of the random gadget multipower is to be enabling.  The point of not allowing a multipower for spells is not to be enabling. Gadget multipowers make sense if you want characters to have a bag of gadgets they can use one at a time. Multipower spells make sense if you want to have characters able to use a variety of spells, one at a time.
There are several main issues with spell Multipowers, even before you get into thematics. First, a battle with a mage on each side can quickly turn into Calvinball. That is, they start spitballing increasingly bizarre spell constructs at each other until someone rolls poorly or someone hits about the situationally useful spell construct. Second, spells can be had cheap. While that is not inherently gamebreaking, it's annoying. A character built around such shenanigans can trivialize a greater number of obstacles and can step on more toes. Third, character complexity shoots through the roof. A twenty-slot Multipower is not a joy in play. Fourth, every single slot needs to be vetted as its own power.
I'm not going to belabor thematics. I don't like magic to be too "easy" in the first place. Putting a bunch of easy spells into a framework that makes things easy is not something I find appealing. I don't want to run a game where a character goes, oh, I switch to this slot and cast this spell. Then I switch and cast this spell. With every spell being basically a weapon, a can opener, or a frustrating defense. Even comic book mages like Doctor Strange don't work this way. He has dozens of commonly used spells, but similar spells have similar limitations. Some of his magic requires his Orb. Some of it is personal magic, some of it is dimensional.
As far as thematics, the Multipower system leaves very little room for ritual magic.
I'm not saying the Multipower-of-whatever-spells system is wrong, I just think it has significant gameplay and thematic drawbacks. If you are going to allow a bunch of versatile super-mages as PCs, I think that does raise some questions about what else do you allow. Why shouldn't the fighter have a magical Multipower as well? What if someone wants to play a frost giant? Can the deceptive rogue have PRE 30? If you want to run a game where the PCs are fairly unlimited characters who can steamroller over a bunch of challenges before eventually succumbing to their inherent weaknesses, you certainly can.
In general, a Multipower that is unlimited in scope is just less magical, and hence less desirable to me.

Yet you are allowed to have a computer, a 3D printer, a sack of flour, and at least at present, an encrypted Internet connection, any one of which is capable of creating far more deaths than a a personal firearm. I think it lacks perspective to suggest one nut with a gun presents a real danger to society. What is dangerous are evil people in numbers. If someone wants to produce math deaths, a semi-automatic rifle is a paltry machine. But three hundred people with rifles, or with piles of bricks, can bring down an entire community. I am far more worried about a repeat of the Tulsa Race Riots, in which the weapon of choice was simply starting fires. An entire thriving black community was eradicated in a day.
I think it is actually sufficient justification to own an item that you find it interesting and potentially useful, even weapons. You lose that right when you turn that item for criminal ends. I'm not suggesting you be allowed to own a nuke, or that a .50 Browning should be fired inside the city limits. But if someone wants to take a machine gun and shoot up pumpkins and post the results on Youtube? I think there should be some provision for that be legal. I can't launch a hot air balloon from my front yard. But people can and do make a hobby out of launching hot air balloons, in the proper time and place, with the proper permits.

Yet you are allowed to have a computer, a 3D printer, a sack of flour, and at least at present, an encrypted Internet connection, any one of which is capable of creating far more deaths than a a personal firearm. I think it lacks perspective to suggest one nut with a gun presents a real danger to society. What is dangerous are evil people in numbers. If someone wants to produce math deaths, a semi-automatic rifle is a paltry machine. But three hundred people with rifles, or with piles of bricks, can bring down an entire community. I am far more worried about a repeat of the Tulsa Race Riots, in which the weapon of choice was simply starting fires. An entire thriving black community was eradicated in a day.
I think it is actually sufficient justification to own an item that you find it interesting and potentially useful, even weapons. You lose that right when you turn that item for criminal ends. I'm not suggesting you be allowed to own a nuke, or that a .50 Browning should be fired inside the city limits. But if someone wants to take a machine gun and shoot up pumpkins and post the results on Youtube? I think there should be some provision for that be legal. I can't launch a hot air balloon from my front yard. But people can and do make a hobby out of launching hot air balloons, in the proper time and place, with the proper permits.

"I am but a humble seller of wares."
"Why are you holding a wand with a skull on it?"
"Uh, family heirloom?"
"Is it for sale?"
"NO TOUCHIE."
 
Also your 1 point Telepathy isn't going to do a lot without Mind Scan.
 
