I haven't played these fancy FATE and Numanuma or whatnot games, so I can't comment on that. But @Woragarten is right, Fiasco basically models the IC and OOC workings of a MU*. ![;) 😉](http://musoapbox.net/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f609.png?v=4vfms5ns7sl)
I love West End Games' d6 System they used for Star Wars, and I think as a core system you can hammer that thing onto anything and it fits. No mess, no fuss, you're adding dice to a pool, you can stay skilled or do multiple-actions for badassitude at high capabilities... and best of all, it's pretty damned simple to code.
I think the question begs the question, "and what kind of MU* would you want to play it on?" See here...
For a tight-knit MU* with a dozen players, half of which are online and available at any given time, I'd want a super-light system that encourages wide leeway in judgement. WEG d6 or Apocalypse World even.
For a MU* with a hundred players and expects to keep some internal consistency, I'd want something that codes clean and clear and has very little leeway in the system. Hero/Champions is great for this, you arbitrate relatively little of the system. (Granted, a lot of this comes down to having and enforcing OOC standards, which involves confrontation, which gamers aren't wonderful at.)
Then other systems work better if you want to code EVERYthing... and other systems work better if you want to basically be a platform for people to run their own stories that don't necessarily need to intersect...
One I'd like to see done on a MU* is Twilight: 2000, any version (even Twilight: 2013, whose excellent mechanics for psychological damage and teams were overshadowed by crotchety fans and abysmally unplayable book organization). I've only seen the CG done once: When I coded it as a teenager--and then suffered hard drive failure.