Talon

I balanced the two via special effect. A fighter was pretty much limited to normal weapons and armor, while a mage could do all sorts of crazy stuff. (I in fact limited mages to the point where their combat potential was much lower than that of a fighter; if you wanted to be a combat monster, you played a fighter.) This was in a low-magic setting, though, so the fighters couldn't pick up lots of magic to compensate.

Unlike real items, his spells can't be confiscated or spotted (by non-magical means); his light can't be blown out by wind or rain, etc.. Depending on the campaign, that can be a very large advantage.

Because the first limitations get you more points than successive limitations. Consider a 60 point power. At -1/4, the cost is 48: 12 points saved. At -1/2, the cost is 40: another 8 points saved. At -3/4, the cost is 34: another 6 points saved. At -1, the cost is 30: another 4 points saved. Since the -1/4 Limitation that takes you from -3/4 to -1 is just as limiting as the one which takes you from 0 to -1/4, you clearly get more bang for your buck with the first limitation.

An upcoming product called Galactic Champions is more along the lines of what you are thinking -- superheroes at the galaxy level, real high power levels, etc. Currently scheduled for early 2004, according to the "Our Products" page.

Re: Another problem : creating a "global" mental power With this as the main idea behind the character, a Variable Power Pool is probably the best answer. A VPP lets you create powers on the fly, so you can do "anything". You can either use the built-in Skill Roll to change the pool, or buy it off and apply a different "task number" limitation to get the roll exactly where you and the GM want it.

One solution is to stop making the magic user pay for spells. Several magic systems have been proposed which treat spells like equipment: you might pay for the skills to use magic, but the power itself is external. Of course, this tends to make magic very cheap, which doesn't sound like what you want. You might try decoupling paying points for power level and paying points for spells. Example: mages must buy Cosmic VPPs with Gestures/Incantations on the control cost, along with "can only learn spells at rate determined by study and GM fiat.". Mage spends XP to increase overall power level, but then learning spells does not require XP, just roleplay as determined by the GM. That works, but a 160 point Cosmic VPP is going to get a little expensive. So mix in a little of the "don't pay for spells" philosophy: mages pay for the control cost, but not the base pool (the pool is there, but the campaign world pays for it). Thus, 10 active points might cost something like 7.5 XP (5 control, +2 advantages, -1 limitations); a 160 point pool would cost 120 points, which is a big chunk of XP but not wholly unreasonable. If you still want PCs to spend XP for spells, require a KS: Spell for each spell they use (note that the cost of the KS remains the same regardless of power level). Hope these ideas are of use.

Re: HEEEEEEEELPPPPPPP! Hahahahahahahahaha that's a good one. It seems to me that you are having trouble at least in part because you haven't specified what it is you are looking for. I would suggest writing up spells for sample mages at various stages (weak NPC, starting PC, mid-campaign PC, maxed out PC, master villain NPC, etc.). Don't write up the whole character (obviously you can't, yet), just focus on the spells. Once you have those down, you'll have some idea what it is you need to cram into your design space, and the right solution should hopefully present itself.

If it's purely bad, make it a Disad. Based on the numerous examples of Trigger sprinkled throughout the system, it's possible to have a Trigger that auto-resets simply by getting the GM's permission. Personally, I'd require at least the Persistent Advantage before considering it.

Count another vote here, working on a few more. I also would have picked Star Hero above Champions...but splitting the vote = bad so I didn't.

I'd like to see something more than "some weapons don't cut well through some things"; perhaps some guidelines or even concrete examples for: -- Cutting a stone wall with a sword -- Cutting a sail with arrows -- Cutting an oak door with swords

I think the difference is that the text for Summon doesn't say "take the points of the creature you want to Summon and divide by 5." It says "1 point for 5 points". Thus, no rounding should be involved. Should.

I don't think that's right -- Summon isn't rounding, it's "1 point for 5 Summon points". If you want less than 5 points, you still have to pay the one point. (Hero Designer has a 56 point summon as costing 12 points, and it tends to be right about these things.)

It's easy to fix if it bugs you: just give the weapon a limitation "Always functions at campaign average SPD". Should be a -0, as long as you get "campaign average" right.

Guess it's time to plug my article on this subject. Extra DCs boost the base damage of unarmed attacks (even unarmed KAs), but not of weapon-based attacks. This is true in heroic and superheroic games.

Nope, maneuver bonuses are capped by the 2x limit. Extra DCs add to the base damage, but only for unarmed attacks.

Transform is clearly the best option here.

These damage rules are among the most complex in Hero -- don't feel bad about being a little unsure. 4 1/2d6 is right, assuming you're allowing the half-die which I believe is optional (but I recommend it). Martial Strike would add 2d6, but the weapon caps at 2x base damage if you are in a heroic campaign. If you're in a superheroic campaign, the STR adds to the base damage, so you'd do 4 1/2 + 2d6 = 6 1/2d6. For the Katana, technically the extra 3 STR doesn't do anything, you need a full 5 to push the damage up 1 DC. As GM, though, it's certainly within your power to round to make things more interesting; just be aware that some players may be tempted to take advantage of this. By the rules, it would be: 1 1/2d6 base damage 1H or 2H; 2d6 with Martial Strike 2d6+1 with Off. Strike

Read Dune.

I think Multiform in a VPP would cover it pretty well. Apply whatever NCC variant you feel is appropriate.

If it's an AI, turn it on and ask it to name itself.

Support for Holding an action, Stunning people, and other who-goes-when stuff (Hipshot, Hurry, etc.) would probably be the best thing.

It's really true for D&D too -- it's just that most D&D campaigns don't aim for architectural realism. After all, D&D uses 5' squares and Hero uses 6' hexes, not that different. Try measuring your house/apartment in Hero or D&D terms sometime and see for yourself.

One option would be to give him a base SPD of 3, and then extra SPD "only for Mental Powers" -- he's quick of mind but not of foot. Conveniently, this works out best if his mental speed is double his base SPD -- now you have an excuse to be SPD 6.

Heh, I limited /starting/ SPD to 5 once and had someone start with 5.9 "because it rounds down to 5" and they could go to 6 with their first XP.

This is pretty much a harsh version of Impairing/Disabling wounds, which can provide the lethality that many feel is lacking in the Hero System.