I don't think you've proven Multipower is broken or abusive. It has tradeoffs. It's appropriate for some systems of magic, and inappropriate for others. It has a limited role in some systems of magic, and a common role in others. I wouldn't allow the Desolidification in the same multipower as mind control unless the campaign style was "kind of comic book style wizardry, with no discernible schools or magical traditions, and also all bets are off with the custom katana talents." Like in what conception does someone shift their powers between being desolid and reading minds? Saying "it's astral form" doesn't really cut it when that isn't like any astral form I've seen. Even in D&D that would be ethereal form, not astral form, and it has nothing to do with mind control.

Historically, it wasn't a part of the original Fantasy Hero and didn't fit the conception of magic given in 4th edition. However, if you dig around in FH you'll find some conversion notes that mention Multipower works really well for converting GURPS magic users. Multipowers generally aren't used in FH because the spells tend to require you to actively maintain them, you have to divide your powers between different effects, there isn't a big cost break for lots of Limitations, and you generally have to magic the magic thematically tight. If your fantasy campaign has a more "psychic" magic style, multipower works really well. It doesn't work all that well for D&D style wizards because they tend to mix it up between long duration "trap", portal, and protection spells, offensive spells, and some concentration effects like telekinesis.
One thing it does really well is for very versatile spells. Mystic Masters has some examples, like a Multipower of light spells that create various attacks and environmental effects. D&D spells that could this treatment include dispel evil, symbol, and imprisonment.

Yet you are allowed to have a computer, a 3D printer, a sack of flour, and at least at present, an encrypted Internet connection, any one of which is capable of creating far more deaths than a a personal firearm. I think it lacks perspective to suggest one nut with a gun presents a real danger to society. What is dangerous are evil people in numbers. If someone wants to produce math deaths, a semi-automatic rifle is a paltry machine. But three hundred people with rifles, or with piles of bricks, can bring down an entire community. I am far more worried about a repeat of the Tulsa Race Riots, in which the weapon of choice was simply starting fires. An entire thriving black community was eradicated in a day.
I think it is actually sufficient justification to own an item that you find it interesting and potentially useful, even weapons. You lose that right when you turn that item for criminal ends. I'm not suggesting you be allowed to own a nuke, or that a .50 Browning should be fired inside the city limits. But if someone wants to take a machine gun and shoot up pumpkins and post the results on Youtube? I think there should be some provision for that be legal. I can't launch a hot air balloon from my front yard. But people can and do make a hobby out of launching hot air balloons, in the proper time and place, with the proper permits.

I ran a Dark Champions campaign once that fizzled out because while I was picturing something like Batman the Animated Series several of my players made characters too dark for Watchmen.

Here's a list or equipment and trade goods I knocked together for my (wholly theoretical at this point) low fantasy game.
 
I should point out that I've applied a few whacky house rules. Most notably Armour Piercing is based on a suggestion here on the forums, it is a simple negative number applied to armour values, not a %. I've also renamed OCV, DCV, PD, and ED as Attack, Defence, PA, & EA, respectively.
 
Weights are based on a bit of googling. Money values for things are based on some vague aim of "game balance" and should be considered suggestions only. :-)
 
Money&Equipment.docx

I'm running a Fantasy Hero campaign set in the Hyborian Kingdoms, so I created a Hero Designer prefab with many different coins from several kingdoms with their relative values. It is easily adaptable to any fantasy setting, and can be downloaded here:
 
https://www.herogames.com/files/file/316-fh-hyborian-currency/
 
I based everything off the generic "silver piece" where 1SP = $1.00.  Feel free to adjust values accordingly.

I'd put all the wings powers into an EC, and then for the defensive maneuver make it Force Field, Constrained (not while flying)

Well, you could be excused if this advice sounds to you like a redundant expense; but Chapter Three of the full Fantasy Hero genre book, for both 5E and 6E, includes multiple tables with game stats for a wide range of weapons and armor, as well as descriptions and use notes for each item, guidelines for creating equipment, and much more; while the last five pages of the previous chapter is full of suggested price lists for all manner of goods and services.
 
If all you want is game stats and prices, the 5E book would more than suffice, and the PDF is only $10.00. Frankly, aside from system edition differences, the material covered in both books is nearly the same.

