Derek Hiemforth

Nothing I can think of; certainly nothing so cross-platform and cross-browser. However, I think I've narrowed it down to something related to my user account. Just for giggles, I downloaded Opera (so it was brand-new and completely untouched by me in any way). I went to herogames.com, and without logging into my account, went to the downloads area, and clicked on Submit a File. It didn't offer me the option to upload multiple files, but it worked this time when I selected a category and clicked Continue. (At least, it let me go to the next step.) When I logged in and tried again, I got the same error message as above. So there's something it doesn't like about my login. Maybe because there's a space in my "Display Name"...?

Yeah, the Talents section of the Champions Complete book itself actually refers the reader to the Free Stuff section of herogames.com to download the breakdown of how all the Talents were built.

Just tried again with the same result. It never lets me get as far as selecting a file. Just to see if it was specific to browser, OS, or other configurations, I tried it under Chrome, Firefox, and Safari under MacOS 11 (both with and without VPN enabled), and under Chrome, Firefox, and Edge under Windows 10 (both with and without VPN enabled). All resulted in the same error message before I select a file. I've been going to Browse > Downloads, and clicking on the "Submit a File" button. I have to choose an option in order to continue, so I choose Hero System 6th Edition Documents, I don't select "I want to upload multiple files" (although I did try it that way; no difference), and then I click Continue, and get the error message shown above. Should I be doing something different to upload?

I just went to upload the first one to "Hero System 6th Edition Documents" using the Submit a File button, and I got the attached error message. @Simon, any ideas?

It looks like maybe these went away somewhere along the line, although I see that @Spence apparently re-added the Converting Characters document several years ago. I still have the others (Animals, Combat Example, Example Characters from Other Genres, and Talent Creation). Is there any interest in adding these back?

This is what Champions Complete did, and it seemed to work fine, as far as I've ever heard.

I like this idea. I'd suggest only putting the Talent descriptions and the critical "how this actually works in play" information in the main part of the book. The "under the hood" details of how the Talent was constructed from other Powers and such, I would put in an appendix at the back of the book (or maybe even put it in a free PDF download for folks who are interested, and don't put it in the book itself at all).

I think the biggest issues with GURPS are lack of granularity in its 4-stat core characteristics, and that it generally doesn't scale up as well as I'd like (which is why I think Hero is a better universal system). Hero has a bit of the opposite problem (not scaling down), but to a much lesser degree than I think GURPS has scaling up.

(added emphasis mine). I love DC Heroes for supers, and that's actually one of the things I liked about Tri-Stat. Their Body/Mind/Soul stats reminded me very much of how DC Heroes categorizes stats into Physical, Mental, and Mystical. Granted though, Tri-Stat collapses them all down into only three stats (instead of just using those concepts to categorize stats), and I can see how that might be not granular enough. I actually have that issue with using GURPS for supers; the stats don't seem granular enough to me.

Interesting that folks are down on the Tri-Stat system. I admit I never actually played it (or the d20 version of SAS), but reading it, it made a pretty favorable impression on me. It seemed pretty similar to Hero System in a lot of ways. I'm curious what Hero System fans disliked about it. Was it a matter of the similarities being only skin-deep, while the differences ran all the way to the core?

I wonder how well Champions Universe: News of the World sold back in the day. A chunk of that book was similar to this idea (updating existing characters to show their growth over time). Similar things have been in a couple other books too. I wonder whether they were strong sellers. Personally, I don't have any interest in a product that shows the same character in different editions of the rules, but I can see where it might make a good PDF product for folks who would dig it.

It wasn't clear. Many people interpreted it the way you describe, but it wasn't necessarily written that way. 5E made it explicit how it works.

AFAIK, he's a fictional character who only exists in Champions. So whatever background is in the Champions Universe material is the only background there is.

Because of course they have! 🤣🤣🤣

To me, it establishes that you can attack with full OCV. And I think that may also be part of why Clairsentience doesn't establish Line of Sight. For any "normal" attack (one without LOS targeting), then even if you have the target sighted with your Clairsentience (and are therefore perceiving them with a Targeting Sense), you still might need your attack to be Extended Range or Indirect or who knows what in order to be able to attack effectively, even if you have your full OCV. But with a LOS attack, if Clairsentience established LOS, then it would also bypass all of those other issues for free. That would make Mental Powers with Clairsentience much more powerful than "physical" powers with Clairsentience. Also, it's "Line of Sight," not just "Point of Sight." You not only need to see what you're aiming at... you also need to see what's between here and there.

I think I have to question the premise that automatons have some semblance of intelligence (with a lower-case "i") and therefore have a mind. They have an INT Characteristic (upper-case "I") and therefore have some way to measure how sophisticated they are in terms of how many commands they accept. A regular computer, likewise, has an INT, but no "mind." They have built in programs, or they can be operated, but can't "think" in any meaningful way. Only if they have EGO (i.e., only if they are an A.I.) can they think for themselves and really be said to have a "mind." Since the effect of Mental Powers is measured against EGO, they may not work on automatons/machines that don't have EGO. If they do, the GM will substitute INT for EGO as needed, but even in this case, I don't think that really implies that the automaton or computer has a "mind" per se. The game is just using the machine's complexity as a "stand-in" for a mind.

Maybe the robots could be the Zarkonoids! EDIT: Apparently, Pinecone and I were sharing a hive mind at the same moment...

Yep, that's what I'd do too. A VPP for Characteristics and miscellaneous Powers, and (at least one) build based on Cramming for Skills.

But not to the attack roll, which was the original question. Also, perception is much more under GM discretion than combat range modifiers are. If you fire an ordinary ranged weapon from 32m away, you're going to be at -4 to hit even if you can see the target clearly. But if the GM thinks you can see the target clearly, then you don't have to attempt a PER Roll at all, despite the fact that you would get a -4 for range if the GM made you roll.

Are you looking for any particular power levels / point totals / edition of the rules?

Technically, no; you'd need to use a small VPP or something for Characteristics and other miscellaneous Powers. This ability can easily get expensive. But then, that's probably fair, because it can also easily get super-useful!