This is one of the wildest things I've ever purchased. In a nutshell, this is a remix of old school Champions, the superhero roleplaying game, first through third editions, by Ron "I am definitely modern gaming" Edwards of Sorcerer fame. The whole book is written in caffeinated, stream-of-consciousness format, defying decades of textbook-style game writing, in favor of a style I usually associate with hundred page spirals from the university print shop. To get right to the point, this is one of the most fun and exciting things in gaming I've read in years. If you have even one superhero game on your shelf, you owe it to yourself to buy this game. Why? I'll tell you why, true believers. That is, after all, the main point of a review.
Many people associate Champions with baroque, math-heavy character creation. My personal introduction began in a book store in the early 90s with a charming-looking hardback called Champions. After a quick thumb through, one thing jumped out at me: Energy Blast, 5 points per 1d6 damage. After learning from the amazing-but-chart-heavy classic DC Heroes and the quirky yet catchy Marvel Super Heroes games, this was like a bolt from the blue. You could just spend a few points for whatever you want, no scaling costs, no limits, and powers were as simple or as complex as you wanted them to be. And make no mistake, under the surface, Champions and Hero System retain that core of simplicity after six editions. You can still make a 6e Champions character with five powers, no modifiers, a handful of skills, and some characteristics. Champions Now takes that core and brings me right back to that bookstore. Make no mistake, Champions Now retains such familiar elements as modifiers and characteristics. Champions Now strips that right down to its essential core. There is only a bare minimum a new Champions player would need to sit down and join a game. Champions Now poses the question of our day: what do you really, truly, need beyond that? Moreover, "special effects" has long been a hallmark of Champions. While Champions 6e allows you to modify a power to a truly exacting description of its effects, "special effects" remain in play. Essentially, it's the idea that fire burns. Regardless of all the modifiers and costs on the worksheet, intended to capture the essence of an ability, the GM is supposed to use those artifacts of play to reflect a fictional narrative. Does your character know how to make sushi? Of course she does! There's no point value for that. Well, Champions Now brings that completely to the front. Everything is special effects. The Powers section is prefaced with the statement: "Although we call these “powers” for convenience, they aren’t. They’re rules to punch the powers’ special effects into play." I'm not sure that's something I want to spell out. It's a little like revealing a magician's tricks. But as a concept, it's a winner. This is well beyond Hero System's "What does this power really do?" This is beyond M&M's "these are effects that build powers." This is way back to Marvel Super Heroes, "Here is a somewhat rambling essay about Wolverine's regeneration masquerading as an entry on a character sheet," but, as Ron says, "with teeth."
Champions Now, however, is its own beast. Combat is very fast and very rough. Ron states repeatedly and emphatically that this is a "let the dice fall where they may" style game. This is not only true to the roots of such old school games, but is also a tool of design. From the get-go, Champions Now is about putting elements into play to see what happens. The GM designs a game around Two Statements, one of which is about superheroes and the other one isn't. Like you might have, "The characters are young adult mutants living in Greenwich Village," and "Friends who are family." Having put that in place, the GM turns things loose to the players. Each player is urged to build their character around three corners: person, powers, and problems. So you have Jennifer, a perpetually broke graduate student on the outs with her wealthy parents. She has lightning powers, but specifically, close-in, high voltage current. And she feels a lot of sense of responsibility for her powers. She also has, I don't know, a teenage cousin who moved in after running away from her alcoholic parents. There is no negotiation phase, no hash-it-out, no setting bible. It's more like one of those games where every participant adds a sentence to the story. Nonetheless, the game is built around integrity. Every element is intended to add change, excitement, and dare I hope, emotion to the game.
Mechanics fall into the "get out of the way" variety. Almost everything is special effects. A power consists of little more than how much, how often, and what is the result. Is it a Piercing blast? A damage Aura? As to what to do, Champions Now doubles and triples down on Champions's two most iconic elements. The first is Endurance. While a lot of modern games dispense with such resource accounting, this element will be very familiar to any MMO player who has had to deal with limited energy and powerful cool-downs. CN is all pacing. Sometimes you fire off a few punches. Sometimes you expend extra effort, dipping deep into your endurance reserves at some risk. Sometimes you hide behind a pillar and Recover while your allies hold the line. Characters are durable, but if you start to take punishment, you will go down fast as Endurance and Knockout quickly run out. The other iconic Champions element is the Presence Attack. Just as much as they are defined by punches, dodges, and energy blasts, Champions characters are defined by Presence. Some characters have just a little, just enough to cow an ordinary thug with your powers. Others literally stop the action just by talking into the room. More importantly, though, are situational modifiers. Just glaring at people in the middle of a pitched fight will get you nowhere. But if you stride into a room, announced, "You started with out me? How rude!" and toss a bad guy through a window with telekinesis while standing literally on top of table with a cutting-ceremony cake for two hundred, you get a few extra dice. Online combat per se with its beat by beat pacing, Presence Attacks take no action, little time, and can happen at any moment, even, if you can get a word in edgewise, on someone else's turn. Presence Attacks reinforce the tropes of superheroes while encouraging constant, dig-deep inventiveness.
And what is a superhero, anyway? Early Batman hung guys out windows to their deaths. Superman ricocheted bullets right back at bad guys, ending them karmically. Later Batman refused to kill at all. Iron Man wrestled with alcoholism. DCAU series Wonder Woman was an out-and-out warrior, but with the heart and boundless compassion the character is known for. Champions Now focuses on the pulpy, messy, forget-continuity-the-Watcher-will-know-his-own style, mostly from the early Silver Age to the early Bronze. But literally, there is no telling you want to do. This could be the Mystery Men movie, or The Specials. It could be the New 52. It could be your own version of Cold War era do-gooders. It could be Cold War era style do-gooders, in the 21st century. Guys in goggles. Women in tights. Gorillas in football jersies. Ten year old wizards. Twenty foot tall anthropomorphic dogs. Lovable kid sidekicks. Terrifying actual-kid sidekicks in danger.
This is not a perfect book. Like the game it contains, like the media and stories it seeks to unleash, this lo-fi, superheropunk, indiepunk, retro-futuro madness. This is not the most accessible game to dive into and read. Still, if you walk with this book, if you read this book through once without trying to understand it all, if you go back and read it again, and jump around to the different parts until you get it, this thing will get inside you. If I had any complaint, it's that there is no newbie-friendly capsule version. Mind you, that won't capture the full spirit of what Ron is trying to accomplish here. But I think it might be a bit much to expect your average player to "get it" on the first time through. Make no mistake, though, this is a very accessible game to a new group, if presented in actual play. If one or two players make the effort of digging deep into it, they can easily lead the way. And for a savvy GM, this game is a cinch to run and a cinch to teach. If CN really catches on, I think it could lead to a refined second edition, with maybe a few helpful pamphlets to fire up the coal in the engine. Such refinement, though, needs to be done carefully, lest this four-color rock star nerd magic of a game turn into a glossy, never-sweating, overproduced imitation of itself.
Even if you never play this game, by all means, at least read it. But play it.
Special Thanks to: Ron Edwards, Steve Long, George MacDonald, and Steve Peterson, long may they reign.

Honestly, this is just part of the larger and more general problem that swords are considered cool, but historically they are a specialized, secondary weapon. The samurai are associated with the katana, but during the height of medieval warfare in Japan, the chief weapons were the spear and the bow. European knights had their swords mythologized by 18th and 19th century writers who romanticized swords because fencing was popular. As in Japan, in Europe, the sword took on greater status as its utility on the open field of battle waned. The Roman gladius was a sidearm. During the Crusades era, the sword was popular in part because it could be depicted as cruciform, and the Arabic scimitar as a crescent, and this imagery persisted centuries later as the Crusades era became romanticized. But most of the actual killing during the Crusades was done by arrows, axes, maces, spears, and flails. High impact weapons were needed to breach mail or mangle flesh under it. The sword is incredibly effective in a duel, but as a general utility weapon, you would rather have a dagger in a scrum, a spear in a charge, and an axe against a well-armored foe. So all the arguments against swords and space are really just arguments against swords in general, but in space. In short, the reason to have lots of swords in space would be to resurrect the reason swords were popular in real life: duels, as status items for aristocrats, and as secondary weapons in pitched battles that hadn't quite got to the dagger/choking/atomic piledriver stage yet.
Daggers, though. You can always find a justification for a dagger.

In the USA. If you look at its overseas box office, it looks like a runaway hit.

Skill levels, only to negate penalties for aiming at the vitals.
Haymaker is fine, though. And there is nothing wrong with "everyone having sneak attack."

Honestly, this is just part of the larger and more general problem that swords are considered cool, but historically they are a specialized, secondary weapon. The samurai are associated with the katana, but during the height of medieval warfare in Japan, the chief weapons were the spear and the bow. European knights had their swords mythologized by 18th and 19th century writers who romanticized swords because fencing was popular. As in Japan, in Europe, the sword took on greater status as its utility on the open field of battle waned. The Roman gladius was a sidearm. During the Crusades era, the sword was popular in part because it could be depicted as cruciform, and the Arabic scimitar as a crescent, and this imagery persisted centuries later as the Crusades era became romanticized. But most of the actual killing during the Crusades was done by arrows, axes, maces, spears, and flails. High impact weapons were needed to breach mail or mangle flesh under it. The sword is incredibly effective in a duel, but as a general utility weapon, you would rather have a dagger in a scrum, a spear in a charge, and an axe against a well-armored foe. So all the arguments against swords and space are really just arguments against swords in general, but in space. In short, the reason to have lots of swords in space would be to resurrect the reason swords were popular in real life: duels, as status items for aristocrats, and as secondary weapons in pitched battles that hadn't quite got to the dagger/choking/atomic piledriver stage yet.
Daggers, though. You can always find a justification for a dagger.